RugbyD wrote:I haven't ignored Ng's responsibility at all. I said he should be deported as the law indicates. That is the one and only result that should derive from his actions and he bears full responsibility for it. Anything in the timeline that happens otherwise is independent of his influence, so he should not bear any resposibility.
If you're argument is solely going to rest on when the timeline started and deny the independence of decisions made within the timeline, it becomes an entirely arbitrary measure with an infinite number of iterations that we can use to assign blame to anything from a butterfly in Brazil to Kevin Bacon.
Guess I just haven't see it then. Even the title of this thread ignores Mr. Ng's responsibility and is aimed at the immigration department. This wasn't a "IF this happened", or "check this out", or "what a sad situation" type of post/thread, it was a full on assault at the immigration department while ignoring Mr. Ng's responsibility for the entire mess getting started.
So I piped up, pointed out the obvious, and here we are.
BitterDodgerFan wrote:i know you're the admin here and all but i gotta say, madison you're making yourself look worse with each response in this thread. do you have an ounce of humanity and compassion for others?
Doesn't matter what title I may have, completely irrelevant to anything. It's simply a discussion and any member is welcome to contribute to a discussion.
If it makes me look bad that I acknowledge Mr. Ng started the ball rolling by choosing to break the law, so be it. If Mr. Ng hadn't broken the law, this wouldn't have happened. There's no way to argue against that, it is simply the truth. And if I'm the bad guy for pointing that out the facts and the obvious, it won't be the first (or last) time I'll be the bad guy for not just looking the other way and excusing actions like his.
And yes, I have compassion for others, and have said that an investigation needs to happen to determine if this went the way the story says it did, but that does not excuse Mr. Ng of his responsibility and his ability to have completely avoided the entire thing. Him having passed doesn't absolve him of shouldering his portion of the blame. May sound cold hearted, but it's the truth.
This is actually a matter of 2 seperate things. I choose to focus on the man responsible for starting it all, where as Rugby and others choose to focus on what everyone else allegedly did wrong. Would be like someone setting a bomb in a stadium, then calling it in to the bomb squad. People would crush and trample people (possibly killing said people) during the evacuation. I choose to place the majority of the blame on the person who set the bomb, where as other people would rather shift the majority of the blame to those who did the trampling. We're not really disagreeing that there were tons of wrongs in this situation, we're debating where the majority of the blame for the entire thing should go (kinda silly in retrospect
- guess we're bored). And for me it boils down to where it started, with Mr. Ng choosing to break the law.
Art Vandelay wrote:Madison, I generally hate to appeal to base emotions or try to make things personal, so forgive me for doing both right here: If I remember correctly, you have a child. If at some point in the future, your kid were to get busted for, like, shoplifting (or whatever), then died while in custody of the juvenile department of something that was easily preventable if someone would have just lifted a finger to help, would you say, "well, he should't have shoplifted." Or if he is going 60 mph in a 55 zone, crashes, and dies while EMTs sit there and watch but don't do anything would the response be "well, he shouldn't have been speeding."
Holding X responsible for their actions doesn't absolve Y of his own responsiblity.
Yep, 10 year old boy. Nice memory.
The final line is priceless. Nicely done and I certainly agree.
However, to answer your question, I know very few people in the world still take responsibility for their own actions, but I am one of them and so is my boy. Ultimately he would be responsible in either of those scenarios. Yes, there would be other people responsible for their actions (or non-actions) as well, but at the crux of it all, my boy would be responsible because he put himself in those positions. If he hadn't chosen to do what he did, none of it ever would have happened, so he would certainly shoulder the majority of the blame/responsibility.
Mookie4ever wrote:Wow, just wow. If breaking the law is carte blanche to commit negligent homicide you had better not speed Madison or you are putting your life at risk.
Where did I say that?
As to the rest of your post (and this really goes for anyone), please explain how all of this still would have occurred if Mr. Ng had renewed his Visa back when he was supposed to. Please.
Yes doctor, I am sick.
Sick of those who are spineless.
Sick of those who feel self-entitled.
Sick of those who are hypocrites.
Yes doctor, an army is forming.
Yes doctor, there will be a war.
Yes doctor, there will be blood.....