I thought this when I heard about the Manson chick was charged with attempting to shoot president Ford, when apparently it was an unloaded gun.
Interestingly, two women have been done for attempting to murder a president; both of which was against Ford within the same month within a small radius (maybe 100 miles).
I think generally anything that is considered an attempted <whatever>, the judicial system takes into account the intent of the person who is being accused. If the intent was to assassinate Trump, and the person had everything they needed to do it, and would have done it if they had not been stopped, then a real attempt was made.
Were any shots fired?
Cause I’ve said it before, if no bullet is fired then it’s not assassination attempt, it’s just sparkling intimidation.
It was concepts of an assassination attempt.
I thought this when I heard about the Manson chick was charged with attempting to shoot president Ford, when apparently it was an unloaded gun.
Interestingly, two women have been done for attempting to murder a president; both of which was against Ford within the same month within a small radius (maybe 100 miles).
God forbid women have hobbies 😭
Trad women can’t have hobbies. Jeez.
That’s unfair. They still have sex and barefoot-cooking.
True. Is punchbag a hobby too?
I guess if sex is, then sure. It’s basically the same thing, she just lays there and takes it. No real participation needed.
just stopping in to tag the internet winning comment of the day, oh hai
deleted by creator
I think generally anything that is considered an attempted <whatever>, the judicial system takes into account the intent of the person who is being accused. If the intent was to assassinate Trump, and the person had everything they needed to do it, and would have done it if they had not been stopped, then a real attempt was made.
So the state has to prove that they would have done it not stopped and the defence has to prove the opposite (or something like that)?