<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_29_022255</id>
	<title>Seinfeld's Good Samaritan Law Now Reality?</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1264783680000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>e3m4n writes <i>"The fictitious 'good samaritan'  law from the final episode of Seinfeld (the one that landed them in jail for a year) appears to be headed toward reality for California residents after <a href="http://www.fresnobee.com/state/story/1799348.html">the house passed this bill</a>. There are some differences, such as direct action is not required, but the concept of guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>e3m4n writes " The fictitious 'good samaritan ' law from the final episode of Seinfeld ( the one that landed them in jail for a year ) appears to be headed toward reality for California residents after the house passed this bill .
There are some differences , such as direct action is not required , but the concept of guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>e3m4n writes "The fictitious 'good samaritan'  law from the final episode of Seinfeld (the one that landed them in jail for a year) appears to be headed toward reality for California residents after the house passed this bill.
There are some differences, such as direct action is not required, but the concept of guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947292</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264761060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't have a telephone nor would I walk miles to the police station just to report a crime against someone who I don't know, don't care about and will never see again in my entire life. People need to fend for themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't have a telephone nor would I walk miles to the police station just to report a crime against someone who I do n't know , do n't care about and will never see again in my entire life .
People need to fend for themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't have a telephone nor would I walk miles to the police station just to report a crime against someone who I don't know, don't care about and will never see again in my entire life.
People need to fend for themselves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946304</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>whiplashx</author>
	<datestamp>1264706580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You shouldn't punish people for following their basic herd instincts as righteous and moral as it might make you feel.</p></div><p>Disagree.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You should n't punish people for following their basic herd instincts as righteous and moral as it might make you feel.Disagree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You shouldn't punish people for following their basic herd instincts as righteous and moral as it might make you feel.Disagree.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946504</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>FreakyGreenLeaky</author>
	<datestamp>1264708620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>You shouldn't punish people for following their basic herd instincts</i></p><p>Well, you go ahead and follow your herd instinct there buddy.  Christ, talk about not rising above mediocrity or standing up for what you believe in and making a fucking difference.</p><p>You're pathetic and so are your morals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should n't punish people for following their basic herd instinctsWell , you go ahead and follow your herd instinct there buddy .
Christ , talk about not rising above mediocrity or standing up for what you believe in and making a fucking difference.You 're pathetic and so are your morals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You shouldn't punish people for following their basic herd instinctsWell, you go ahead and follow your herd instinct there buddy.
Christ, talk about not rising above mediocrity or standing up for what you believe in and making a fucking difference.You're pathetic and so are your morals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945736</id>
	<title>A bit late?</title>
	<author>SlothDead</author>
	<datestamp>1264701180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm surprised that the USA does not already have a bill like this. In other countries (e.g. Germany) helping people in need is mandatory. You are also encouraged to give CPR and if you fail at it and make it worse you are not charged (otherwise people would be too scared of screwingn up and never administer CPR at all).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised that the USA does not already have a bill like this .
In other countries ( e.g .
Germany ) helping people in need is mandatory .
You are also encouraged to give CPR and if you fail at it and make it worse you are not charged ( otherwise people would be too scared of screwingn up and never administer CPR at all ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised that the USA does not already have a bill like this.
In other countries (e.g.
Germany) helping people in need is mandatory.
You are also encouraged to give CPR and if you fail at it and make it worse you are not charged (otherwise people would be too scared of screwingn up and never administer CPR at all).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945870</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>madpansy</author>
	<datestamp>1264702320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lack of morality aside, another real head-scratcher is this nugget.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Current law requires witnesses to report violent crimes when the victim is younger than 14.</p></div><p>I suppose CA legislators (or perhaps it was a prop) asked us to, please, think of the children, but not anyone else.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lack of morality aside , another real head-scratcher is this nugget.Current law requires witnesses to report violent crimes when the victim is younger than 14.I suppose CA legislators ( or perhaps it was a prop ) asked us to , please , think of the children , but not anyone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lack of morality aside, another real head-scratcher is this nugget.Current law requires witnesses to report violent crimes when the victim is younger than 14.I suppose CA legislators (or perhaps it was a prop) asked us to, please, think of the children, but not anyone else.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949212</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>jellomizer</author>
	<datestamp>1264779960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly we get punished for doing the right thing.  If we see someone getting beaten up if we were to help the person other then just risk getting beaten ourselves we could also face criminal prosecution.</p><p>We have police who tell us not to take the law into our own hands while they are also stating that there is to much for them to handle.</p><p>I want my rights to tell kids to get off my lawn and if they don't I should be able to pull out a shotgun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly we get punished for doing the right thing .
If we see someone getting beaten up if we were to help the person other then just risk getting beaten ourselves we could also face criminal prosecution.We have police who tell us not to take the law into our own hands while they are also stating that there is to much for them to handle.I want my rights to tell kids to get off my lawn and if they do n't I should be able to pull out a shotgun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly we get punished for doing the right thing.
If we see someone getting beaten up if we were to help the person other then just risk getting beaten ourselves we could also face criminal prosecution.We have police who tell us not to take the law into our own hands while they are also stating that there is to much for them to handle.I want my rights to tell kids to get off my lawn and if they don't I should be able to pull out a shotgun.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947282</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>VShael</author>
	<datestamp>1264761000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fortunately, studies have also shown that if you are aware of the "Bystander Effect" you are less likely to be influenced by it.</p><p>Thus, if we want to eliminate it from society, we merely have to educate ourselves about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fortunately , studies have also shown that if you are aware of the " Bystander Effect " you are less likely to be influenced by it.Thus , if we want to eliminate it from society , we merely have to educate ourselves about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fortunately, studies have also shown that if you are aware of the "Bystander Effect" you are less likely to be influenced by it.Thus, if we want to eliminate it from society, we merely have to educate ourselves about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952220</id>
	<title>Re:What, am I now my brothers keeper?</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1264791000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I have helped at accident scenes, but would no longer do so because of the legal complications we've all heard of."</p><p>What legal complications? I am a first responder, and have been stopping to help people for over 30 years and have never heard of any legal complications. In fact there are laws in place preventing any legal complications.</p><p>This law in NO WAY prevent people from helping.</p><p>Why would this law cause people ti turn away?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I have helped at accident scenes , but would no longer do so because of the legal complications we 've all heard of .
" What legal complications ?
I am a first responder , and have been stopping to help people for over 30 years and have never heard of any legal complications .
In fact there are laws in place preventing any legal complications.This law in NO WAY prevent people from helping.Why would this law cause people ti turn away ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I have helped at accident scenes, but would no longer do so because of the legal complications we've all heard of.
"What legal complications?
I am a first responder, and have been stopping to help people for over 30 years and have never heard of any legal complications.
In fact there are laws in place preventing any legal complications.This law in NO WAY prevent people from helping.Why would this law cause people ti turn away?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30961698</id>
	<title>Meta-good samaritan</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1264862520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So if there's a crime going on in front of me, and I don't report it, <i>but</i> I do report that the guy next to me didn't report it, am I still committing a crime?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So if there 's a crime going on in front of me , and I do n't report it , but I do report that the guy next to me did n't report it , am I still committing a crime ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if there's a crime going on in front of me, and I don't report it, but I do report that the guy next to me didn't report it, am I still committing a crime?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948146</id>
	<title>Re:What, am I now my brothers keeper?</title>
	<author>zippthorne</author>
	<datestamp>1264772820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When you create laws that make the douchebag move the rational choice, you can't get upset when rational people choose that course of action.  In fact, only irrational people will choose otherwise...</p><p>One of the goals of a government and legal system is to align "my best interest" with "our best interest" where they are not aligned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When you create laws that make the douchebag move the rational choice , you ca n't get upset when rational people choose that course of action .
In fact , only irrational people will choose otherwise...One of the goals of a government and legal system is to align " my best interest " with " our best interest " where they are not aligned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When you create laws that make the douchebag move the rational choice, you can't get upset when rational people choose that course of action.
In fact, only irrational people will choose otherwise...One of the goals of a government and legal system is to align "my best interest" with "our best interest" where they are not aligned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30953212</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1264795020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Do stupid laws and frivolous lawsuits make you too afraid to help someone in trouble?"<br>care to cite a successful example?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Do stupid laws and frivolous lawsuits make you too afraid to help someone in trouble ?
" care to cite a successful example ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Do stupid laws and frivolous lawsuits make you too afraid to help someone in trouble?
"care to cite a successful example?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</id>
	<title>When girls can be raped in public with no 911 call</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264701540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the result of more than 20 people watching a minor (15) year old girl being gang raped during a school dance and not a single one calling 911 to report it. Unfortunately a law like this needs to be enacted so that such people can be punished. It's a shame that such basic morality is lacking in society these days but it's come to this point. We have to legislate that if someone is so devoid of such basic morality, that they can't call the police when witnessing a gang rape, that we need to start putting people in jail for not doing such basic acts of humanity, so that there is at least a threat of jail to inspire people to do the right thing if their conscious is devoid of inspiration to do so voluntarily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the result of more than 20 people watching a minor ( 15 ) year old girl being gang raped during a school dance and not a single one calling 911 to report it .
Unfortunately a law like this needs to be enacted so that such people can be punished .
It 's a shame that such basic morality is lacking in society these days but it 's come to this point .
We have to legislate that if someone is so devoid of such basic morality , that they ca n't call the police when witnessing a gang rape , that we need to start putting people in jail for not doing such basic acts of humanity , so that there is at least a threat of jail to inspire people to do the right thing if their conscious is devoid of inspiration to do so voluntarily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the result of more than 20 people watching a minor (15) year old girl being gang raped during a school dance and not a single one calling 911 to report it.
Unfortunately a law like this needs to be enacted so that such people can be punished.
It's a shame that such basic morality is lacking in society these days but it's come to this point.
We have to legislate that if someone is so devoid of such basic morality, that they can't call the police when witnessing a gang rape, that we need to start putting people in jail for not doing such basic acts of humanity, so that there is at least a threat of jail to inspire people to do the right thing if their conscious is devoid of inspiration to do so voluntarily.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952864</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>Reziac</author>
	<datestamp>1264793580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are right, but... Knowing how Nava thinks, this is intended as a blanket "you WILL be a snitch, or else" law, and once on the books, will be expanded (or at least enforced) to cover forced reporting of every offense any citizen observes, all the way down to jaywalking.</p><p>When you can't trust your neighbour because you know they'll turn you in for any little violation, it destroys personal trust, and increases the power of gov't thugs because there is no one else you CAN trust.</p><p>=======</p><p>"You should not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harm it would cause if improperly administered."<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -- Lyndon Johnson, 36th President of the U.S.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are right , but... Knowing how Nava thinks , this is intended as a blanket " you WILL be a snitch , or else " law , and once on the books , will be expanded ( or at least enforced ) to cover forced reporting of every offense any citizen observes , all the way down to jaywalking.When you ca n't trust your neighbour because you know they 'll turn you in for any little violation , it destroys personal trust , and increases the power of gov't thugs because there is no one else you CAN trust. = = = = = = = " You should not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered , but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harm it would cause if improperly administered .
"       -- Lyndon Johnson , 36th President of the U.S .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are right, but... Knowing how Nava thinks, this is intended as a blanket "you WILL be a snitch, or else" law, and once on the books, will be expanded (or at least enforced) to cover forced reporting of every offense any citizen observes, all the way down to jaywalking.When you can't trust your neighbour because you know they'll turn you in for any little violation, it destroys personal trust, and increases the power of gov't thugs because there is no one else you CAN trust.======="You should not examine legislation in the light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in the light of the wrongs it would do and the harm it would cause if improperly administered.
"
      -- Lyndon Johnson, 36th President of the U.S.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948226</id>
	<title>Unbalanced</title>
	<author>Prune</author>
	<datestamp>1264773660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Duty to rescue laws infringe severely on personal freedom.  Seehttp://www.commonlaw.uottawa.ca/index.php?option=com\_docman&amp;task=doc\_download&amp;gid=2577 for a detailed analysis</htmltext>
<tokenext>Duty to rescue laws infringe severely on personal freedom .
Seehttp : //www.commonlaw.uottawa.ca/index.php ? option = com \ _docman&amp;task = doc \ _download&amp;gid = 2577 for a detailed analysis</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Duty to rescue laws infringe severely on personal freedom.
Seehttp://www.commonlaw.uottawa.ca/index.php?option=com\_docman&amp;task=doc\_download&amp;gid=2577 for a detailed analysis</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948038</id>
	<title>Mayor attacked for calling 911</title>
	<author>listentoreason</author>
	<datestamp>1264772160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know of at least one case where a bystander was assaulted for calling 911 - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom\_Barrett\_(politician)#Attack" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett</a> [wikipedia.org] was beaten with a tire iron at a state fair when he tried to call 911 after hearing a woman call for help.</p><p>I was once (late 90's) riding the MBTA in Boston around midnight. I was in the last car, sitting at the end, as were maybe three other teenagers. In the second to last car were about 5 other teenagers. They were yelling at each other through the glass. When we stopped at a platform, the larger group came into my car and started pounding on the smaller group. The T was generally pretty safe, so I was taken back by shock for a bit. I then pushed the little red button next to me and said (trying to be quiet but hoping I could still be heard) something like "Uh, I think you need to send some cops back here, there's a big fight." The conductor said (quite loudly) "We're aware of it, the police are on their way." I then waited for what seemed like a very long time wondering if I would ultimately be safer staying in the car or dashing out the door if big group finished little group and decided to head over to me.</p><p>Anyway, I made what I think was the right decision (even though it was likely irrelevant in providing any sort of aid), but I certainly didn't think it was without risk. Not sure what I think of the law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know of at least one case where a bystander was assaulted for calling 911 - Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett [ wikipedia.org ] was beaten with a tire iron at a state fair when he tried to call 911 after hearing a woman call for help.I was once ( late 90 's ) riding the MBTA in Boston around midnight .
I was in the last car , sitting at the end , as were maybe three other teenagers .
In the second to last car were about 5 other teenagers .
They were yelling at each other through the glass .
When we stopped at a platform , the larger group came into my car and started pounding on the smaller group .
The T was generally pretty safe , so I was taken back by shock for a bit .
I then pushed the little red button next to me and said ( trying to be quiet but hoping I could still be heard ) something like " Uh , I think you need to send some cops back here , there 's a big fight .
" The conductor said ( quite loudly ) " We 're aware of it , the police are on their way .
" I then waited for what seemed like a very long time wondering if I would ultimately be safer staying in the car or dashing out the door if big group finished little group and decided to head over to me.Anyway , I made what I think was the right decision ( even though it was likely irrelevant in providing any sort of aid ) , but I certainly did n't think it was without risk .
Not sure what I think of the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know of at least one case where a bystander was assaulted for calling 911 - Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett [wikipedia.org] was beaten with a tire iron at a state fair when he tried to call 911 after hearing a woman call for help.I was once (late 90's) riding the MBTA in Boston around midnight.
I was in the last car, sitting at the end, as were maybe three other teenagers.
In the second to last car were about 5 other teenagers.
They were yelling at each other through the glass.
When we stopped at a platform, the larger group came into my car and started pounding on the smaller group.
The T was generally pretty safe, so I was taken back by shock for a bit.
I then pushed the little red button next to me and said (trying to be quiet but hoping I could still be heard) something like "Uh, I think you need to send some cops back here, there's a big fight.
" The conductor said (quite loudly) "We're aware of it, the police are on their way.
" I then waited for what seemed like a very long time wondering if I would ultimately be safer staying in the car or dashing out the door if big group finished little group and decided to head over to me.Anyway, I made what I think was the right decision (even though it was likely irrelevant in providing any sort of aid), but I certainly didn't think it was without risk.
Not sure what I think of the law.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30951380</id>
	<title>Re:Is-ought problem</title>
	<author>celle</author>
	<datestamp>1264788240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The reason why there are such laws is because we feel that we should have a moral responsibility to help those who are in immediate life-threatening danger when we are in a position to help them without (too much) personal sacrifice."</p><p>But in a country where helping is a catch-22 what would be the point? Remember America is a country born on individuality, capitalism, minimal public support, etc, and it's ingrained in our thinking.(conservative politics) Why would anyone do anything that is not in their own best interest? In this case, helping someone where getting involved opens up an unwanted legal can of worms never mind the physical/cultural risks. Plus the catch-22 can come from multiple directions(criminal,civil,financial,medical,cultural, on and on). How about stepping in and saving the life of that abortion doctor that instead died in Wichita, Kansas a while back. I'm sure the new death threats from the religious nutjobs would be wanted, that's where cultural comes in. And if you have a family, are lawmakers willing to take responsibility(all responsibility) if you get injured or killed or your family threatened because you followed that law. There's lots of reasons people don't help, many created by the very culture/legal system we live in that over-legislates, creating laws that don't actually protect anyone(abusing law), never mind biased enforcement of said laws, and then expects people to ignore survival instincts and do something not in their own interest.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The reason why there are such laws is because we feel that we should have a moral responsibility to help those who are in immediate life-threatening danger when we are in a position to help them without ( too much ) personal sacrifice .
" But in a country where helping is a catch-22 what would be the point ?
Remember America is a country born on individuality , capitalism , minimal public support , etc , and it 's ingrained in our thinking .
( conservative politics ) Why would anyone do anything that is not in their own best interest ?
In this case , helping someone where getting involved opens up an unwanted legal can of worms never mind the physical/cultural risks .
Plus the catch-22 can come from multiple directions ( criminal,civil,financial,medical,cultural , on and on ) .
How about stepping in and saving the life of that abortion doctor that instead died in Wichita , Kansas a while back .
I 'm sure the new death threats from the religious nutjobs would be wanted , that 's where cultural comes in .
And if you have a family , are lawmakers willing to take responsibility ( all responsibility ) if you get injured or killed or your family threatened because you followed that law .
There 's lots of reasons people do n't help , many created by the very culture/legal system we live in that over-legislates , creating laws that do n't actually protect anyone ( abusing law ) , never mind biased enforcement of said laws , and then expects people to ignore survival instincts and do something not in their own interest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The reason why there are such laws is because we feel that we should have a moral responsibility to help those who are in immediate life-threatening danger when we are in a position to help them without (too much) personal sacrifice.
"But in a country where helping is a catch-22 what would be the point?
Remember America is a country born on individuality, capitalism, minimal public support, etc, and it's ingrained in our thinking.
(conservative politics) Why would anyone do anything that is not in their own best interest?
In this case, helping someone where getting involved opens up an unwanted legal can of worms never mind the physical/cultural risks.
Plus the catch-22 can come from multiple directions(criminal,civil,financial,medical,cultural, on and on).
How about stepping in and saving the life of that abortion doctor that instead died in Wichita, Kansas a while back.
I'm sure the new death threats from the religious nutjobs would be wanted, that's where cultural comes in.
And if you have a family, are lawmakers willing to take responsibility(all responsibility) if you get injured or killed or your family threatened because you followed that law.
There's lots of reasons people don't help, many created by the very culture/legal system we live in that over-legislates, creating laws that don't actually protect anyone(abusing law), never mind biased enforcement of said laws, and then expects people to ignore survival instincts and do something not in their own interest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949656</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1264781880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> The only downside is that such laws are dirty hacks to paper over the real problem of a sue crazy society.</p></div><p>The downside is that these stupid laws cultivate societal contempt for the process of making, enforcing and adjudicating law as well as reinforce the stereotype of politicians being asshats. Did I mention that politicians are asshats?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only downside is that such laws are dirty hacks to paper over the real problem of a sue crazy society.The downside is that these stupid laws cultivate societal contempt for the process of making , enforcing and adjudicating law as well as reinforce the stereotype of politicians being asshats .
Did I mention that politicians are asshats ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The only downside is that such laws are dirty hacks to paper over the real problem of a sue crazy society.The downside is that these stupid laws cultivate societal contempt for the process of making, enforcing and adjudicating law as well as reinforce the stereotype of politicians being asshats.
Did I mention that politicians are asshats?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30956736</id>
	<title>Fear of gang retaliation.</title>
	<author>Ungrounded Lightning</author>
	<datestamp>1264766760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>There's a lot of evidence that they are acting out of normal and fairly standard psychological patterns. Humans are less likely to help in large groups. This is known as the bystander effect.</i></p><p>I think this one is a bit beyond the bystander effect.</p><p>This was a gang rape.  The witnesses may have had a justified fear of violent retaliation if they were to turn in the rapists.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a lot of evidence that they are acting out of normal and fairly standard psychological patterns .
Humans are less likely to help in large groups .
This is known as the bystander effect.I think this one is a bit beyond the bystander effect.This was a gang rape .
The witnesses may have had a justified fear of violent retaliation if they were to turn in the rapists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a lot of evidence that they are acting out of normal and fairly standard psychological patterns.
Humans are less likely to help in large groups.
This is known as the bystander effect.I think this one is a bit beyond the bystander effect.This was a gang rape.
The witnesses may have had a justified fear of violent retaliation if they were to turn in the rapists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949058</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>Somebody Is Using My</author>
	<datestamp>1264779240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If something like that gang rape happened within visible range of 20 random adults, then I'd find it hard to believe that at least half of them wouldn't have tried to call the cops.</i></p><p>Maybe it's different with gang-rape versus murder, but read up on the story about Kitty Genovese. People -especially in groups- often do not respond the way you would expect when witnessing a crime. Social psychiatrists even have a term for it: the bystander effect.</p><p>I remember a similar story a couple years ago about an elderly man who was hit by a car and nearby watchers did nothing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If something like that gang rape happened within visible range of 20 random adults , then I 'd find it hard to believe that at least half of them would n't have tried to call the cops.Maybe it 's different with gang-rape versus murder , but read up on the story about Kitty Genovese .
People -especially in groups- often do not respond the way you would expect when witnessing a crime .
Social psychiatrists even have a term for it : the bystander effect.I remember a similar story a couple years ago about an elderly man who was hit by a car and nearby watchers did nothing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If something like that gang rape happened within visible range of 20 random adults, then I'd find it hard to believe that at least half of them wouldn't have tried to call the cops.Maybe it's different with gang-rape versus murder, but read up on the story about Kitty Genovese.
People -especially in groups- often do not respond the way you would expect when witnessing a crime.
Social psychiatrists even have a term for it: the bystander effect.I remember a similar story a couple years ago about an elderly man who was hit by a car and nearby watchers did nothing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30953832</id>
	<title>Re:What, am I now my brothers keeper?</title>
	<author>kalirion</author>
	<datestamp>1264798200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This laws isn't about rendering assistance.  It's about calling for help.  No one expects you to break up a gang rape by yourself.  But is walking away out of sight and dialing 911 too much?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This laws is n't about rendering assistance .
It 's about calling for help .
No one expects you to break up a gang rape by yourself .
But is walking away out of sight and dialing 911 too much ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This laws isn't about rendering assistance.
It's about calling for help.
No one expects you to break up a gang rape by yourself.
But is walking away out of sight and dialing 911 too much?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</id>
	<title>Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>name*censored*</author>
	<datestamp>1264701180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do stupid laws and frivolous lawsuits make you too afraid to help someone in trouble? No problem, we'll just pass another ill-thought law! What could possibly go wrong?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do stupid laws and frivolous lawsuits make you too afraid to help someone in trouble ?
No problem , we 'll just pass another ill-thought law !
What could possibly go wrong ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do stupid laws and frivolous lawsuits make you too afraid to help someone in trouble?
No problem, we'll just pass another ill-thought law!
What could possibly go wrong?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946450</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264708140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As I read TFA, the problem is that being a bystander to rape is currently NOT a crime. It obviously "should be", thus the new law.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As I read TFA , the problem is that being a bystander to rape is currently NOT a crime .
It obviously " should be " , thus the new law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I read TFA, the problem is that being a bystander to rape is currently NOT a crime.
It obviously "should be", thus the new law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946530</id>
	<title>Re:What, am I now my brothers keeper?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264795200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Could be, but one who isn't going to tangle with the legal system over what can ONLY be a personal, moral choice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could be , but one who is n't going to tangle with the legal system over what can ONLY be a personal , moral choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could be, but one who isn't going to tangle with the legal system over what can ONLY be a personal, moral choice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945882</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264702440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Let's say  you have a few dozen illegal immigrants hanging out, watching a girl being raped.  Some of them even taking a turn.  Now, you can't arrest them for being illegal immigrants and you can't arrest them for rape, so the only solution is to create an entirely new law that wouldn't have helped but at least sounds good.  Sort of.
<p>
There is an upside: this law provides an absolute defense if you kill the legislators who thought this was a good idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's say you have a few dozen illegal immigrants hanging out , watching a girl being raped .
Some of them even taking a turn .
Now , you ca n't arrest them for being illegal immigrants and you ca n't arrest them for rape , so the only solution is to create an entirely new law that would n't have helped but at least sounds good .
Sort of .
There is an upside : this law provides an absolute defense if you kill the legislators who thought this was a good idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's say  you have a few dozen illegal immigrants hanging out, watching a girl being raped.
Some of them even taking a turn.
Now, you can't arrest them for being illegal immigrants and you can't arrest them for rape, so the only solution is to create an entirely new law that wouldn't have helped but at least sounds good.
Sort of.
There is an upside: this law provides an absolute defense if you kill the legislators who thought this was a good idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948010</id>
	<title>We've had that for years</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1264771800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I don't even remember a time when we didn't have a law that requires you to report crimes you see or learn about. Not reporting them makes you immediately an accomplice and you could be tried as such. Oddly, nobody complains about it despite the can of worms it opens, especially the latter part. The "reporting when you learn about it" part. Because hearing about a crime does not immediately ensure that what you hear is right and the charge for false accusation is not far away from there.</p><p>If you really want to put someone in a mess, tell him that you were the culprit for some crime while at the same time having a very good alibi. He has to report it (or you could report him for not reporting it), and when he does you can file a suit for false accusation.</p><p>Great stuff...</p><p>Of course he could countersue because you unjustly accused yourself of a crime (believe it or not, that's illegal as well), but he'd have to prove that.</p><p>Can you tell some catch 22 laws remained in place after 1945 that were invented in the few years before that time?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I do n't even remember a time when we did n't have a law that requires you to report crimes you see or learn about .
Not reporting them makes you immediately an accomplice and you could be tried as such .
Oddly , nobody complains about it despite the can of worms it opens , especially the latter part .
The " reporting when you learn about it " part .
Because hearing about a crime does not immediately ensure that what you hear is right and the charge for false accusation is not far away from there.If you really want to put someone in a mess , tell him that you were the culprit for some crime while at the same time having a very good alibi .
He has to report it ( or you could report him for not reporting it ) , and when he does you can file a suit for false accusation.Great stuff...Of course he could countersue because you unjustly accused yourself of a crime ( believe it or not , that 's illegal as well ) , but he 'd have to prove that.Can you tell some catch 22 laws remained in place after 1945 that were invented in the few years before that time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I don't even remember a time when we didn't have a law that requires you to report crimes you see or learn about.
Not reporting them makes you immediately an accomplice and you could be tried as such.
Oddly, nobody complains about it despite the can of worms it opens, especially the latter part.
The "reporting when you learn about it" part.
Because hearing about a crime does not immediately ensure that what you hear is right and the charge for false accusation is not far away from there.If you really want to put someone in a mess, tell him that you were the culprit for some crime while at the same time having a very good alibi.
He has to report it (or you could report him for not reporting it), and when he does you can file a suit for false accusation.Great stuff...Of course he could countersue because you unjustly accused yourself of a crime (believe it or not, that's illegal as well), but he'd have to prove that.Can you tell some catch 22 laws remained in place after 1945 that were invented in the few years before that time?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946058</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264704000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Say what you will about Tennessee, but I know for a fact that if something like that happened down here, the only "watching" done by 20 people would be the sighting of their shotguns on the sorry assholes.  There are some things that just don't ever make it to the courts, and in situations this extreme, I have to say I like it that way.  As Bob Lee Swagger put it in the movie Shooter, "I'd bury you in the hill and tell the sherif a month or two later. He understands."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Say what you will about Tennessee , but I know for a fact that if something like that happened down here , the only " watching " done by 20 people would be the sighting of their shotguns on the sorry assholes .
There are some things that just do n't ever make it to the courts , and in situations this extreme , I have to say I like it that way .
As Bob Lee Swagger put it in the movie Shooter , " I 'd bury you in the hill and tell the sherif a month or two later .
He understands .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Say what you will about Tennessee, but I know for a fact that if something like that happened down here, the only "watching" done by 20 people would be the sighting of their shotguns on the sorry assholes.
There are some things that just don't ever make it to the courts, and in situations this extreme, I have to say I like it that way.
As Bob Lee Swagger put it in the movie Shooter, "I'd bury you in the hill and tell the sherif a month or two later.
He understands.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949896</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>jayme0227</author>
	<datestamp>1264782900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By your logic, rage murders should go unpunished. The murderers were only acting out of normal and fairly standard psychological patterns, ie. they caught their wife cheating, got mad, then shot her and the guy. Is the guy likely to kill again? Not really, unless he catches his next wife cheating on him.</p><p>I imagine the Bystander effect is a lot like the concept of fate. If you don't know your fate, you're bound to it. If you do know your fate, however, you have the opportunity to change your behavior. I think calling attention to this effect could actually help to prevent it from happening in the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By your logic , rage murders should go unpunished .
The murderers were only acting out of normal and fairly standard psychological patterns , ie .
they caught their wife cheating , got mad , then shot her and the guy .
Is the guy likely to kill again ?
Not really , unless he catches his next wife cheating on him.I imagine the Bystander effect is a lot like the concept of fate .
If you do n't know your fate , you 're bound to it .
If you do know your fate , however , you have the opportunity to change your behavior .
I think calling attention to this effect could actually help to prevent it from happening in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By your logic, rage murders should go unpunished.
The murderers were only acting out of normal and fairly standard psychological patterns, ie.
they caught their wife cheating, got mad, then shot her and the guy.
Is the guy likely to kill again?
Not really, unless he catches his next wife cheating on him.I imagine the Bystander effect is a lot like the concept of fate.
If you don't know your fate, you're bound to it.
If you do know your fate, however, you have the opportunity to change your behavior.
I think calling attention to this effect could actually help to prevent it from happening in the future.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947900</id>
	<title>your problem, not theirs</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1264770480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>The reason why there are such laws is because we feel that we should have a moral responsibility to help those who are in immediate life-threatening danger when we are in a position to help them without (too much) personal sacrifice.</i></p><p>The reason why there are such laws is also because too many people are intellectually lazy, like you are, and trying to assuage their guilty conscience with quick fixes.</p><p>Laws are just one of many ways of influencing human behavior, and apparently not a particularly good one at that.  A far more effective way of dealing with the bystander effect is likely educational campaigns and public service messages.  But that costs money and time.  You and your kind of politician want a quick and cheap fig-leaf, something that says that you have done your duty even if it achieves nothing.</p><p>So, yes, standing around watching a rape and doing nothing is immoral, even though it seems to be the natural thing to do.  Your fallacy is that you think your moral responsibility is discharged by passing a law, but it is not.</p><p>By advocating a solution you ought to know full well is ineffective, you are actually guilty of immoral behavior yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason why there are such laws is because we feel that we should have a moral responsibility to help those who are in immediate life-threatening danger when we are in a position to help them without ( too much ) personal sacrifice.The reason why there are such laws is also because too many people are intellectually lazy , like you are , and trying to assuage their guilty conscience with quick fixes.Laws are just one of many ways of influencing human behavior , and apparently not a particularly good one at that .
A far more effective way of dealing with the bystander effect is likely educational campaigns and public service messages .
But that costs money and time .
You and your kind of politician want a quick and cheap fig-leaf , something that says that you have done your duty even if it achieves nothing.So , yes , standing around watching a rape and doing nothing is immoral , even though it seems to be the natural thing to do .
Your fallacy is that you think your moral responsibility is discharged by passing a law , but it is not.By advocating a solution you ought to know full well is ineffective , you are actually guilty of immoral behavior yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason why there are such laws is because we feel that we should have a moral responsibility to help those who are in immediate life-threatening danger when we are in a position to help them without (too much) personal sacrifice.The reason why there are such laws is also because too many people are intellectually lazy, like you are, and trying to assuage their guilty conscience with quick fixes.Laws are just one of many ways of influencing human behavior, and apparently not a particularly good one at that.
A far more effective way of dealing with the bystander effect is likely educational campaigns and public service messages.
But that costs money and time.
You and your kind of politician want a quick and cheap fig-leaf, something that says that you have done your duty even if it achieves nothing.So, yes, standing around watching a rape and doing nothing is immoral, even though it seems to be the natural thing to do.
Your fallacy is that you think your moral responsibility is discharged by passing a law, but it is not.By advocating a solution you ought to know full well is ineffective, you are actually guilty of immoral behavior yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30960638</id>
	<title>a LOT of phone calls...!</title>
	<author>drkim</author>
	<datestamp>1264846080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...I can see how this might lead to a <b>lot</b> of phone calls to 911. Follow me:
<br> <br>
I'm in  a place where one person starts committing a crime. There are 5 people (A,B,C,D &amp; E) standing around who DON'T call 911.
<br> <br>
So I have to call (by law) to report the criminal. Now, I also have to call 911 to report that A,B,C,D &amp; E are now committing a crime <b>by not calling 911</b>!
<br> <br>
And, I have to call again to say that A,B,C,D &amp; E are committing another crime by not calling on each other, and that the original criminal is also committing the crime of: "not calling 911 on himself, and on A,B,C,D &amp; E for not calling 911 on him"
<br> <br>
I could go on all night!!!!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>...I can see how this might lead to a lot of phone calls to 911 .
Follow me : I 'm in a place where one person starts committing a crime .
There are 5 people ( A,B,C,D &amp; E ) standing around who DO N'T call 911 .
So I have to call ( by law ) to report the criminal .
Now , I also have to call 911 to report that A,B,C,D &amp; E are now committing a crime by not calling 911 !
And , I have to call again to say that A,B,C,D &amp; E are committing another crime by not calling on each other , and that the original criminal is also committing the crime of : " not calling 911 on himself , and on A,B,C,D &amp; E for not calling 911 on him " I could go on all night ! ! ! !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...I can see how this might lead to a lot of phone calls to 911.
Follow me:
 
I'm in  a place where one person starts committing a crime.
There are 5 people (A,B,C,D &amp; E) standing around who DON'T call 911.
So I have to call (by law) to report the criminal.
Now, I also have to call 911 to report that A,B,C,D &amp; E are now committing a crime by not calling 911!
And, I have to call again to say that A,B,C,D &amp; E are committing another crime by not calling on each other, and that the original criminal is also committing the crime of: "not calling 911 on himself, and on A,B,C,D &amp; E for not calling 911 on him"
 
I could go on all night!!!!
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946446</id>
	<title>Not so much "society"</title>
	<author>Kohath</author>
	<datestamp>1264708080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not really "society".  If it were up to the public, a large majority would vote to support limiting lawsuits in a meaningful way.</p><p>Trial lawyers and other special interests are the ones who keep our "society" this way, largely against our will.</p><p>It's too bad.  It was a pretty nice country we had once.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not really " society " .
If it were up to the public , a large majority would vote to support limiting lawsuits in a meaningful way.Trial lawyers and other special interests are the ones who keep our " society " this way , largely against our will.It 's too bad .
It was a pretty nice country we had once .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not really "society".
If it were up to the public, a large majority would vote to support limiting lawsuits in a meaningful way.Trial lawyers and other special interests are the ones who keep our "society" this way, largely against our will.It's too bad.
It was a pretty nice country we had once.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945878</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264702440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is what happens in a "progressive" society that's trying to remove morals from our society completely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is what happens in a " progressive " society that 's trying to remove morals from our society completely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is what happens in a "progressive" society that's trying to remove morals from our society completely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949256</id>
	<title>Re:Why stop there?</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1264780140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much you want to bed the law will be ignored when you are videotaping a cop beating someone.  You were helping them by gathering evidence.  Yet most people will be prosecuted for not letting the cop destroy  your camera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much you want to bed the law will be ignored when you are videotaping a cop beating someone .
You were helping them by gathering evidence .
Yet most people will be prosecuted for not letting the cop destroy your camera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much you want to bed the law will be ignored when you are videotaping a cop beating someone.
You were helping them by gathering evidence.
Yet most people will be prosecuted for not letting the cop destroy  your camera.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947592</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947736</id>
	<title>Californians, False Accusations are coming to you!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264768140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>All of my life I've had to deal with people falsely accusing me of just about everything you can imagine. And it was always due to paranoia. It finally took its toll in causing me to miss out on millions of dollars and the destruction of my marriage.<p>

And this was without a "Good Samaritan Law".</p><p>

People are inherently stupid. They see things that simply aren't there. They perceive things though their own past traumas and the like. If they get a silly notion in their heads, sometimes all logic is thrown out if the silly notion really bugs them. Such simple logic as "did I really see this guy <b>do</b> anything?</p><p>

The "Good Samaritan Law" may have "good intentions", but we all know what the "road to Hell" is paved with!</p><p>

I have to say, I am now glad I don't live in California, which up till now was looking good as a state I might want to live in. Now, "no way in hell" are the words that come to mind.</p><p>

Gotta love our culture of hyper-paranoia. A child-abuser behind every door, a terrorist in ever-other plane seat, and now this.</p><p>

I do have one solution to this mess: expatriation. Even China is beginning to look like a better option.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All of my life I 've had to deal with people falsely accusing me of just about everything you can imagine .
And it was always due to paranoia .
It finally took its toll in causing me to miss out on millions of dollars and the destruction of my marriage .
And this was without a " Good Samaritan Law " .
People are inherently stupid .
They see things that simply are n't there .
They perceive things though their own past traumas and the like .
If they get a silly notion in their heads , sometimes all logic is thrown out if the silly notion really bugs them .
Such simple logic as " did I really see this guy do anything ?
The " Good Samaritan Law " may have " good intentions " , but we all know what the " road to Hell " is paved with !
I have to say , I am now glad I do n't live in California , which up till now was looking good as a state I might want to live in .
Now , " no way in hell " are the words that come to mind .
Got ta love our culture of hyper-paranoia .
A child-abuser behind every door , a terrorist in ever-other plane seat , and now this .
I do have one solution to this mess : expatriation .
Even China is beginning to look like a better option .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of my life I've had to deal with people falsely accusing me of just about everything you can imagine.
And it was always due to paranoia.
It finally took its toll in causing me to miss out on millions of dollars and the destruction of my marriage.
And this was without a "Good Samaritan Law".
People are inherently stupid.
They see things that simply aren't there.
They perceive things though their own past traumas and the like.
If they get a silly notion in their heads, sometimes all logic is thrown out if the silly notion really bugs them.
Such simple logic as "did I really see this guy do anything?
The "Good Samaritan Law" may have "good intentions", but we all know what the "road to Hell" is paved with!
I have to say, I am now glad I don't live in California, which up till now was looking good as a state I might want to live in.
Now, "no way in hell" are the words that come to mind.
Gotta love our culture of hyper-paranoia.
A child-abuser behind every door, a terrorist in ever-other plane seat, and now this.
I do have one solution to this mess: expatriation.
Even China is beginning to look like a better option.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947894</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264770360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And when you find out that it was a false accusation, and you just killed a bunch of people who were just having a sex party with a willing participant, what do you do then?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And when you find out that it was a false accusation , and you just killed a bunch of people who were just having a sex party with a willing participant , what do you do then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And when you find out that it was a false accusation, and you just killed a bunch of people who were just having a sex party with a willing participant, what do you do then?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946028</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946612</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>mikael\_j</author>
	<datestamp>1264796100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, 20 people calling at the same time may very well be needed, if one person calls the operator may just decide that they're full of shit or that it's just one person overreacting, I once called 112, the swedish equivalent of 911, after finding a passed out beaten up and drunk man in a ditch, they essentially told me "no ambulances are available right now, take care of him yourself", I called them three more times before they finally relented and decided to send a police car to take the guy to the hospital, took the police about two minutes to get there which was pretty impressive considering I had been told in previous calls that all police units and ambulances were in a neighboring town some 25 km away due to a large number of festival-related disturbances*.</p><p>* This touches on another issue I have with emergency operators, if you only have one "spare" unit don't tell me there are <b>no</b> units in town, you don't think I'll figure out that you were lying to me once you realize I'm calling about a real emergency?</p><p>/Mikael</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , 20 people calling at the same time may very well be needed , if one person calls the operator may just decide that they 're full of shit or that it 's just one person overreacting , I once called 112 , the swedish equivalent of 911 , after finding a passed out beaten up and drunk man in a ditch , they essentially told me " no ambulances are available right now , take care of him yourself " , I called them three more times before they finally relented and decided to send a police car to take the guy to the hospital , took the police about two minutes to get there which was pretty impressive considering I had been told in previous calls that all police units and ambulances were in a neighboring town some 25 km away due to a large number of festival-related disturbances * .
* This touches on another issue I have with emergency operators , if you only have one " spare " unit do n't tell me there are no units in town , you do n't think I 'll figure out that you were lying to me once you realize I 'm calling about a real emergency ? /Mikael</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, 20 people calling at the same time may very well be needed, if one person calls the operator may just decide that they're full of shit or that it's just one person overreacting, I once called 112, the swedish equivalent of 911, after finding a passed out beaten up and drunk man in a ditch, they essentially told me "no ambulances are available right now, take care of him yourself", I called them three more times before they finally relented and decided to send a police car to take the guy to the hospital, took the police about two minutes to get there which was pretty impressive considering I had been told in previous calls that all police units and ambulances were in a neighboring town some 25 km away due to a large number of festival-related disturbances*.
* This touches on another issue I have with emergency operators, if you only have one "spare" unit don't tell me there are no units in town, you don't think I'll figure out that you were lying to me once you realize I'm calling about a real emergency?/Mikael</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946076</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>Kral\_Blbec</author>
	<datestamp>1264704300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It has nothing to do with intervening. If you are afraid for your own safety then there isnt anything to make you go rambo. What it is saying is that you have an obligation to pick up your phone and call someone about it. Is that really too hard?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It has nothing to do with intervening .
If you are afraid for your own safety then there isnt anything to make you go rambo .
What it is saying is that you have an obligation to pick up your phone and call someone about it .
Is that really too hard ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has nothing to do with intervening.
If you are afraid for your own safety then there isnt anything to make you go rambo.
What it is saying is that you have an obligation to pick up your phone and call someone about it.
Is that really too hard?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950482</id>
	<title>Re:What, am I now my brothers keeper?</title>
	<author>mark-t</author>
	<datestamp>1264785060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The thing is, even with a law like this, you're allowed to choose to not render assistance if you feel unable to do so or think it would be unsafe to help.  There was a law like this similar to where I used to live, and while I was in high school, this matter came up during a Q.A. session with a police officer about various legalities, he stated that the intent of the law was to obligate citizens to offer aid (which may amount to nothing more than calling 911) in circumstances where they could have otherwise reasonably (and safely) done so.  Not being aware of how safe it might be to offer such aid is generally acceptable grounds for not doing so... although that may be up to a judge to determine whether or not there was reasonable cause to have such anxiety.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is , even with a law like this , you 're allowed to choose to not render assistance if you feel unable to do so or think it would be unsafe to help .
There was a law like this similar to where I used to live , and while I was in high school , this matter came up during a Q.A .
session with a police officer about various legalities , he stated that the intent of the law was to obligate citizens to offer aid ( which may amount to nothing more than calling 911 ) in circumstances where they could have otherwise reasonably ( and safely ) done so .
Not being aware of how safe it might be to offer such aid is generally acceptable grounds for not doing so... although that may be up to a judge to determine whether or not there was reasonable cause to have such anxiety .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is, even with a law like this, you're allowed to choose to not render assistance if you feel unable to do so or think it would be unsafe to help.
There was a law like this similar to where I used to live, and while I was in high school, this matter came up during a Q.A.
session with a police officer about various legalities, he stated that the intent of the law was to obligate citizens to offer aid (which may amount to nothing more than calling 911) in circumstances where they could have otherwise reasonably (and safely) done so.
Not being aware of how safe it might be to offer such aid is generally acceptable grounds for not doing so... although that may be up to a judge to determine whether or not there was reasonable cause to have such anxiety.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949200</id>
	<title>Unintended consequences</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1264779840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Suppose you witness a crime, but for various reasons (like wanting to continue breathing) you don't want to report it or testify about it.  Suppose further the cops figure out you were a witness, and you're subpoena'd and ordered to testify.  Since you didn't report the crime, and not doing so is a crime, you can now simply take the fifth and not testify!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Suppose you witness a crime , but for various reasons ( like wanting to continue breathing ) you do n't want to report it or testify about it .
Suppose further the cops figure out you were a witness , and you 're subpoena 'd and ordered to testify .
Since you did n't report the crime , and not doing so is a crime , you can now simply take the fifth and not testify !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suppose you witness a crime, but for various reasons (like wanting to continue breathing) you don't want to report it or testify about it.
Suppose further the cops figure out you were a witness, and you're subpoena'd and ordered to testify.
Since you didn't report the crime, and not doing so is a crime, you can now simply take the fifth and not testify!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946412</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>nextekcarl</author>
	<datestamp>1264707780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And then you have the cases of people who just give up trying. When I lived with some friends in a less than great neighborhood (really not that bad, just not rich or anything like that) and we thought we heard something that sounded like a shotgun going off in the neighborhood, what did we do? We called 911 to report it. What did the dispatcher do? Laughed and hung up on us. They sounded interested until we told them exactly where we lived. We weren't laughing when we called, we weren't being particularly alarmist (since we weren't certain of what we heard, but have some experience hunting and know what a shotgun sounds like). There wasn't a party going on, and we had a couple of neighbors that had a history of having the cops show up to deal with domestic problems a few months beforehand. No idea why they thought it was so funny, and apparently a waste of time. No cops showed up that night.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And then you have the cases of people who just give up trying .
When I lived with some friends in a less than great neighborhood ( really not that bad , just not rich or anything like that ) and we thought we heard something that sounded like a shotgun going off in the neighborhood , what did we do ?
We called 911 to report it .
What did the dispatcher do ?
Laughed and hung up on us .
They sounded interested until we told them exactly where we lived .
We were n't laughing when we called , we were n't being particularly alarmist ( since we were n't certain of what we heard , but have some experience hunting and know what a shotgun sounds like ) .
There was n't a party going on , and we had a couple of neighbors that had a history of having the cops show up to deal with domestic problems a few months beforehand .
No idea why they thought it was so funny , and apparently a waste of time .
No cops showed up that night .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And then you have the cases of people who just give up trying.
When I lived with some friends in a less than great neighborhood (really not that bad, just not rich or anything like that) and we thought we heard something that sounded like a shotgun going off in the neighborhood, what did we do?
We called 911 to report it.
What did the dispatcher do?
Laughed and hung up on us.
They sounded interested until we told them exactly where we lived.
We weren't laughing when we called, we weren't being particularly alarmist (since we weren't certain of what we heard, but have some experience hunting and know what a shotgun sounds like).
There wasn't a party going on, and we had a couple of neighbors that had a history of having the cops show up to deal with domestic problems a few months beforehand.
No idea why they thought it was so funny, and apparently a waste of time.
No cops showed up that night.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945918</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264702680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Violent gangs are very bad like the gang rape. This law i think will not inspire people because people are scared of retaliation against such as 'gangs' replace with(mob, corrupt governments, and etc.) Don't get me wrong this law is great because it makes people speak up. But if you do speak up and testify against them what protections will they get from testifying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Violent gangs are very bad like the gang rape .
This law i think will not inspire people because people are scared of retaliation against such as 'gangs ' replace with ( mob , corrupt governments , and etc .
) Do n't get me wrong this law is great because it makes people speak up .
But if you do speak up and testify against them what protections will they get from testifying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Violent gangs are very bad like the gang rape.
This law i think will not inspire people because people are scared of retaliation against such as 'gangs' replace with(mob, corrupt governments, and etc.
) Don't get me wrong this law is great because it makes people speak up.
But if you do speak up and testify against them what protections will they get from testifying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950440</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1264784940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps I should say you can't be successfully sued for obeying the law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps I should say you ca n't be successfully sued for obeying the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps I should say you can't be successfully sued for obeying the law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945844</id>
	<title>20 people can't see through 20 people</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264702200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the 20 people couldn't see through the 20 people raping her, no xray vision</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the 20 people could n't see through the 20 people raping her , no xray vision</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the 20 people couldn't see through the 20 people raping her, no xray vision</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946028</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264703640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, what needs to happen is this. Round up all members who raped the girl, and execute them with a hollow point bullet. What's lacking in America is a show of FORCE in the front of heinous/violent crimes against humanity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , what needs to happen is this .
Round up all members who raped the girl , and execute them with a hollow point bullet .
What 's lacking in America is a show of FORCE in the front of heinous/violent crimes against humanity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, what needs to happen is this.
Round up all members who raped the girl, and execute them with a hollow point bullet.
What's lacking in America is a show of FORCE in the front of heinous/violent crimes against humanity.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946238</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264705920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Make it legal (and not impossible) for regular people in California to get certified to carry handguns and to protect them from prosecution when they use deadly force to prevent / stop these things from happening, and I will be the first one to step up to save the next gang rape victim.  Until / unless that happens, forget it.  Know why you don't read about these kinds of things in Texas or Florida - because they hand out CHL's like candy and the law lets people use deadly force to stop rape.</p><p>And yea, real handguns with full capacity magazines too - not those wussy 'CA Legal' handguns with five bullets or whatever in them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Make it legal ( and not impossible ) for regular people in California to get certified to carry handguns and to protect them from prosecution when they use deadly force to prevent / stop these things from happening , and I will be the first one to step up to save the next gang rape victim .
Until / unless that happens , forget it .
Know why you do n't read about these kinds of things in Texas or Florida - because they hand out CHL 's like candy and the law lets people use deadly force to stop rape.And yea , real handguns with full capacity magazines too - not those wussy 'CA Legal ' handguns with five bullets or whatever in them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Make it legal (and not impossible) for regular people in California to get certified to carry handguns and to protect them from prosecution when they use deadly force to prevent / stop these things from happening, and I will be the first one to step up to save the next gang rape victim.
Until / unless that happens, forget it.
Know why you don't read about these kinds of things in Texas or Florida - because they hand out CHL's like candy and the law lets people use deadly force to stop rape.And yea, real handguns with full capacity magazines too - not those wussy 'CA Legal' handguns with five bullets or whatever in them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30966786</id>
	<title>Re:As overbearing as it seems...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264857600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is where stories like these are taken completely out of contest. This was not your average high school. Richmond has a lot of high risk areas, violent crime and housing projects. Not par for the course as far as suburbia goes in the Bay Area. While I don't like the law, I do like the premise behind the law, it's very reasonable. As a citizen I am mindful of my rights yet at the same time don't like seeing the potential for unjust litigation.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is where stories like these are taken completely out of contest .
This was not your average high school .
Richmond has a lot of high risk areas , violent crime and housing projects .
Not par for the course as far as suburbia goes in the Bay Area .
While I do n't like the law , I do like the premise behind the law , it 's very reasonable .
As a citizen I am mindful of my rights yet at the same time do n't like seeing the potential for unjust litigation .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is where stories like these are taken completely out of contest.
This was not your average high school.
Richmond has a lot of high risk areas, violent crime and housing projects.
Not par for the course as far as suburbia goes in the Bay Area.
While I don't like the law, I do like the premise behind the law, it's very reasonable.
As a citizen I am mindful of my rights yet at the same time don't like seeing the potential for unjust litigation.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950206</id>
	<title>Re:What, am I now my brothers keeper?</title>
	<author>FatAlb3rt</author>
	<datestamp>1264784040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Standing up for what you believe is not something everyone is willing to do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Standing up for what you believe is not something everyone is willing to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Standing up for what you believe is not something everyone is willing to do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946530</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946620</id>
	<title>Punishment is the goal</title>
	<author>Kohath</author>
	<datestamp>1264796220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some folks think every time something goes wrong, someone should be <i>punished</i>.  As if punishing bystanders (or just punishing someone -- anyone) solves a problem or makes the world better in some way.</p><p>It's emotion-based -- not a well-considered, rational response to a given situation.  Be wary of emotional appeals to victimize or punish people.  History has shown there's almost nothing more potentially dangerous.</p><p>The California incident shows something lacking in the character of everyone involved.  Punishing them won't fill in what's missing.  Maybe if their parents had done a better job, they'd already have it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some folks think every time something goes wrong , someone should be punished .
As if punishing bystanders ( or just punishing someone -- anyone ) solves a problem or makes the world better in some way.It 's emotion-based -- not a well-considered , rational response to a given situation .
Be wary of emotional appeals to victimize or punish people .
History has shown there 's almost nothing more potentially dangerous.The California incident shows something lacking in the character of everyone involved .
Punishing them wo n't fill in what 's missing .
Maybe if their parents had done a better job , they 'd already have it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some folks think every time something goes wrong, someone should be punished.
As if punishing bystanders (or just punishing someone -- anyone) solves a problem or makes the world better in some way.It's emotion-based -- not a well-considered, rational response to a given situation.
Be wary of emotional appeals to victimize or punish people.
History has shown there's almost nothing more potentially dangerous.The California incident shows something lacking in the character of everyone involved.
Punishing them won't fill in what's missing.
Maybe if their parents had done a better job, they'd already have it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950608</id>
	<title>Re:Is-ought problem</title>
	<author>S77IM</author>
	<datestamp>1264785600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, it's not the is-ought problem, it's the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic\_fallacy" title="wikipedia.org">naturalistic fallacy</a> [wikipedia.org].  Confusing the two is a common mistake.</p><p>I think it's cool that you are trying to teach people better critical-thinking skills but if you are going to use the fancy official terms you should probably get them right.  There are several (possible) solutions to the is-ought problem, but I've never heard the naturalistic fallacy described as anything other than a specific sort of unproven assertion.</p><p>
&nbsp; -- 77IM</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it 's not the is-ought problem , it 's the naturalistic fallacy [ wikipedia.org ] .
Confusing the two is a common mistake.I think it 's cool that you are trying to teach people better critical-thinking skills but if you are going to use the fancy official terms you should probably get them right .
There are several ( possible ) solutions to the is-ought problem , but I 've never heard the naturalistic fallacy described as anything other than a specific sort of unproven assertion .
  -- 77IM</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it's not the is-ought problem, it's the naturalistic fallacy [wikipedia.org].
Confusing the two is a common mistake.I think it's cool that you are trying to teach people better critical-thinking skills but if you are going to use the fancy official terms you should probably get them right.
There are several (possible) solutions to the is-ought problem, but I've never heard the naturalistic fallacy described as anything other than a specific sort of unproven assertion.
  -- 77IM</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948650</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>tophermeyer</author>
	<datestamp>1264776780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My memory is a little incomplete on this, but from my college years in Psych I recall a study along these lines.</p><p>About 20 Priests were recruited, they were told they were to give a lecture about morality and an obligation to do good deeds (or something like that), and they were made to believe they were running late to their appointment.  Along their route to their lecture, study confederates staged a man faking a heart attack, with a crowd standing by watching.  Again my memory fails me a little, but I recall only something like 2 or 3 of these Priests stopped to offer assistance.  Even though these people were primed with the concept of having a duty to offer assistance, they failed to do so because they were late to their appointment.</p><p>I wont defend that kind of inactivity on a personal level, but considering our evolutionary background where it was the sick and weak that were taken by predators, it does not surprise me that groups of people can rationalize not stepping up to intervene.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My memory is a little incomplete on this , but from my college years in Psych I recall a study along these lines.About 20 Priests were recruited , they were told they were to give a lecture about morality and an obligation to do good deeds ( or something like that ) , and they were made to believe they were running late to their appointment .
Along their route to their lecture , study confederates staged a man faking a heart attack , with a crowd standing by watching .
Again my memory fails me a little , but I recall only something like 2 or 3 of these Priests stopped to offer assistance .
Even though these people were primed with the concept of having a duty to offer assistance , they failed to do so because they were late to their appointment.I wont defend that kind of inactivity on a personal level , but considering our evolutionary background where it was the sick and weak that were taken by predators , it does not surprise me that groups of people can rationalize not stepping up to intervene .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My memory is a little incomplete on this, but from my college years in Psych I recall a study along these lines.About 20 Priests were recruited, they were told they were to give a lecture about morality and an obligation to do good deeds (or something like that), and they were made to believe they were running late to their appointment.
Along their route to their lecture, study confederates staged a man faking a heart attack, with a crowd standing by watching.
Again my memory fails me a little, but I recall only something like 2 or 3 of these Priests stopped to offer assistance.
Even though these people were primed with the concept of having a duty to offer assistance, they failed to do so because they were late to their appointment.I wont defend that kind of inactivity on a personal level, but considering our evolutionary background where it was the sick and weak that were taken by predators, it does not surprise me that groups of people can rationalize not stepping up to intervene.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950094</id>
	<title>Miranda Rights of Witnesses</title>
	<author>Anomalyx</author>
	<datestamp>1264783680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You do NOT have the right to remain silent.<br>
Anything you DON'T say can, and will, be used against you in a court of law.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do NOT have the right to remain silent .
Anything you DO N'T say can , and will , be used against you in a court of law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do NOT have the right to remain silent.
Anything you DON'T say can, and will, be used against you in a court of law.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945730</id>
	<title>No</title>
	<author>scotch</author>
	<datestamp>1264701120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>I didn't have to read very far to find out that no, the law is not a reality.&nbsp; Thanks, slashdot!</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't have to read very far to find out that no , the law is not a reality.   Thanks , slashdot !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't have to read very far to find out that no, the law is not a reality.  Thanks, slashdot!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952382</id>
	<title>As overbearing as it seems...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264791600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has to make you think about what kind of society are we living in today that legislators would even have to consider putting forward a law like this.</p><p>Let's review: Twenty teenagers watched the gangrape of a 16-year-old girl outside a high school without doing ANYTHING and your primary concern is a fucking good samaritan law eroding your freedom?</p><p>I am a little more worried about the how those spectators will be the future of America. </p><p> And if you could, in any way, justify not reporting a violent crime in action (even anonymously), you have some serious issues.  That's the problem nowdays, we've been reduced to sheep who don't want to get our hoofs dirty, so we just watch and wait for someone else to fix the problem.   </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has to make you think about what kind of society are we living in today that legislators would even have to consider putting forward a law like this.Let 's review : Twenty teenagers watched the gangrape of a 16-year-old girl outside a high school without doing ANYTHING and your primary concern is a fucking good samaritan law eroding your freedom ? I am a little more worried about the how those spectators will be the future of America .
And if you could , in any way , justify not reporting a violent crime in action ( even anonymously ) , you have some serious issues .
That 's the problem nowdays , we 've been reduced to sheep who do n't want to get our hoofs dirty , so we just watch and wait for someone else to fix the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has to make you think about what kind of society are we living in today that legislators would even have to consider putting forward a law like this.Let's review: Twenty teenagers watched the gangrape of a 16-year-old girl outside a high school without doing ANYTHING and your primary concern is a fucking good samaritan law eroding your freedom?I am a little more worried about the how those spectators will be the future of America.
And if you could, in any way, justify not reporting a violent crime in action (even anonymously), you have some serious issues.
That's the problem nowdays, we've been reduced to sheep who don't want to get our hoofs dirty, so we just watch and wait for someone else to fix the problem.   </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952028</id>
	<title>despotism</title>
	<author>celle</author>
	<datestamp>1264790340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then they tell you "ignorance of the law is no excuse" when given the size of our legal system it's the only excuse that matters. That's why there's specialized lawyers and you often go through several in just one case as no single lawyer can know the whole law and all its effects so what chance does a normal person have of actually knowing the law. When they arrest you for this BS law just wait for it. America is sliding down the drain. CA needs an outright civil war, given the number of guns it shouldn't be a problem and if it happens in America hopefully that like other times CA will start the trend.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then they tell you " ignorance of the law is no excuse " when given the size of our legal system it 's the only excuse that matters .
That 's why there 's specialized lawyers and you often go through several in just one case as no single lawyer can know the whole law and all its effects so what chance does a normal person have of actually knowing the law .
When they arrest you for this BS law just wait for it .
America is sliding down the drain .
CA needs an outright civil war , given the number of guns it should n't be a problem and if it happens in America hopefully that like other times CA will start the trend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then they tell you "ignorance of the law is no excuse" when given the size of our legal system it's the only excuse that matters.
That's why there's specialized lawyers and you often go through several in just one case as no single lawyer can know the whole law and all its effects so what chance does a normal person have of actually knowing the law.
When they arrest you for this BS law just wait for it.
America is sliding down the drain.
CA needs an outright civil war, given the number of guns it shouldn't be a problem and if it happens in America hopefully that like other times CA will start the trend.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30961392</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264858620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, I can't agree with your reasoning at all. <br>
&nbsp; <br>People "following their basic herd instincts" -- oh, let's use as an example discriminating against other people on the basis of color -- is what kept slavery legal in the US until the Civil War (and kept it the de facto law of the land in the South until . . . well, let's just say 'much more recently'). <br>
&nbsp; <br>Laws are what civilized societies pass in an effort to elevate "the herd" above their animal natures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , I ca n't agree with your reasoning at all .
  People " following their basic herd instincts " -- oh , let 's use as an example discriminating against other people on the basis of color -- is what kept slavery legal in the US until the Civil War ( and kept it the de facto law of the land in the South until .
. .
well , let 's just say 'much more recently ' ) .
  Laws are what civilized societies pass in an effort to elevate " the herd " above their animal natures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, I can't agree with your reasoning at all.
  People "following their basic herd instincts" -- oh, let's use as an example discriminating against other people on the basis of color -- is what kept slavery legal in the US until the Civil War (and kept it the de facto law of the land in the South until .
. .
well, let's just say 'much more recently').
  Laws are what civilized societies pass in an effort to elevate "the herd" above their animal natures.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947626</id>
	<title>Huh?!? Isn't this universal?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264766280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Brazil, we have a "rescue omission" ("omiss&#227;o de socorro") law: if you're involved in an accident and escape the place leaving an injured peerson without helping or calling the paramedics, you're in for an extra charge (the aforementioned).</p><p>It has been so for what? 20 years? 30?</p><p>I thought this law existed in most places...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Brazil , we have a " rescue omission " ( " omiss   o de socorro " ) law : if you 're involved in an accident and escape the place leaving an injured peerson without helping or calling the paramedics , you 're in for an extra charge ( the aforementioned ) .It has been so for what ?
20 years ?
30 ? I thought this law existed in most places.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Brazil, we have a "rescue omission" ("omissão de socorro") law: if you're involved in an accident and escape the place leaving an injured peerson without helping or calling the paramedics, you're in for an extra charge (the aforementioned).It has been so for what?
20 years?
30?I thought this law existed in most places...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952594</id>
	<title>So let's see ...</title>
	<author>cdrguru</author>
	<datestamp>1264792440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We have a "good samaritian" law, with the force of police, courts and jail behind it.</p><p>We have a "stop snitching" movement, with the force of death behind it.</p><p>Which do you think will win?  I'd say "stop snitching" has it all over anything else, because if you are caught you easily end up dead.  Here in the West we love life more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We have a " good samaritian " law , with the force of police , courts and jail behind it.We have a " stop snitching " movement , with the force of death behind it.Which do you think will win ?
I 'd say " stop snitching " has it all over anything else , because if you are caught you easily end up dead .
Here in the West we love life more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have a "good samaritian" law, with the force of police, courts and jail behind it.We have a "stop snitching" movement, with the force of death behind it.Which do you think will win?
I'd say "stop snitching" has it all over anything else, because if you are caught you easily end up dead.
Here in the West we love life more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30960106</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1264882380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't see what your own emergency service lying to you has to do with the subject at hand. In any case there is a very big difference between 1 person calling several times, and 20 people calling all at once. I know how my county's 911 service works, and that many calls would overwhelm them. Response time would not be faster, it would be much slower.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see what your own emergency service lying to you has to do with the subject at hand .
In any case there is a very big difference between 1 person calling several times , and 20 people calling all at once .
I know how my county 's 911 service works , and that many calls would overwhelm them .
Response time would not be faster , it would be much slower .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see what your own emergency service lying to you has to do with the subject at hand.
In any case there is a very big difference between 1 person calling several times, and 20 people calling all at once.
I know how my county's 911 service works, and that many calls would overwhelm them.
Response time would not be faster, it would be much slower.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946002</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264703280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>a law like this needs to be enacted so that such people can be punished.</p></div><p>No. Being a bystander to rape is obviously a crime right now. This law would not significantly change the prosecution of those people (if they were identifiable).</p><p>From what I can tell the target of this law is riots and protests. If you are in a protest now and 1 person does something wrong you must STOP and contact the police. This law will be used to break up gatherings and arrest protesters en masse.</p><p>Unfortunately taking politics at face value isn't very useful and will rarely lead to logical reasoning.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>a law like this needs to be enacted so that such people can be punished.No .
Being a bystander to rape is obviously a crime right now .
This law would not significantly change the prosecution of those people ( if they were identifiable ) .From what I can tell the target of this law is riots and protests .
If you are in a protest now and 1 person does something wrong you must STOP and contact the police .
This law will be used to break up gatherings and arrest protesters en masse.Unfortunately taking politics at face value is n't very useful and will rarely lead to logical reasoning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a law like this needs to be enacted so that such people can be punished.No.
Being a bystander to rape is obviously a crime right now.
This law would not significantly change the prosecution of those people (if they were identifiable).From what I can tell the target of this law is riots and protests.
If you are in a protest now and 1 person does something wrong you must STOP and contact the police.
This law will be used to break up gatherings and arrest protesters en masse.Unfortunately taking politics at face value isn't very useful and will rarely lead to logical reasoning.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947052</id>
	<title>We're all doomed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264757880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's days like these when I lose hope in humanity.</p><p>The very fact that we need laws to tell us "yes, you can help someone in need and in fact you should" is bad enough, but then we have the typical lazy-bastard response "why should I be forced to help" and even uber-rationalizations like "groups are programmed to no intervene, it's normal" or even "it's a slippery slope..."</p><p>My karma is on Excellent so mod me down if you will, but if you think like so many posters, I have this to tell you: have a good look at yourself in the mirror. YOU are a self-centered lazy bastard; no matter how clever you think you are, you're human failure and I hope you won't find out the hard way how is to be ignored by your fellows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's days like these when I lose hope in humanity.The very fact that we need laws to tell us " yes , you can help someone in need and in fact you should " is bad enough , but then we have the typical lazy-bastard response " why should I be forced to help " and even uber-rationalizations like " groups are programmed to no intervene , it 's normal " or even " it 's a slippery slope... " My karma is on Excellent so mod me down if you will , but if you think like so many posters , I have this to tell you : have a good look at yourself in the mirror .
YOU are a self-centered lazy bastard ; no matter how clever you think you are , you 're human failure and I hope you wo n't find out the hard way how is to be ignored by your fellows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's days like these when I lose hope in humanity.The very fact that we need laws to tell us "yes, you can help someone in need and in fact you should" is bad enough, but then we have the typical lazy-bastard response "why should I be forced to help" and even uber-rationalizations like "groups are programmed to no intervene, it's normal" or even "it's a slippery slope..."My karma is on Excellent so mod me down if you will, but if you think like so many posters, I have this to tell you: have a good look at yourself in the mirror.
YOU are a self-centered lazy bastard; no matter how clever you think you are, you're human failure and I hope you won't find out the hard way how is to be ignored by your fellows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946016</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1264703520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the stupid lawsuits that follow helping people are countered by laws requiring you to render assistance. You can't be sued for obeying the law. Most such laws have a built in "out" to them like "if you believe you may do so safely". The only downside is that such laws are dirty hacks to paper over the real problem of a sue crazy society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the stupid lawsuits that follow helping people are countered by laws requiring you to render assistance .
You ca n't be sued for obeying the law .
Most such laws have a built in " out " to them like " if you believe you may do so safely " .
The only downside is that such laws are dirty hacks to paper over the real problem of a sue crazy society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the stupid lawsuits that follow helping people are countered by laws requiring you to render assistance.
You can't be sued for obeying the law.
Most such laws have a built in "out" to them like "if you believe you may do so safely".
The only downside is that such laws are dirty hacks to paper over the real problem of a sue crazy society.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945726</id>
	<title>Oblig</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264701000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's a shame</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a shame</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a shame</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946466</id>
	<title>Re:What, am I now my brothers keeper?</title>
	<author>JoshDD</author>
	<datestamp>1264708260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are a douche and should be ashamed of yourself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are a douche and should be ashamed of yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are a douche and should be ashamed of yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920</id>
	<title>Is-ought problem</title>
	<author>SpeedyDX</author>
	<datestamp>1264702680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just because it is the case that the bystander effect is normal doesn't mean it ought to be the case that it is normal. This is a very common logical fallacy in moral philosophy called the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is-ought" title="wikipedia.org">is-ought problem</a> [wikipedia.org] as it was well articulated by David Hume. The gist of it is that you cannot take descriptive statements as premises and come to a prescriptive conclusion.</p><p>The reason why there are such laws is because we feel that we should have a moral responsibility to help those who are in immediate life-threatening danger when we are in a position to help them without (too much) personal sacrifice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because it is the case that the bystander effect is normal does n't mean it ought to be the case that it is normal .
This is a very common logical fallacy in moral philosophy called the is-ought problem [ wikipedia.org ] as it was well articulated by David Hume .
The gist of it is that you can not take descriptive statements as premises and come to a prescriptive conclusion.The reason why there are such laws is because we feel that we should have a moral responsibility to help those who are in immediate life-threatening danger when we are in a position to help them without ( too much ) personal sacrifice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because it is the case that the bystander effect is normal doesn't mean it ought to be the case that it is normal.
This is a very common logical fallacy in moral philosophy called the is-ought problem [wikipedia.org] as it was well articulated by David Hume.
The gist of it is that you cannot take descriptive statements as premises and come to a prescriptive conclusion.The reason why there are such laws is because we feel that we should have a moral responsibility to help those who are in immediate life-threatening danger when we are in a position to help them without (too much) personal sacrifice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952774</id>
	<title>Slashdotter's "thinking"</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1264793220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you read TFA, you'd know that the article summary is almost entirely incorrect.</p><p>California has a law requiring people to report (not intervene) observed physical violence against persons aged 14 and under. The new law just removes the age requirement. Not only does this make perfect sense, but there was no way it <i>wasn't</i> going to pass when the impetus of the bill was the widely-reported gang rape of a 16 year old girl in public.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read TFA , you 'd know that the article summary is almost entirely incorrect.California has a law requiring people to report ( not intervene ) observed physical violence against persons aged 14 and under .
The new law just removes the age requirement .
Not only does this make perfect sense , but there was no way it was n't going to pass when the impetus of the bill was the widely-reported gang rape of a 16 year old girl in public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read TFA, you'd know that the article summary is almost entirely incorrect.California has a law requiring people to report (not intervene) observed physical violence against persons aged 14 and under.
The new law just removes the age requirement.
Not only does this make perfect sense, but there was no way it wasn't going to pass when the impetus of the bill was the widely-reported gang rape of a 16 year old girl in public.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947792</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>delinear</author>
	<datestamp>1264768860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Probably aimed at the kind of idiots who film this stuff on their phones and post it to youtube but don't even think twice about calling the relevant authorities.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably aimed at the kind of idiots who film this stuff on their phones and post it to youtube but do n't even think twice about calling the relevant authorities .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably aimed at the kind of idiots who film this stuff on their phones and post it to youtube but don't even think twice about calling the relevant authorities.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945850</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>LockeOnLogic</author>
	<datestamp>1264702200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a relatively well known phenomena that groups witnessing emergencies often take no action on the assumption that someone else will. Would you be acting perfectly rational if you were to come across something like this? Of course those responsible deserve the full force of the law. But those witnesses are acting as many reasonable people would (reasonable person as in the legal meaning). Although doing nothing is morally reprehensible, it's sadly what most people would do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a relatively well known phenomena that groups witnessing emergencies often take no action on the assumption that someone else will .
Would you be acting perfectly rational if you were to come across something like this ?
Of course those responsible deserve the full force of the law .
But those witnesses are acting as many reasonable people would ( reasonable person as in the legal meaning ) .
Although doing nothing is morally reprehensible , it 's sadly what most people would do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a relatively well known phenomena that groups witnessing emergencies often take no action on the assumption that someone else will.
Would you be acting perfectly rational if you were to come across something like this?
Of course those responsible deserve the full force of the law.
But those witnesses are acting as many reasonable people would (reasonable person as in the legal meaning).
Although doing nothing is morally reprehensible, it's sadly what most people would do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947068</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1264758180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually, the stupid lawsuits that follow helping people are countered by laws requiring you to render assistance. You can't be sued for obeying the law</p></div><p>Says who?  You can be sued for just about anything.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the stupid lawsuits that follow helping people are countered by laws requiring you to render assistance .
You ca n't be sued for obeying the lawSays who ?
You can be sued for just about anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the stupid lawsuits that follow helping people are countered by laws requiring you to render assistance.
You can't be sued for obeying the lawSays who?
You can be sued for just about anything.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946044</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1264703820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being supposedly "progressive" has nothing to do with it.</p><p>Ever heard about long standing tradition of blaming rape victims, for example?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being supposedly " progressive " has nothing to do with it.Ever heard about long standing tradition of blaming rape victims , for example ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being supposedly "progressive" has nothing to do with it.Ever heard about long standing tradition of blaming rape victims, for example?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946132</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264704780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its not politically feasible to actually punish the offenders anymore, especially juveniles. Slap on the wrist, out on parole, bam! You have another repeat offender.

Last numbers from the FBI I saw showed that some 60\% of offense are by repeat offenders.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Its not politically feasible to actually punish the offenders anymore , especially juveniles .
Slap on the wrist , out on parole , bam !
You have another repeat offender .
Last numbers from the FBI I saw showed that some 60 \ % of offense are by repeat offenders .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its not politically feasible to actually punish the offenders anymore, especially juveniles.
Slap on the wrist, out on parole, bam!
You have another repeat offender.
Last numbers from the FBI I saw showed that some 60\% of offense are by repeat offenders.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946028</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946020</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264703520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to TFA they already have a law on the books that requires a witness to report violent assaults to anyone under 15yo. This is an amendment to that law to make it compulsory to report violent crimes against anyone of any age.</p><p>The idea is to scare people into not being caught watching (or cheering on) instead of reporting the crime.</p><p>This is mostly attributable to teenagers and others within an insular peer group. If something like that gang rape happened within visible range of 20 random adults, then I'd find it hard to believe that at least half of them wouldn't have tried to call the cops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>According to TFA they already have a law on the books that requires a witness to report violent assaults to anyone under 15yo .
This is an amendment to that law to make it compulsory to report violent crimes against anyone of any age.The idea is to scare people into not being caught watching ( or cheering on ) instead of reporting the crime.This is mostly attributable to teenagers and others within an insular peer group .
If something like that gang rape happened within visible range of 20 random adults , then I 'd find it hard to believe that at least half of them would n't have tried to call the cops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to TFA they already have a law on the books that requires a witness to report violent assaults to anyone under 15yo.
This is an amendment to that law to make it compulsory to report violent crimes against anyone of any age.The idea is to scare people into not being caught watching (or cheering on) instead of reporting the crime.This is mostly attributable to teenagers and others within an insular peer group.
If something like that gang rape happened within visible range of 20 random adults, then I'd find it hard to believe that at least half of them wouldn't have tried to call the cops.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946884</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264755720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So... murder? Yeah, that'll solve all our problems. Especially if handled by such a worthy and responsible organization as the government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So... murder ? Yeah , that 'll solve all our problems .
Especially if handled by such a worthy and responsible organization as the government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... murder? Yeah, that'll solve all our problems.
Especially if handled by such a worthy and responsible organization as the government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946028</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952204</id>
	<title>Sounds Unconstitutional to me ...</title>
	<author>dougmc</author>
	<datestamp>1264790940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>The right to remain silent (which comes from the fifth amendment) includes the right to not talk to police.  About anything, really.

And since nobody can really know ALL the laws, simply reporting an observed crime to the police could very well incriminate you in some crime, either the crime you're reporting or something else (watching a cock fight?  illegal.  Being out after curfew?  Illegal.  Who knows what laws you might have violated simply by being there, and when you report this crime, you're telling them that you were there.)

For more on this --

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc</a> [youtube.com]
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The right to remain silent ( which comes from the fifth amendment ) includes the right to not talk to police .
About anything , really .
And since nobody can really know ALL the laws , simply reporting an observed crime to the police could very well incriminate you in some crime , either the crime you 're reporting or something else ( watching a cock fight ?
illegal. Being out after curfew ?
Illegal. Who knows what laws you might have violated simply by being there , and when you report this crime , you 're telling them that you were there .
) For more on this -- http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 6wXkI4t7nuc [ youtube.com ] http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 08fZQWjDVKE [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The right to remain silent (which comes from the fifth amendment) includes the right to not talk to police.
About anything, really.
And since nobody can really know ALL the laws, simply reporting an observed crime to the police could very well incriminate you in some crime, either the crime you're reporting or something else (watching a cock fight?
illegal.  Being out after curfew?
Illegal.  Who knows what laws you might have violated simply by being there, and when you report this crime, you're telling them that you were there.
)

For more on this --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947624</id>
	<title>Guilt by association</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1264766280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"There are some differences, such as direct action is not required, but the concept of guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill."</p></div><p>I think most people can sympathize with the view that we have at least a moral duty to do something when we see one of our fellow beings is in need; whether passing yet another law is the best way is debatable, but IMO if you simply stand around to enjoy the entertainment, you are guilty.</p><p>"Guilt by association" BTW, means that you are considered guilty as the consequence of a false association (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt\_by\_association); it doesn't apply in this case, where the offence is not that you are in the neighborhood, but that you do nothing to help, not even the bare minimum of reporting it.</p><p>Those things aside - I really have no sympathy with the attitude, that people won't accept anything but the complete and final solution to problems. Here we have identified an obvious problem: Criminals can act with impunity because nobody cares enough to do anything. Passing a law that criminalizes those that fail to help, is clearly not the best way - but it is at least an attempt at addressing the problem.</p><p>The sad truth is that you can hardly ever solve a problem with one, bold strike; it has to be a step-by-step process with a lot of trial error on the way. But doing something, anything, is a lot better than just standing in the corner, sulking. But to turn things around: Why don't you tell us all how you would solve the problem? Taking into account, of course, that your only tools are the power to legislate and to allocate limited funds to social projects.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" There are some differences , such as direct action is not required , but the concept of guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill .
" I think most people can sympathize with the view that we have at least a moral duty to do something when we see one of our fellow beings is in need ; whether passing yet another law is the best way is debatable , but IMO if you simply stand around to enjoy the entertainment , you are guilty .
" Guilt by association " BTW , means that you are considered guilty as the consequence of a false association ( http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt \ _by \ _association ) ; it does n't apply in this case , where the offence is not that you are in the neighborhood , but that you do nothing to help , not even the bare minimum of reporting it.Those things aside - I really have no sympathy with the attitude , that people wo n't accept anything but the complete and final solution to problems .
Here we have identified an obvious problem : Criminals can act with impunity because nobody cares enough to do anything .
Passing a law that criminalizes those that fail to help , is clearly not the best way - but it is at least an attempt at addressing the problem.The sad truth is that you can hardly ever solve a problem with one , bold strike ; it has to be a step-by-step process with a lot of trial error on the way .
But doing something , anything , is a lot better than just standing in the corner , sulking .
But to turn things around : Why do n't you tell us all how you would solve the problem ?
Taking into account , of course , that your only tools are the power to legislate and to allocate limited funds to social projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"There are some differences, such as direct action is not required, but the concept of guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill.
"I think most people can sympathize with the view that we have at least a moral duty to do something when we see one of our fellow beings is in need; whether passing yet another law is the best way is debatable, but IMO if you simply stand around to enjoy the entertainment, you are guilty.
"Guilt by association" BTW, means that you are considered guilty as the consequence of a false association (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt\_by\_association); it doesn't apply in this case, where the offence is not that you are in the neighborhood, but that you do nothing to help, not even the bare minimum of reporting it.Those things aside - I really have no sympathy with the attitude, that people won't accept anything but the complete and final solution to problems.
Here we have identified an obvious problem: Criminals can act with impunity because nobody cares enough to do anything.
Passing a law that criminalizes those that fail to help, is clearly not the best way - but it is at least an attempt at addressing the problem.The sad truth is that you can hardly ever solve a problem with one, bold strike; it has to be a step-by-step process with a lot of trial error on the way.
But doing something, anything, is a lot better than just standing in the corner, sulking.
But to turn things around: Why don't you tell us all how you would solve the problem?
Taking into account, of course, that your only tools are the power to legislate and to allocate limited funds to social projects.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947592</id>
	<title>Why stop there?</title>
	<author>WinstonWolfIT</author>
	<datestamp>1264766040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Amend the bill in the Senate to also make it a crime to video record morbid scenes and we might get just a sliver of humanity returned to us.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Amend the bill in the Senate to also make it a crime to video record morbid scenes and we might get just a sliver of humanity returned to us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Amend the bill in the Senate to also make it a crime to video record morbid scenes and we might get just a sliver of humanity returned to us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384</id>
	<title>What, am I now my brothers keeper?</title>
	<author>scotts13</author>
	<datestamp>1264707420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think not. I, and I alone, will decide when and if it's safe/appropriate/desirable for me to render assistance. I have helped at accident scenes, but would no longer do so because of the legal complications we've all heard of.

A law like this would ensure one thing - that bystanders would immediately exit the scene, rather than watching to see if it was safe to help.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think not .
I , and I alone , will decide when and if it 's safe/appropriate/desirable for me to render assistance .
I have helped at accident scenes , but would no longer do so because of the legal complications we 've all heard of .
A law like this would ensure one thing - that bystanders would immediately exit the scene , rather than watching to see if it was safe to help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think not.
I, and I alone, will decide when and if it's safe/appropriate/desirable for me to render assistance.
I have helped at accident scenes, but would no longer do so because of the legal complications we've all heard of.
A law like this would ensure one thing - that bystanders would immediately exit the scene, rather than watching to see if it was safe to help.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946428</id>
	<title>With each passing day.</title>
	<author>Low Ranked Craig</author>
	<datestamp>1264707900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am so glad I moved my family the hell out of California.  It's a nice place to visit but I don't want to live there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am so glad I moved my family the hell out of California .
It 's a nice place to visit but I do n't want to live there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am so glad I moved my family the hell out of California.
It's a nice place to visit but I don't want to live there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949102</id>
	<title>Re:Is-ought problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264779480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Just because it is the case that the bystander effect is normal doesn't mean it ought to be the case that it is normal. This is a very common logical fallacy in moral philosophy called the is-ought problem as it was well articulated by David Hume. The gist of it is that you cannot take descriptive statements as premises and come to a prescriptive conclusion.</i></p><p>Then you might as well prosecute people for being unable to fly. After all, they "ought" to be able to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because it is the case that the bystander effect is normal does n't mean it ought to be the case that it is normal .
This is a very common logical fallacy in moral philosophy called the is-ought problem as it was well articulated by David Hume .
The gist of it is that you can not take descriptive statements as premises and come to a prescriptive conclusion.Then you might as well prosecute people for being unable to fly .
After all , they " ought " to be able to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because it is the case that the bystander effect is normal doesn't mean it ought to be the case that it is normal.
This is a very common logical fallacy in moral philosophy called the is-ought problem as it was well articulated by David Hume.
The gist of it is that you cannot take descriptive statements as premises and come to a prescriptive conclusion.Then you might as well prosecute people for being unable to fly.
After all, they "ought" to be able to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30951318</id>
	<title>It's not the first place to do this</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1264788060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and it won't hold up. You can't force people to get involved. This is yet another unneeded law backed by the Prison Guard Union lobby. The Lobby that's been behind pretty much EVERY new crime bill in CA for the past 20 years.<br>You wonder who pushed 3 strike? fights for longer sentences for non violent criminals?<br>Yeah, the prison guard union...fuckers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and it wo n't hold up .
You ca n't force people to get involved .
This is yet another unneeded law backed by the Prison Guard Union lobby .
The Lobby that 's been behind pretty much EVERY new crime bill in CA for the past 20 years.You wonder who pushed 3 strike ?
fights for longer sentences for non violent criminals ? Yeah , the prison guard union...fuckers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and it won't hold up.
You can't force people to get involved.
This is yet another unneeded law backed by the Prison Guard Union lobby.
The Lobby that's been behind pretty much EVERY new crime bill in CA for the past 20 years.You wonder who pushed 3 strike?
fights for longer sentences for non violent criminals?Yeah, the prison guard union...fuckers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946388</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1264707540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right. So there are 20 witnesses to a crime, and you have 20 people calling 911 all at the same time.
<br> <br>
Sorry, but that is not helpful at all. It is counterproductive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right .
So there are 20 witnesses to a crime , and you have 20 people calling 911 all at the same time .
Sorry , but that is not helpful at all .
It is counterproductive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right.
So there are 20 witnesses to a crime, and you have 20 people calling 911 all at the same time.
Sorry, but that is not helpful at all.
It is counterproductive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947244</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1264760580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do stupid laws and frivolous lawsuits make you too afraid to help someone in trouble?</p></div><p>I know it was a rhetorical question, but the answer is definitely no, I had never heard of that before (IANAL).  Is it a widespread thing?  I googled "sued for helping" and then "good samaritan sued" and got some malpractice pages and one case of a woman in LA being pulled from a car and getting paralyzed.  Is that it, or are there a lot more cases?  We don't seem to be experiencing a rash of thousands of people trying to get rich by suing people who come to their aid.  If that really is the one case, I would argue that there's not exactly anything wrong here.  One case doesn't mean there is a general big problem with lawsuits and helping people out.  It's too bad for the friend, and while I don't agree with the plantiff, I'd imagine if you were suddenly a quadruplegic, with no source of income, facing huge medical bills etc, desperation could get the better of you, but that isn't a common case and reaction.</p><p>Anyway, if that's the rationale behind the law, I think the bigger issue is "Why are we passing laws based off one isolated case?"  I've been sued for a freak skiing accident, yet it didn't even cross my mind to stop skiing to prevent that one case from ever happening again, yet california appears to be doing that on a huge scale.</p><p>Again, assuming there aren't a lot more cases that I'm just not finding in my exhaustive "first page of google hits" research...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do stupid laws and frivolous lawsuits make you too afraid to help someone in trouble ? I know it was a rhetorical question , but the answer is definitely no , I had never heard of that before ( IANAL ) .
Is it a widespread thing ?
I googled " sued for helping " and then " good samaritan sued " and got some malpractice pages and one case of a woman in LA being pulled from a car and getting paralyzed .
Is that it , or are there a lot more cases ?
We do n't seem to be experiencing a rash of thousands of people trying to get rich by suing people who come to their aid .
If that really is the one case , I would argue that there 's not exactly anything wrong here .
One case does n't mean there is a general big problem with lawsuits and helping people out .
It 's too bad for the friend , and while I do n't agree with the plantiff , I 'd imagine if you were suddenly a quadruplegic , with no source of income , facing huge medical bills etc , desperation could get the better of you , but that is n't a common case and reaction.Anyway , if that 's the rationale behind the law , I think the bigger issue is " Why are we passing laws based off one isolated case ?
" I 've been sued for a freak skiing accident , yet it did n't even cross my mind to stop skiing to prevent that one case from ever happening again , yet california appears to be doing that on a huge scale.Again , assuming there are n't a lot more cases that I 'm just not finding in my exhaustive " first page of google hits " research.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do stupid laws and frivolous lawsuits make you too afraid to help someone in trouble?I know it was a rhetorical question, but the answer is definitely no, I had never heard of that before (IANAL).
Is it a widespread thing?
I googled "sued for helping" and then "good samaritan sued" and got some malpractice pages and one case of a woman in LA being pulled from a car and getting paralyzed.
Is that it, or are there a lot more cases?
We don't seem to be experiencing a rash of thousands of people trying to get rich by suing people who come to their aid.
If that really is the one case, I would argue that there's not exactly anything wrong here.
One case doesn't mean there is a general big problem with lawsuits and helping people out.
It's too bad for the friend, and while I don't agree with the plantiff, I'd imagine if you were suddenly a quadruplegic, with no source of income, facing huge medical bills etc, desperation could get the better of you, but that isn't a common case and reaction.Anyway, if that's the rationale behind the law, I think the bigger issue is "Why are we passing laws based off one isolated case?
"  I've been sued for a freak skiing accident, yet it didn't even cross my mind to stop skiing to prevent that one case from ever happening again, yet california appears to be doing that on a huge scale.Again, assuming there aren't a lot more cases that I'm just not finding in my exhaustive "first page of google hits" research...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946478</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1264708320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This isn't an ill-thought law.  It's not how the summary portrayed it.  From the article:</p><blockquote><div><p>Witnesses could be charged with a misdemeanor for failing to report violent attacks in California under legislation approved by the state Assembly.</p><p>The bill by Democratic Assemblyman Pedro Nava of Santa Barbara follows the October gang rape of a 16-year-old girl outside Richmond High School's homecoming dance. Investigators believe as many as 10 people participated while another 20 or so watched without calling police.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is n't an ill-thought law .
It 's not how the summary portrayed it .
From the article : Witnesses could be charged with a misdemeanor for failing to report violent attacks in California under legislation approved by the state Assembly.The bill by Democratic Assemblyman Pedro Nava of Santa Barbara follows the October gang rape of a 16-year-old girl outside Richmond High School 's homecoming dance .
Investigators believe as many as 10 people participated while another 20 or so watched without calling police .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This isn't an ill-thought law.
It's not how the summary portrayed it.
From the article:Witnesses could be charged with a misdemeanor for failing to report violent attacks in California under legislation approved by the state Assembly.The bill by Democratic Assemblyman Pedro Nava of Santa Barbara follows the October gang rape of a 16-year-old girl outside Richmond High School's homecoming dance.
Investigators believe as many as 10 people participated while another 20 or so watched without calling police.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946558</id>
	<title>Re:Politician's "thinking"</title>
	<author>coaxial</author>
	<datestamp>1264795620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or it could just be people that are assholes that just couldn't be bothered.  Especially given that your <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good\_Samaritan\_law" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">liability is explicitly limited</a> [wikipedia.org].  But hey, sucks to their asthmar right?</p><p>Allow me to quote the relevant part of the article:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The bill by Democratic Assemblyman Pedro Nava of Santa Barbara follows the October <strong>gang rape of a 16-year-old girl outside Richmond High School's homecoming dance</strong>. Investigators believe as many as 10 people participated while <strong>another 20 or so watched without calling police</strong>.</p></div><p>Yeah, I'm really sure that girl and her family would have sued anyone there for calling the cops.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or it could just be people that are assholes that just could n't be bothered .
Especially given that your liability is explicitly limited [ wikipedia.org ] .
But hey , sucks to their asthmar right ? Allow me to quote the relevant part of the article : The bill by Democratic Assemblyman Pedro Nava of Santa Barbara follows the October gang rape of a 16-year-old girl outside Richmond High School 's homecoming dance .
Investigators believe as many as 10 people participated while another 20 or so watched without calling police.Yeah , I 'm really sure that girl and her family would have sued anyone there for calling the cops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or it could just be people that are assholes that just couldn't be bothered.
Especially given that your liability is explicitly limited [wikipedia.org].
But hey, sucks to their asthmar right?Allow me to quote the relevant part of the article:The bill by Democratic Assemblyman Pedro Nava of Santa Barbara follows the October gang rape of a 16-year-old girl outside Richmond High School's homecoming dance.
Investigators believe as many as 10 people participated while another 20 or so watched without calling police.Yeah, I'm really sure that girl and her family would have sued anyone there for calling the cops.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949218</id>
	<title>This Rocks....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264779960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>" guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill."</i></p><p>WE need the EFF to start getting the RIAA employees thrown in jail left and right as well as other corporation executives over this.</p><p>They DAILY don't "do the right thing" to the American public... so let's hope the law is so road that it will be used to attack corporations that are pretty much evil.  Time to start funding paces like EFF so they can have a legal warchest that will allow them to hunt and kill the evil in the world....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill .
" WE need the EFF to start getting the RIAA employees thrown in jail left and right as well as other corporation executives over this.They DAILY do n't " do the right thing " to the American public... so let 's hope the law is so road that it will be used to attack corporations that are pretty much evil .
Time to start funding paces like EFF so they can have a legal warchest that will allow them to hunt and kill the evil in the world... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>" guilt by association for not doing the right thing is still on the face of the bill.
"WE need the EFF to start getting the RIAA employees thrown in jail left and right as well as other corporation executives over this.They DAILY don't "do the right thing" to the American public... so let's hope the law is so road that it will be used to attack corporations that are pretty much evil.
Time to start funding paces like EFF so they can have a legal warchest that will allow them to hunt and kill the evil in the world....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945816</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264701960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And you think this would encourage people to call for help, rather than just to get the hell away from whatever crime they're witnessing?</htmltext>
<tokenext>And you think this would encourage people to call for help , rather than just to get the hell away from whatever crime they 're witnessing ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And you think this would encourage people to call for help, rather than just to get the hell away from whatever crime they're witnessing?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947556</id>
	<title>the bystander effect is real</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1264765320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and unfortunate. the idea should be to compel people to stop acting like herd animals, not accept the vile reality of the behavior</p><p>people also tend to litter. vast parts of german society just shrugged and accepted the rise of the third reich. so we just accept evil? "oh well"</p><p>the idea is society is supposed to enforce codes of conduct to elevate us somewhat above that of herbivores, especially when the modification to the behavior is very quick easy and low cost: you can't make a phone call if someone is being beaten? you can't walk to a garbage can to dispose of your trash?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and unfortunate .
the idea should be to compel people to stop acting like herd animals , not accept the vile reality of the behaviorpeople also tend to litter .
vast parts of german society just shrugged and accepted the rise of the third reich .
so we just accept evil ?
" oh well " the idea is society is supposed to enforce codes of conduct to elevate us somewhat above that of herbivores , especially when the modification to the behavior is very quick easy and low cost : you ca n't make a phone call if someone is being beaten ?
you ca n't walk to a garbage can to dispose of your trash ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and unfortunate.
the idea should be to compel people to stop acting like herd animals, not accept the vile reality of the behaviorpeople also tend to litter.
vast parts of german society just shrugged and accepted the rise of the third reich.
so we just accept evil?
"oh well"the idea is society is supposed to enforce codes of conduct to elevate us somewhat above that of herbivores, especially when the modification to the behavior is very quick easy and low cost: you can't make a phone call if someone is being beaten?
you can't walk to a garbage can to dispose of your trash?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1264701900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why should such people be punished? There's a lot of evidence that they are acting out of normal and fairly standard psychological patterns. Humans are less likely to help in large groups. This is known as the bystander effect. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander\_effect" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander\_effect</a> [wikipedia.org]. People have tested this in many different contexts, these include having people pretending to have heart attacks, as well as more controlled lab settings. One good example test involved a lab setting where people were supposed to be answering a set of questions, then the experimenter would go out of the room and something loud and bad would happen to the experimenter who would cry out for help. The key issue is that all but one of the people in the room were actually actors. The actors all just kept taking the test. The one almost never helps. This works with as few as one actor and one real person. But if there is a single individual and no actors, more often than not, they will help. And if one of the actors gets up to help, then the person generally will also. You shouldn't punish people for following their basic herd instincts as righteous and moral as it might make you feel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should such people be punished ?
There 's a lot of evidence that they are acting out of normal and fairly standard psychological patterns .
Humans are less likely to help in large groups .
This is known as the bystander effect .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander \ _effect [ wikipedia.org ] .
People have tested this in many different contexts , these include having people pretending to have heart attacks , as well as more controlled lab settings .
One good example test involved a lab setting where people were supposed to be answering a set of questions , then the experimenter would go out of the room and something loud and bad would happen to the experimenter who would cry out for help .
The key issue is that all but one of the people in the room were actually actors .
The actors all just kept taking the test .
The one almost never helps .
This works with as few as one actor and one real person .
But if there is a single individual and no actors , more often than not , they will help .
And if one of the actors gets up to help , then the person generally will also .
You should n't punish people for following their basic herd instincts as righteous and moral as it might make you feel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why should such people be punished?
There's a lot of evidence that they are acting out of normal and fairly standard psychological patterns.
Humans are less likely to help in large groups.
This is known as the bystander effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander\_effect [wikipedia.org].
People have tested this in many different contexts, these include having people pretending to have heart attacks, as well as more controlled lab settings.
One good example test involved a lab setting where people were supposed to be answering a set of questions, then the experimenter would go out of the room and something loud and bad would happen to the experimenter who would cry out for help.
The key issue is that all but one of the people in the room were actually actors.
The actors all just kept taking the test.
The one almost never helps.
This works with as few as one actor and one real person.
But if there is a single individual and no actors, more often than not, they will help.
And if one of the actors gets up to help, then the person generally will also.
You shouldn't punish people for following their basic herd instincts as righteous and moral as it might make you feel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949480</id>
	<title>Re:What, am I now my brothers keeper?</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1264781040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Note that duty-to-rescue laws (which this is, despite what TFS says) usually come coupled with actual Good Samaritan laws, which excuse you form liability if you tried to help and did so in a reasonable way.<br>
<br>
Let's say you see a man in a crashed car. You get him out and notice he doesn't appear to have a pulse so after calling 112 (or the local emergency number in your country) you proceed to administer CPR, during which you accidentally crack one of their ribs.<br>
If that person sues you, the court is extremely likely to rule in your favor - you tried to help and administering CPR until the ambulance arrives was the sensible thing to do. As you don't have any medical training past, say, a first aid course years ago you can't be expected to administer CPR in exactly the right way in an emergency situation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Note that duty-to-rescue laws ( which this is , despite what TFS says ) usually come coupled with actual Good Samaritan laws , which excuse you form liability if you tried to help and did so in a reasonable way .
Let 's say you see a man in a crashed car .
You get him out and notice he does n't appear to have a pulse so after calling 112 ( or the local emergency number in your country ) you proceed to administer CPR , during which you accidentally crack one of their ribs .
If that person sues you , the court is extremely likely to rule in your favor - you tried to help and administering CPR until the ambulance arrives was the sensible thing to do .
As you do n't have any medical training past , say , a first aid course years ago you ca n't be expected to administer CPR in exactly the right way in an emergency situation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note that duty-to-rescue laws (which this is, despite what TFS says) usually come coupled with actual Good Samaritan laws, which excuse you form liability if you tried to help and did so in a reasonable way.
Let's say you see a man in a crashed car.
You get him out and notice he doesn't appear to have a pulse so after calling 112 (or the local emergency number in your country) you proceed to administer CPR, during which you accidentally crack one of their ribs.
If that person sues you, the court is extremely likely to rule in your favor - you tried to help and administering CPR until the ambulance arrives was the sensible thing to do.
As you don't have any medical training past, say, a first aid course years ago you can't be expected to administer CPR in exactly the right way in an emergency situation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946188</id>
	<title>Re:When girls can be raped in public with no 911 c</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264705440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"that we need to start putting people in jail for not doing such basic acts of humanity"<br>Because we all know that prison is such a humanizing, uplifting experience for most people. Get a brain, Moran!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" that we need to start putting people in jail for not doing such basic acts of humanity " Because we all know that prison is such a humanizing , uplifting experience for most people .
Get a brain , Moran !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"that we need to start putting people in jail for not doing such basic acts of humanity"Because we all know that prison is such a humanizing, uplifting experience for most people.
Get a brain, Moran!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946504
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949896
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30953832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30966786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949102
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30960106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947792
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30953212
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30961392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30951380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30956736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946530
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_022255_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30960638
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30951318
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945726
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947592
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949256
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30966786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30960638
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30953832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946466
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946530
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950206
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947052
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946016
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949656
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947068
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30953212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946076
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946388
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946612
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30960106
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30952864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948010
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947626
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945878
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945810
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30948650
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946620
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30956736
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947282
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945920
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30950608
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947900
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949102
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30951380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946504
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30961392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30949896
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946028
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946884
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947894
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30946132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945870
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945844
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30945730
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_022255.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_022255.30947736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
