The Smokers Club Tour - Week 1 (Video)
After a year of planning the 2nd annual Smokers Club Tour we took to the road for week 1. Meth brought out Red, DZA Hairline disappeared, Shiest Bubz hosted the shows with Cinematic Sidekick Cuzzin Todd & i decided to grip some wood wheel at a random Walmart while a hater chased me. There is also some footage of 1 our Bus Drivers & Tour manager extrodinaire Dutchington talkin his shit about the tour so far. Roll up, Smoke n Joke do whatever it is you do but 1 thing is mandatory bring yo muthafuckin lungs with ya! GoodTalk…. O & all videos shot by Steve-ography if it didnt come from him it aint official
Shot By Steve-Ography
get off of there cat. this farmville obsession has gone two far. you’ve been on there for 48 hours straight. i want to check my email.
The 27 year old singer was found dead at her home today. The reason for death has not been confirmed yet, but “drug overdose” is the suspected cause. Though how she died might be still a question, we have a clue who exactly was responsible. Joining more than 34 artists in the “27 club”, she…
OK, so I kind of liked this analogy, until I came across the following use of a similar analogy in The New York State Reporter, a book of New York State court decisions published in 1894.
At common law, if a person intended to steal an article take it with the the owner’s consent, it is not larceny. … In such a case the completed act, accomplished as intended, not being a crime, none of the steps taken being ingredients of the offense, would constitute a crime, and the taker could not be convicted of an attempt to commit the crime of larceny.
If an assault should be made on a man dressed as a woman with the intent to ravish, the assailant believing the person assaulted to be a woman, he could not be convicted of an attempt to ravish, because in such a case the commission of the crime of rape would be an impossibility. So in the case at bar, it was a legal impossibility to commit the crime of extortion as against the woman Ames, because she inveigled the defendant to commit the act and was not in fear by him. [Emphasis added.]
In the case of The People v. Gardiner, Catherine Ames, who ran a “house of prostitution,” was coerced by Charles W. Gardiner, who threatened to have her prosecuted, to pay him $150. The court ruled that it was a “legal impossibility” for Gardiner to extorted money from Ames, claiming that she was not in fear.
While not exactly the same as the “mugging” dialog above, the two cases have significant parallels. Both coerce someone to give the other person their money, main difference is the one uses the threat of a gun and the other uses the threat of criminal prosecution. While the hypothetical mugging is used as a rape analogy, in the real life case of The People v. Gardiner the court itself makes an analogy to rape.
Only in real life case, the attempted rape of a trans woman or male cross-dresser is actually deemed an “impossibility,” and is not recognized by the court as a crime. Moreover, in a clear case of “victim-blaming,” it is suggested that trans women and cross-dresser actually “inveigled” their assailants to attack them.
While this may be a case from the nineteenth century, this view of the “impossibility” of rape of trans women is still predominant in our society.