Drunk woman ruins $423k of art on horror first date - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE]A Texas woman is facing a legal battle after causing damage worth at least US$300,000 to a private art collection while intoxicated on a first date. Dallas local Lindy Lou Layman, 29, was arrested on criminal mischief charges after hiding in prominent Houston lawyer Anthony Buzbee's home when he tried to get her to leave. Mr Buzbee claims Ms Layman got too drunk during their date and called her an Uber as soon as they returned to his house, but she simply rebuffed his attempts to kick her out. She turned down the first offer of a taxi home and ran away, hiding in his $20 million house. When Mr Buzbee found her and called a second Uber, she became hostile, he says. Police say Ms Layman, a freelance court reporter, tore down several paintings and poured red wine on others. She also tossed two US$20,000 sculptures to the ground, the Associated Press reports. Among the paintings she damaged were two Andy Warhol originals, each valued at US$500,000 - meaning the damages could prove to be much higher than the US$300,000 stated in the court documents. Ms Layman was released on US$30,000 bond on Christmas Day and now awaits legal proceedings.[/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2017/12/drunk-us-woman-destroys-423k-of-art-on-horror-first-date.html[/URL]

Something as sophisticated as art is not to be understood by the Layman.

[quote]Among the paintings she damaged were two Andy Warhol originals[/quote] god that fucking made me cringe... just the idea of something that important being trashed by a drunk eugh god that's horrid

[QUOTE=ThatCrazyGmanV2;53015568]god that fucking made me cringe... just the idea of something that important being trashed by a drunk eugh god that's horrid[/QUOTE] Considering how often this happens I'm starting to get numb to art destruction. If society is content to just let originals sit around in some guy's house or even in museums that have [I]no[/I] real protection against "Hey what if someone just wanted to fuck with it?" then it's just gonna keep on happening over and over and over again.

The destruction of art is art in of itself /s.

[QUOTE=duckmaster;53015771]The destruction of art is art in of itself /s.[/QUOTE] You should read up on kintsugi, I think you'd enjoy that.

And this is why you have your first date in a public enough place until you're damn sure you trust the other person enough to move to a more private setting.

[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;53015585]Considering how often this happens I'm starting to get numb to art destruction. If society is content to just let originals sit around in some guy's house or even in museums that have [I]no[/I] real protection against "Hey what if someone just wanted to fuck with it?" then it's just gonna keep on happening over and over and over again.[/QUOTE] Yes, original and noteworthy works of art shouldn't be allowed to hang freely in peoples homes. They ought all to be locked up in storages, or maybe museums but only if they are tucked away safely and hard to reach/view. /s

[QUOTE=Mango;53015901]Yes, original and noteworthy works of art shouldn't be allowed to hang freely in peoples homes. They ought all to be locked up in storages, or maybe museums but only if they are tucked away safely and hard to reach/view. /s[/QUOTE] Yes they are much better hanging in some rich asshole's mansion where they're acessible to almost nobody.

[QUOTE=Mango;53015901]Yes, original and noteworthy works of art shouldn't be allowed to hang freely in peoples homes. They ought all to be locked up in storages, or maybe museums but only if they are tucked away safely and hard to reach/view. /s[/QUOTE] Modern art is just a money thing anyway. Rich art collectors see something, say "this is what it's worth" and then suddenly only billionaires and the like can afford it. I'm an art guy and I love art but much of what we have now in terms of how the high art industry works is just a scam

[QUOTE=Gogeta SS4;53015932]Yes they are much better hanging in some rich asshole's mansion where they're acessible to almost nobody.[/QUOTE] If you are trying to argue that increasing accessibility would decrease risk of damage you may want to think about that. This "rich asshole" made the mistake of letting someone into his house which he had some prior conversation with. Art gallerias aren't going to do background checks or breathalyzer tests on people entering them and cannot discriminate. The reason people don't trash art in public venues is because they know full well the art is somewhat valuable and because there is a grand chance of getting caught between security, surveillance, and other guests. In spite of all these factors if somebody really wanted to do some damage and had no care for the repercussions they could most certainly do it. (provided the actual piece is on display and its not a decoy, but if the decoy is on display and nobody can tell then the point is proven anyways)

*snip* *I don't know anymore.*

So, is there going to be a second date?

[QUOTE=Del91;53016123]So, is there going to be a second date?[/QUOTE] In the court room

[QUOTE=Gogeta SS4;53015932]Yes they are much better hanging in some [B]rich asshole's[/B] mansion where they're acessible to almost nobody.[/QUOTE] Why is he an asshole exactly? Just because he has more money than you? I don't understand this mentality

[QUOTE=Socram;53016344]Why is he an asshole exactly? Just because he has more money than you? I don't understand this mentality[/QUOTE] At least where I live, this mentality hold true to most rich people in the area, the area being Silicon Valley. Bunch of stuck up entitled dicks is what most of them are. Might not be that way everywhere but here it really is, especially the kids, thinking they're better than anyone else because they (it their parents) have more money than most.

[QUOTE=Mango;53015901]Yes, original and noteworthy works of art shouldn't be allowed to hang freely in peoples homes. They ought all to be locked up in storages, or maybe museums but only if they are tucked away safely and hard to reach/view. /s[/QUOTE] Did you even read their post?

[QUOTE=Gogeta SS4;53015932]Yes they are much better hanging in some rich asshole's mansion where they're acessible to almost nobody.[/QUOTE] Eh, he paid the money for it. Should we disallow purchasing art because of people being scared it might get ruined? Sure we can take measures to prevent them from getting ruined, but how could he foresee them getting ruined really? Yes, he let a date in his home, but only after calling an Uber to get her home which she declined. Seriously guys, are you so paranoid about your dates that you think what he did was irresponsible? Isn't the fault entirely upon the girl who did this shit? The artwork was in his home, equally protected as himself. Stuff gets destroyed all the time (even people die because they are badly protected, should we restrict/guard people more?), and yes it sucks, but should we really start putting locks on art and disabling private ownership because we are afraid it might get destroyed? That's reasoning based solely in fear; which I think we all should be encouraged to stray away from. [QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;53016525]Did you even read their post?[/QUOTE] I'm not sure what part you think I missed, but yes I did. If you are assuming I missed the part without appropriate protection, then I'd argue that a private home is safer than a public museum with safety precautions.

Such art destroyed by a drunk imbecile... This is truly a clear definition of idiocy.

[QUOTE=Socram;53016344]Why is he an asshole exactly? Just because he has more money than you? I don't understand this mentality[/QUOTE] The system is horribly stacked for the rich. Once you're rich, it's pretty easy to stay rich, to keep getting richer, and to manipulate the laws further. How do you stop this? I don't know. Wealth is power in our society, and there are people with more wealth and power than we can fathom, and they're stacking the decks even more in their favour. You can say "That's not all rich people' and you might be right, but the reality of the situation is that the Charles and David Kochs of the world, as well as the Mercers, and numerous other billionaire dynasty families from around the world are actively working to get more power. I'm not sure why we should just be in awe of them for their wealth. I'm not sure why we should act like they're role models. They're powerful parasites.

[QUOTE=Mango;53016813]I'm not sure what part you think I missed, but yes I did. If you are assuming I missed the part without appropriate protection, then I'd argue that a private home is safer than a public museum with safety precautions.[/QUOTE] I think you forgot something called "glass" exists.

[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;53016853]I think you forgot something called "glass" exists.[/QUOTE] I think you forgot that something which is called "locked doors" exist. What's to stop someone from throwing a rock through the glass? Shitty people will always exist. Problem is the people, not "insufficient protection". [editline]31st December 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53016852]The system is horribly stacked for the rich. Once you're rich, it's pretty easy to stay rich, to keep getting richer, and to manipulate the laws further. How do you stop this? I don't know. Wealth is power in our society, and there are people with more wealth and power than we can fathom, and they're stacking the decks even more in their favour. You can say "That's not all rich people' and you might be right, but the reality of the situation is that the Charles and David Kochs of the world, as well as the Mercers, and numerous other billionaire dynasty families from around the world are actively working to get more power. I'm not sure why we should just be in awe of them for their wealth. I'm not sure why we should act like they're role models. They're powerful parasites.[/QUOTE] "Born to parents who worked as a butcher and a high school cafeteria worker" [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Buzbee[/url]

[QUOTE=Mango;53016878]I think you forgot that something which is called "locked doors" exist. What's to stop someone from throwing a rock through the glass? Shitty people will always exist. Problem is the people, not "insufficient protection". [editline]31st December 2017[/editline] "Born to parents who worked as a butcher and a high school cafeteria worker" [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Buzbee[/url][/QUOTE] I didn't say it was impossible to make it rich from being poor. It however is not a normal circumstance, nor one that is being made more possible by regulations. Yes, please toss as many individuals as you want at me. That doesn't change my argument, or the reality one iota dude.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53016911]I didn't say it was impossible to make it rich from being poor. It however is not a normal circumstance, nor one that is being made more possible by regulations. Yes, please toss as many individuals as you want at me. That doesn't change my argument, or the reality one iota dude.[/QUOTE] That's true, you're right. Still, you can't make the argument that all rich people are bad people simply because it's easy to remain rich.

[QUOTE=Mango;53016946]That's true, you're right. Still, you can't make the argument that all rich people are bad people simply because it's easy to remain rich.[/QUOTE] No, but I don't really have any sympathy for them. Wealth disparity is reaching some of the worst levels we've seen. It's worth keeping in mind who needs actual sympathy.

[QUOTE=Dave_Parker;53016960]It's not normal circumstance because it's hard work if you're not born into it and requires conscious life choices like not having kids until later, along with a bunch of shit out of your control like being healthy, being somewhat intelligent, being able to get good education... What sort of regulations would you want to see?[/QUOTE] You left out so many things out of that category of things "out of your control" that it's quite deceptive. I was stating the rich have changed rules and regulations as it is already. Not that I want more on top of them.

[QUOTE=Mango;53016878]I think you forgot that something which is called "locked doors" exist. What's to stop someone from throwing a rock through the glass? Shitty people will always exist. Problem is the people, not "insufficient protection".[/QUOTE] What is "security" Stay in school.

[QUOTE=iownuall;53016417]At least where I live, this mentality hold true to most rich people in the area, the area being Silicon Valley. Bunch of stuck up entitled dicks is what most of them are. Might not be that way everywhere but here it really is, especially the kids, thinking they're better than anyone else because they (it their parents) have more money than most.[/QUOTE] Sounds like prejudice/confirmation bias to be honest, I live in the area as well and I haven't experienced this.

[quote]Dallas local Lindy Lou Layman[/quote] She's a long way from Whoville

Lol owned. Can't say I feel that bad for insanely rich people getting pwned by having a house too big to find their guest