If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN) NewsFlash American citizen to be tried as an American citizen. Sadly, in 2013, this warrants a news flash   (cnn.com) divider line 492
    More: NewsFlash, American citizens, Boston, Don Lemon, Americans, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, Tsarnaev, Boston area  
•       •       •

11203 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Apr 2013 at 2:07 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

492 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-04-22 02:04:05 PM
the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.
 
2013-04-22 02:06:52 PM
plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?
 
2013-04-22 02:07:54 PM
AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.
 
2013-04-22 02:08:59 PM
If it doesn't warrant a news flash then why did you news flash it?
 
2013-04-22 02:09:04 PM

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


He'll get the DP in prison too.
 
2013-04-22 02:09:20 PM
blog.synthesis.net
 
2013-04-22 02:09:33 PM
Really, subby
CNN?

Have we forgiven them so soon?


/too soon, I say.
//too soon.
 
2013-04-22 02:09:37 PM

Cream of Meat: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

He'll get the DP in prison too.


True justice turns like a spit.
 
2013-04-22 02:10:01 PM
He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.
 
2013-04-22 02:10:08 PM
He's a citizen?  I thought I read that he had a green card, and was a legal immigrant, but not a US citizen.

Or is that just CNN/NYPost being derpy again?
 
2013-04-22 02:10:18 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.


are you retarded?
 
2013-04-22 02:10:28 PM

Cream of Meat: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

He'll get the DP in prison too.


i... realized what i typed only after i hit "add comment."
 
2013-04-22 02:10:33 PM

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


Yes.
 
2013-04-22 02:10:40 PM
If USCIS can find any fraud on his application they can revoke his citizenship.  Just sayin'.
 
2013-04-22 02:10:50 PM
He should be tried by Jack Bauer.
 
2013-04-22 02:11:00 PM
Remember when last week was the worst week ever? No, THIS is the worst week ever
 
2013-04-22 02:11:09 PM

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


This. No matter how heinous the charges or how solid the evidence, his rights must not be violated. Anyone who suggests otherwise basically hates America.
 
2013-04-22 02:11:17 PM
THIS IS AN OUTR- actually, this is very logical
 
2013-04-22 02:11:18 PM
But what if he's a Sovereign Citizen, not subject to the Crown or some phoney-baloney Imperial Navy of the British Colonies laws? He should be free to not pay taxes and do as he pleases without Federal harassment, seems to me.

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


He'll probably get that, TP, and "Spit-Roasted", repeatedly for years on end if he's in Federal prison.
 
2013-04-22 02:11:19 PM
Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.
 
2013-04-22 02:11:20 PM
meh, I don't think this was ever much of a question
 
2013-04-22 02:11:22 PM
A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.
 
2013-04-22 02:11:26 PM

slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


well, that's their job.
 
2013-04-22 02:11:29 PM

vudukungfu: Really, subby
CNN?

Have we forgiven them so soon?


/too soon, I say.
//too soon.


Most of the news networks made errors during their coverage, especially in the early hours of the final manhunt.  It was sickening to watch major news sources pick up the Mike Mulugeta crap.  I hope he sues them all.
 
2013-04-22 02:11:30 PM
This is Judge Ito's second chance!
 
2013-04-22 02:12:00 PM
Phony GOP Americans must be inconsolable.
 
2013-04-22 02:12:09 PM

slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


I'm good with that.  Lets give him 5-10 years in the electric chair.
 
2013-04-22 02:12:09 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


I think any bomb is considered a WMD. Not to be confused with the WMDs that Saddam moved to Syria
 
2013-04-22 02:12:26 PM

HMS_Blinkin: He's a citizen?  I thought I read that he had a green card, and was a legal immigrant, but not a US citizen.

Or is that just CNN/NYPost being derpy again?


He took the oath in september.
 
2013-04-22 02:12:33 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


I think the biggest problem with the WMD moniker is that it stands so strongly opposed to the law of conservation of mass.
 
2013-04-22 02:12:39 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


It's more than Saddam had, and we went to war over it.
 
2013-04-22 02:12:40 PM
Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.
 
2013-04-22 02:12:44 PM
Good point, subby. As an Islamic terrorist, he should be declared an enemy combatant.
 
2013-04-22 02:12:56 PM

HMS_Blinkin: He's a citizen?  I thought I read that he had a green card, and was a legal immigrant, but not a US citizen.

Or is that just CNN/NYPost being derpy again?


Does it matter? The military is not for things inside the us
 
2013-04-22 02:13:12 PM
Obama must be mad he couldnt get to him with a drone, then it would be OK
 
2013-04-22 02:13:12 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.


Yeah. The idea of a "special terrorism interrogator" getting to him before he is officially questioned bothers me. You can't put due process on hold.
 
2013-04-22 02:13:14 PM

Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.


This and this, again.
 
2013-04-22 02:13:31 PM

Treygreen13: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

I think the biggest problem with the WMD moniker is that it stands so strongly opposed to the law of conservation of mass.


Weapons of mass conversion.
 
2013-04-22 02:13:32 PM

HotWingConspiracy: Phony GOP Americans must be inconsolable.


Oh, they're certainly upset. Question is, more or less upset than Fark Lefties who learned that these two jokers weren't bombing for Jeebus?
 
2013-04-22 02:13:32 PM
Because remember, there's nothing like sticking up for the principles the terrorists supposedly hate like abandoning them the millisecond your own personal safety is threatened.
 
2013-04-22 02:13:45 PM

Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.


Five?  Christ, if the guy "only" gets life in prison we'll be hearing about it for decades.

"It's too dangerous to keep him in prison.  What if Al Qaeda tries to spring him.  What if he escapes?!  WOOGA BOOGA!!"
 
2013-04-22 02:13:49 PM
Are we trying to break the "newsflash" record this week?
 
2013-04-22 02:13:55 PM

Jument: FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.

This. No matter how heinous the charges or how solid the evidence, his rights must not be violated. Anyone who suggests otherwise basically hates America.


there are so many people already convinced that his rights ARE being violated, simply because the wrong guy is in charge.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-04-22 02:14:06 PM
Shrugging Atlas

Quoting my post from yesterday's thread:

For purposes of federal criminal law, a "weapon of mass destruction" includes any "destructive device." 18 USC 2332a. A "destructive device" includes any bomb, grenade, rocket with more than four ounces of propellant, and any projectile launcher with a caliber over .50 inches (except for Attorney General approved shotguns). 18 USC 921. A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.
 
2013-04-22 02:14:06 PM
The Newsflash tag is entirely optional and is used to generate page hits due to it being tied to email alerts for those who get them.

See: Kim Kardashian Divorced for an example.
 
2013-04-22 02:14:12 PM

FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.


There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.
 
2013-04-22 02:14:14 PM
Why is this even an argument?
 
2013-04-22 02:14:18 PM
To piss him off he should be put on trial under Sharia law, on the 'eye for an eye' section.
 
2013-04-22 02:14:24 PM

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


Yes, a conviction on using 'weapons of mass destruction' could result in the DP
We shall see.

Personally, I wish they'd just torched the boat, and had a few weapons malfunctions.
I would make a truly awful policeman.  But my beat would be quite
so quite
 
2013-04-22 02:14:58 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Treygreen13: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

I think the biggest problem with the WMD moniker is that it stands so strongly opposed to the law of conservation of mass.

Weapons of mass conversion.


There we go. We need to try to limit WMCs.
 
2013-04-22 02:15:04 PM

ManateeGag: TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

are you retarded?


Investigators are going into Tsarnaev's room every few hours to ask questions in the presence of doctors, the source said.

Ill-informed, opinionated and yes, retarded. Yes, I am.

/smack dab in the middle of that Fark.com bell curve
 
2013-04-22 02:15:17 PM
What the hell else would you try an American citizen as?
 
2013-04-22 02:15:24 PM

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


The scary part is what it means for the rest of us....

...if the government doesn't have a rock solid case against you, like they do here against this punk, then they'll do whatever they can to paint you as a terrorist so they can try you outside our legal system, and minimize your right to defend yourself.

Scary.
 
2013-04-22 02:15:29 PM

slayer199: Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


well...from everything that's been released, it was his older brother that got pissy and started planning this, they younger brother was more of "oh hey, I'll help you bro"
 
2013-04-22 02:15:34 PM

FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.


What's wrong with handling it at the federal level?

I doubt MA has any laws against terrorism or murder by weapon of mass destruction that would be required to prosecute this effectively.
 
2013-04-22 02:16:08 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


yeah... i dunno... i mean there were mass casualties, but this would mean that just about any bomber could be charged with this. not that i'm against it, i guess, but it does seem to lump it in with someone with a dirty bomb or sarin canister or something similar.
 
2013-04-22 02:16:31 PM

ZAZ: Shrugging Atlas

Quoting my post from yesterday's thread:

For purposes of federal criminal law, a "weapon of mass destruction" includes any "destructive device." 18 USC 2332a. A "destructive device" includes any bomb, grenade, rocket with more than four ounces of propellant, and any projectile launcher with a caliber over .50 inches (except for Attorney General approved shotguns). 18 USC 921. A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.


Ah, thanks for the knowledge.  Sweet christ that's a pretty wide open definition.
 
2013-04-22 02:16:32 PM

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


A fair trial and a fine hangin'.

slayer199: Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


Of course, if they can only get his brother to testify on his behalf.  Otherwise, hey bud, you're 19.  That should be old enough to know that you're not supposed to blow up the Boston Marathon.

Seriously, though, what were they trying to achieve?  The Chechens don't have a beef with the US, or even Boston.  They're not even Canadians/Yankees/the entire NFL fans.
 
2013-04-22 02:16:35 PM

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


Phrasing!
 
2013-04-22 02:16:36 PM

skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.


Sadly, that's a fact.  I'm sure he is being charged with some P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act crap, which is why I'd rather let MA handle this.
 
2013-04-22 02:16:45 PM

Vodka Zombie: What the hell else would you try an American citizen as?


sometimes we don't try them at all...

mycatbirdseat.com
 
2013-04-22 02:16:54 PM

ManateeGag:He took the oath in september.

Ah, thank you.

Warlordtrooper: Does it matter? The military is not for things inside the us


Subby said he was a citizen (not a legal alien as I had thought), and I was wondering if that was really the case.  Unless I'm wrong, and I well could be since IANAL, I was under the impression that citizens and non-citizens were treated differently in the law.  I'm not implying he ought to be given a military trial---the question was more a matter of what KIND of civilian trial should he get?  Since he's officially a citizen that negates the question anyway.
 
2013-04-22 02:16:57 PM

slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.
 
2013-04-22 02:16:57 PM
USA USA USA!
 
2013-04-22 02:16:57 PM

vudukungfu: Really, subby
CNN?

Have we forgiven them so soon?


/too soon, I say.
//too soon.


Perhaps he/she was being ironic.
 
2013-04-22 02:17:05 PM
This is such an open and shut case that we can't entrust it to the courts!

/ this is what some Americans actually believe about accused terrorists
 
2013-04-22 02:17:05 PM

tinyarena: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

Yes, a conviction on using 'weapons of mass destruction' could result in the DP
We shall see.

Personally, I wish they'd just torched the boat, and had a few weapons malfunctions.
I would make a truly awful policeman.  But my beat would be quite
so quite

4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-04-22 02:17:16 PM
Glad to hear. They are doing the right thing.

This is why, even though you may disagree with some of the things Obama Admin has done, such as drone policy, etc., you still vote for the guy who most closely resembles your views.
 
2013-04-22 02:17:22 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.

Five?  Christ, if the guy "only" gets life in prison we'll be hearing about it for decades.

"It's too dangerous to keep him in prison.  What if Al Qaeda tries to spring him.  What if he escapes?!  WOOGA BOOGA!!"


That is all he is going to get. I'm pretty sure he will plead out and give up any information he has in return for life.
 
2013-04-22 02:17:26 PM

gilgigamesh: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

What's wrong with handling it at the federal level?

I doubt MA has any laws against terrorism or murder by weapon of mass destruction that would be required to prosecute this effectively.


Murder in the first degree.  4 Counts.  Life no parole. Ta-da!
 
2013-04-22 02:17:31 PM

skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.


I wouldn't say zero.  Couldn't the state choose to prosecute when the feds are done with him for state level crimes?  If he somehow is found not guilty of the fed charges, couldn't the state indict?  Even go through with it, just to have the sentence in place if he's ever given federal parole?  For example, the murder of the MIT police officer.  I suspect he won't be charged with that by the feds, but the state could if they so chose.
 
2013-04-22 02:17:31 PM
That honestly seems like very few charges and skips over a lot of other things they did.
 
2013-04-22 02:17:40 PM

FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

Sadly, that's a fact.  I'm sure he is being charged with some P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act crap, which is why I'd rather let MA handle this.


He's probably gonna be charged as a mass murdering terrorist because he's a farking mass murdering terrorist.
 
2013-04-22 02:17:44 PM

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


Right.  That's what being TRIED in COURT means... Justice.

Or, we can tear him apart in the streets to feed the hungry mob.
 
2013-04-22 02:17:49 PM
All of you third world tinpot dictator types wishing for the death penalty for the guy. Most civilized countries have abolished the death penalty. And then there's the good ol' USA.
 
2013-04-22 02:18:09 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Treygreen13: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

I think the biggest problem with the WMD moniker is that it stands so strongly opposed to the law of conservation of mass.

Weapons of mass conversion.


Weapon of mass convection.
 
2013-04-22 02:18:24 PM

gilgigamesh: I doubt MA has any laws against terrorism or murder by weapon of mass destruction that would be required to prosecute this effectively.


"Terroristes shall be punished by Exposure to the Crowd and shall be dragged through the Township by Mule and pelted with Foodstuffs in the presence of no fewer than six Clergymen and the Governor" - MA General Law still on the books from 1677
 
2013-04-22 02:18:39 PM

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


I can think of two mitigating factors. 1. His age. He's old enough to execute, but young enough that a jury might consider that. 2. The fact that it seems he was heavily influenced by his brother. Every single other aspect of the case are aggravating factors, though. It may be possible to cop a plea for life if he talks.
 
2013-04-22 02:18:40 PM
If he were a foreign combatant, and could show that terrorism (which is a type of guerrilla warfare) is a legitimate tactic, he would not face the death penalty except for a showing of war crimes.

As an American citizen, he's going to get either (a) the death penalty or (c) biting down the pillow in Cellbock C until his anus collapses.
 
2013-04-22 02:18:58 PM

skullkrusher: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

I think any bomb is considered a WMD. Not to be confused with the WMDs that Saddam moved to Syria


So you're saying some bombs aren't WMD except when it's convenient to call them so? Well, which is it?
 
2013-04-22 02:19:00 PM
Good.  terrorists need to be treated as the common criminals that they are.  Don't elevate them to some special kind of special super special enemy warrior status.  "Terror networks" should be treated as the criminal enterprises that are and prosecuted under RICO with the all the jail time and confiscation of personal assets that RICO allows.
 
2013-04-22 02:19:00 PM

BlueGreenSwirly: Good point, subby. As an Islamic terrorist, he should be declared an enemy combatant.


as a christian terrorist, should eric rudolph have been declared an enemy combatant?
 
2013-04-22 02:19:03 PM

Shrugging Atlas: A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.


I have an Attorney General-approved potato gun.  Max magazine capacity of 7 potatoes, no folding stock, forehand grip, or bayonet mount.
 
2013-04-22 02:19:04 PM

Eirik: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

I wouldn't say zero.  Couldn't the state choose to prosecute when the feds are done with him for state level crimes?  If he somehow is found not guilty of the fed charges, couldn't the state indict?  Even go through with it, just to have the sentence in place if he's ever given federal parole?  For example, the murder of the MIT police officer.  I suspect he won't be charged with that by the feds, but the state could if they so chose.


I'd imagine that MA could try him on charges in addition to the Fed charges but it certainly won't be in lieu of Fed charges. I am pretty sure double jeopardy would apply if he were first acquitted federally and then retried locally for the same crimes
 
2013-04-22 02:19:12 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


Explains a lot.  9 years too late, but I learned something today.  We can invade ourselves and implement regime change!  The war machine rolls on!
 
2013-04-22 02:19:21 PM

Jument: FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.

This. No matter how heinous the charges or how solid the evidence, his rights must not be violated. Anyone who suggests otherwise basically hates America  doesn't care about the law or our constitution.


you were just fine without the hyperbole.
 
2013-04-22 02:19:31 PM

skullkrusher: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

I think any bomb is considered a WMD. Not to be confused with the WMDs that Saddam moved to Syria


So Saddam had all kinds of WMD then since he had explosives.  I knew it!
 
2013-04-22 02:19:47 PM

tinyarena: Personally, I wish they'd just torched the boat, and had a few weapons malfunctions.
I would make a truly awful policeman. But my beat would be quite
so quite


Part of justice is to let him get his story out. We need to know why people do terrible things so we have a better way to look out for it later on.

So while he is very much one of the bombers, he may not have been the one to go "oh hey, let's bomb some people that have been good to me over the years...because...you know, bombs"
 
2013-04-22 02:19:51 PM

Shrugging Atlas: ZAZ: Shrugging Atlas

Quoting my post from yesterday's thread:

For purposes of federal criminal law, a "weapon of mass destruction" includes any "destructive device." 18 USC 2332a. A "destructive device" includes any bomb, grenade, rocket with more than four ounces of propellant, and any projectile launcher with a caliber over .50 inches (except for Attorney General approved shotguns). 18 USC 921. A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.

Ah, thanks for the knowledge.  Sweet christ that's a pretty wide open definition.


I suppose most of the characters in Big Bang Theory could be arrested for WMD possession.

/kind of ironic, considering Iraq didn't have any
 
2013-04-22 02:19:52 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


Yes, that's what I thought too. Seems like someone at the US Attorney's Office is trying to stretch the definition to sex up the charges. Once upon a time it was Nuclear/Biological/Chemical (NBC) to cover anything that wasn't conventional explosives. Only the Soviets called it WMD and even they meant it the same way we did. But now you call it "Mass Destruction" and suddenly a large black powder or fertilizer bomb qualifies. No, it doesn't.

As for charging this guy, it's absolutely the right thing to do. He's here legally, with permanent residential status. For us to treat him differently is to turn our back on the Bill of Rights. We don't have lynch mobs anymore, no matter how loathsome and shiatty the perpetrator may be. To do otherwise is to shame our constitution and make us no better than the dictators we accuse as oppressive tyrants. We got laws and due process and WhatNot, folks. It protects the innocent and it also protects America as a nation when we can show, "yes, this guy's not a political prisoner, but a shiatbag and here's the evidence."
 
2013-04-22 02:19:56 PM
Nice charges. Kinda generic to avoid a long drawn out case, but decent.
Next Week, George W. Bush gets charged for using weapons of mass destruction(Americas military) against the World. Canadas republican Prime Minister offers asylum for Bush and that comes with all the soggy animal goo covered fries he can eat.
 
2013-04-22 02:19:57 PM

skullkrusher: HotWingConspiracy: Phony GOP Americans must be inconsolable.

Oh, they're certainly upset. Question is, more or less upset than Fark Lefties who learned that these two jokers weren't bombing for Jeebus?


I thought people speculated more that it was some horrifying version of patriotism rather than religious fanaticism.

Either way, treating them as criminals makes more sense than treating them as some sort of organized armed force.
 
2013-04-22 02:20:10 PM

Matthew Keene: All of you third world tinpot dictator types wishing for the death penalty for the guy. Most civilized countries have abolished the death penalty. And then there's the good ol' USA.


If anything, the death penalty is more humane. This kid will never again know life outside of a cage. A cage filled with people who want to rape and kill him.
 
2013-04-22 02:20:11 PM

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


I'd rather see him spend the next 60 years in one of these.

sometimesinteresting.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-04-22 02:20:13 PM

FlashHarry: BlueGreenSwirly: Good point, subby. As an Islamic terrorist, he should be declared an enemy combatant.

as a christian terrorist, should eric rudolph have been declared an enemy combatant?


He DOES have a dark complexion, but he's still white, so....No.
 
2013-04-22 02:20:36 PM
Kid's only leverage is to give information about his brother in exchange to avoid the needle.
 
2013-04-22 02:20:49 PM

FarkedOver: gilgigamesh: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

What's wrong with handling it at the federal level?

I doubt MA has any laws against terrorism or murder by weapon of mass destruction that would be required to prosecute this effectively.

Murder in the first degree.  4 Counts.  Life no parole. Ta-da!


Eh, I am as libby a lib as it gets, and I don't see the problem.

People get tried on federal charges all the time. Mail fraud, wire fraud, bank robbery, drug importation, RICO... its pretty commonplace. I don't see why its a problem here.
 
2013-04-22 02:21:03 PM

CruJones: He should be tried by Jack Bauer.


THIS. THIS. THISSY THIS THIS.
 
2013-04-22 02:21:04 PM

sodomizer: If he were a foreign combatant, and could show that terrorism (which is a type of guerrilla warfare) is a legitimate tactic, he would not face the death penalty except for a showing of war crimes.

As an American citizen, he's going to get either (a) the death penalty or (c) biting down the pillow in Cellbock C until his anus collapses.


The fact that you of all people posted that made me lul on the inside.
 
2013-04-22 02:21:18 PM

skullkrusher: FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

Sadly, that's a fact.  I'm sure he is being charged with some P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act crap, which is why I'd rather let MA handle this.

He's probably gonna be charged as a mass murdering terrorist because he's a farking mass murdering terrorist.


Not saying he isn't a terrorist.  I just don't want him executed for his crimes.  I want him incarcerated.
 
2013-04-22 02:21:23 PM

HMS_Blinkin: He's a citizen?  I thought I read that he had a green card, and was a legal immigrant, but not a US citizen.

Or is that just CNN/NYPost being derpy again?


That's the case for the dead brother. The living one became a naturalized citizen on... Sept. 11, 2012! Get Alex Jones on the phone! Wake up Sheeple!
 
2013-04-22 02:21:31 PM
The point of the Justice System is to protect the public, not to extract revenge.
He is still accused and not convicted.
I understand this.  I agree with this.
However, it would save time and money if they granted him bail and released him at a memorial service for his victoms.

/especially if they announced it in advance and gave all victom's families one baseball bat each.
 
2013-04-22 02:21:31 PM

DrWhy: Good.  terrorists need to be treated as the common criminals that they are.  Don't elevate them to some special kind of special super special enemy warrior status.  "Terror networks" should be treated as the criminal enterprises that are and prosecuted under RICO with the all the jail time and confiscation of personal assets that RICO allows.


Engrave the Miranda warning on the bullet jacket.

Treating them as criminals may be awkward in certain situations.  Like at a training camp in a failed state, for example, which would require a RCT for a successful rendition.
 
2013-04-22 02:21:31 PM

TheHumanCannonball: skullkrusher: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

I think any bomb is considered a WMD. Not to be confused with the WMDs that Saddam moved to Syria

So you're saying some bombs aren't WMD except when it's convenient to call them so? Well, which is it?


I'm saying in the context of the Iraq justification, "WMD" referred to chem/bio/nukes but in terms of US criminal law, a WMD does not have to be bio/chem/nuke to qualify as a WMD although those certainly do qualify as well
 
2013-04-22 02:22:00 PM

LessO2: Kid's only leverage is to give information about his brother in exchange to avoid the needle.


considering the damage done, i'd say that's unlikely.
 
2013-04-22 02:22:06 PM

Nana's Vibrator: We can invade ourselves and implement regime change


Every four years, man.
 
2013-04-22 02:22:10 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.


Just leave him to rot in the US prison system, and the fellow residents will torture him for us.

Hey, we're not a nation of torturers if we lock you in a facility where the other inmates are doing the torturing, am I right?

/just throwing that out there, we've been torturing people for a long, long time, for much lesser offenses.
//yes, this guy deserves punishment
 
2013-04-22 02:22:13 PM

nekom: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

I can think of two mitigating factors. 1. His age. He's old enough to execute, but young enough that a jury might consider that. 2. The fact that it seems he was heavily influenced by his brother. Every single other aspect of the case are aggravating factors, though. It may be possible to cop a plea for life if he talks.


I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.
 
2013-04-22 02:22:16 PM

ongbok: That is all he is going to get. I'm pretty sure he will plead out and give up any information he has in return for life.


That's assuming that he has other information to give.  If his brother was a lone-bomber type and he just helped, then he might literally have nothing else to tell the police beyond what they already know.

Personally, I don't mind the idea of him getting life in prison instead of the death penalty if he does help roll up other terrorists, here and/or abroad.  But he should die in prison.  If he's got nothing, well... sucks to be him, but he got a lot more years than the kid he set down his bomb next too.
 
2013-04-22 02:22:18 PM
Seems reasonable to try him as a citizen, given lack of any large connection with overseas groups.
 
2013-04-22 02:22:18 PM

ongbok: That is all he is going to get. I'm pretty sure he will plead out and give up any information he has in return for life.


Yeah, I'd bet money on it personally.  And at the age of 19, he'll probably wish he got the death penalty since he's facing god knows how many decades in a Federal super max prison in solitary.
 
2013-04-22 02:22:21 PM

Glendale: That honestly seems like very few charges and skips over a lot of other things they did.


That's so the state has some charges to levy just in case the Fed case tanks. SOP. It's how they got the Rodney King cops into the courtroom twice for the same offense.
 
2013-04-22 02:22:30 PM

gilgigamesh: People get tried on federal charges all the time. Mail fraud, wire fraud, bank robbery, drug importation, RICO... its pretty commonplace. I don't see why its a problem here.


Massachusetts is state that doesn't have the death penalty.  If he is charged federally he will face the death penalty.  I'd rather him not be executed.
 
2013-04-22 02:22:33 PM

Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.


Wonderful.

They're gonna RAGE about lawful Constitutional legal procedure being correctly upheld.

This is a police matter, not war.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-04-22 02:22:40 PM

slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


What?  From multiple death sentiences to just one?
 
2013-04-22 02:22:41 PM

FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

Sadly, that's a fact.  I'm sure he is being charged with some P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act crap, which is why I'd rather let MA handle this.

He's probably gonna be charged as a mass murdering terrorist because he's a farking mass murdering terrorist.

Not saying he isn't a terrorist.  I just don't want him executed for his crimes.  I want him incarcerated.


I agree. I am not fond of capital punishment for several reasons. However, if he gets poked with Old Stabby, I'm not gonna lose much sleep.
 
2013-04-22 02:23:25 PM
CNN? Really?
 
2013-04-22 02:23:38 PM

FlashHarry: LessO2: Kid's only leverage is to give information about his brother in exchange to avoid the needle.

considering the damage done, i'd say that's unlikely.


I'd say it's very likely.  The G has little idea where his brother got his training and his background, I'm sure they will want to know.
 
2013-04-22 02:23:41 PM
Other WMD
gdb.rferl.org
 
2013-04-22 02:23:42 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: ManateeGag: TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

are you retarded?

Investigators are going into Tsarnaev's room every few hours to ask questions in the presence of doctors, the source said.

Ill-informed, opinionated and yes, retarded. Yes, I am.

/smack dab in the middle of that Fark.com bell curve


and you know, for sure, he hasn't been read his rights?  hasn't waived his right to a lawyer?
 
2013-04-22 02:23:44 PM
If ever there was a time to use teh Patriot act, now would seem to be it.
 
2013-04-22 02:23:48 PM

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


i read yesterday that MA doens't have the death penalty, so only if the feds move on him will that be in play, which as shown in this trhead, goes to federal criminal statutes on WMD.  i haven't looked but i'm sure there are some broad "domestic terror" laws that probably merit federal prosecution and invoke death.  but if MA exclusively prosecutes, death is not in play.
 
2013-04-22 02:23:49 PM

Glendale: That honestly seems like very few charges and skips over a lot of other things they did.


Not sure, but maybe these are the only two charges the federal government has jurisdiction over, and the reckless endangerment, carjacking, gunfights with cops, trespassing, etc. can still also be charged at the state level?
 
2013-04-22 02:24:00 PM
The weirdest thing about all this is the definition of WMD. The Iraq War made it sound like it's limited to nukes, bio/chem weapons -- the kind of things that can kill millions in a single attack.  Not a pot with some gunpowder and nails in it.

Now we need a new word for the things that can kill more people than conventional weapons.
 
2013-04-22 02:24:05 PM

skullkrusher: FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

Sadly, that's a fact.  I'm sure he is being charged with some P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act crap, which is why I'd rather let MA handle this.

He's probably gonna be charged as a mass murdering terrorist because he's a farking mass murdering terrorist.

Not saying he isn't a terrorist.  I just don't want him executed for his crimes.  I want him incarcerated.

I agree. I am not fond of capital punishment for several reasons. However, if he gets poked with Old Stabby, I'm not gonna lose much sleep.


I'd rather him rot with that pathetic attempt of a suicide hole in his neck for the rest of his crap life.
 
2013-04-22 02:24:17 PM

thebigfarker: The point of the Justice System is to protect the public, not to extract revenge.
He is still accused and not convicted.
I understand this.  I agree with this.
However, it would save time and money if they granted him bail and released him at a memorial service for his victoms.

/especially if they announced it in advance and gave all victom's families one baseball bat each.


Hammer
Chain Saw

** Katana **
 
2013-04-22 02:24:19 PM
Sadly, in 2013, some people elected officials who have taken oaths to protect and serve have a problem with an American citizen being treated like an American citizen.
 
2013-04-22 02:24:36 PM
I'm not sure I agree with that description.  One does not have to be a "citizen" in the US to be tried in accordance with US law and to be entitled to due process rights.  In any case, I am relieved by this decision.  Our civilian court system can handle cases like this.
 
2013-04-22 02:24:39 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.


There is no legal requirement to question with legal counsel present. That's only if you want to use the evidence in court. I think they decided the video of him dropping the bag and having that bag explode probably means they don't need his testimony.
 
2013-04-22 02:24:48 PM
Since he is heavily sedated, cant his defense use that  as any statement made by him can be tossed out since he wasnt all the way there when read is rights?
 
2013-04-22 02:25:06 PM
I'll just leave this here.........

Xyphoid:

Pretty disturbing reading how many people want him tortured and/or extrajudicially punished, or just plain wishing suffering upon him.

My opinion, as an American, is I want him afforded every right I'd expect myself as an American. Those rights and the treatment we espouse to be sacred are a significant portion of what makes our country better than many others. As well, my country claims to stand against, and has hung people for, torture/"enhanced interrogation"/increasing suffering (even through inaction). In that regard I also believe any intentional suffering caused upon someone in custody is a crime that should be punished, as is the opinion of the legal system* (*- sadly, your mileage may vary).

My opinion in regard to my faith and as a human being is that no unnecessary suffering (excluding any pain due to life-saving or life-maintaining actions) should come to him, even though I believe he likely did it (to the effect I'd have to sit out of a jury). I also believe that he shouldn't be sentenced to death unless his continued existence, no matter what actions we could possibly undertake, would still pose a threat to innocent life.

Some of you guys should be ashamed of yourselves. Whatever this persons motivations were, you wishing those kinds of things upon him, suggesting you'd be ambivalent to them happening, or wishing you could do it yourself makes you the same kind of person you believe this fellow to be. You don't think terrorists have their own justification, like you, for thinking their actions (or willingness to cause suffering) as right?

/Two Iraq deployments for a year and a half
//Despite being shot at, fellow soldiers injured and killed, poisoned, threatened, insulted and knowing that if I was captured that terrible things would be done to me, 100% of any prisoners or suspects I had control of were treated like human beings. Not just because of my beliefs, but that's how decent and civilized human beings roll.
///So yeah, I can practice what I preach, even in the shiat.
 
2013-04-22 02:25:14 PM

NostroZ:
I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.


Personally, I agree. I oppose the death penalty in all cases for a variety of reasons. I do, however, understand the other side of that debate, especially when it comes to mass murder and other especially heinous crimes. I'll feel just as safe if they merely house him in a cage for the rest of his life. I live near a maximum security state prison, I took the tour when they opened it, escape is for Hollywood movies, not for reality. He ain't going nowhere.
 
2013-04-22 02:25:16 PM
Who's going to pay for the guys boat?
 
2013-04-22 02:25:43 PM

rickythepenguin: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

i read yesterday that MA doens't have the death penalty, so only if the feds move on him will that be in play, which as shown in this trhead, goes to federal criminal statutes on WMD.  i haven't looked but i'm sure there are some broad "domestic terror" laws that probably merit federal prosecution and invoke death.  but if MA exclusively prosecutes, death is not in play.


i think he's being tried by the feds and will be eligible for the DP.

/anti-DP
 
2013-04-22 02:25:47 PM

rickythepenguin: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

i read yesterday that MA doens't have the death penalty, so only if the feds move on him will that be in play, which as shown in this trhead, goes to federal criminal statutes on WMD.  i haven't looked but i'm sure there are some broad "domestic terror" laws that probably merit federal prosecution and invoke death.  but if MA exclusively prosecutes, death is not in play.


They could do a Dahmer on him. Wisconsin doesn't have capital punishment, so the prison guards just exposed Dahmer to the general population for a short while... wouldn't take more than 2 minutes for this kid to get his neck broken.

/not advocating, just saying it happens
 
2013-04-22 02:25:48 PM
s17.postimg.org
 
2013-04-22 02:25:50 PM

HotWingConspiracy: I thought people speculated more that it was some horrifying version of patriotism rather than religious fanaticism.


yeah, I was kinda using "Jeebus" as a stand-in for Teabagger motivations

HotWingConspiracy: Either way, treating them as criminals makes more sense than treating them as some sort of organized armed force.


I agree though the line is a bit blurrier for McVeighs and The Brothers Karamazav than it is for Adam Lanzas
 
2013-04-22 02:25:54 PM

ColSanders: Shrugging Atlas: Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

It's more than Saddam had, and we went to war over it.


Nice.
 
2013-04-22 02:26:09 PM

Galloping Galoshes: Shrugging Atlas: A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.

I have an Attorney General-approved potato gun.  Max magazine capacity of 7 potatoes, no folding stock, forehand grip, or bayonet mount.


Before today I had never considered mounting a bayonet on a spud gun.

Molon Labe, Idaho!
 
2013-04-22 02:26:15 PM

FlashHarry: BlueGreenSwirly: Good point, subby. As an Islamic terrorist, he should be declared an enemy combatant.

as a christian terrorist, should eric rudolph have been declared an enemy combatant?


Sure. Why not? He was attempting in his own pathetic way to circumvent the rule of the American government and intimidate the public into establishing a Christian theocracy. It's basically a form of sedition any time you use a non-democratic method to try to overrule the government in a democracy.
 
2013-04-22 02:26:20 PM
Anyone venture over to FreeRepublic for their reaction?  I can't visit that website anymore. It frightens me and I have to be sedated when I close the page.
 
2013-04-22 02:26:26 PM
TheShavingofOccam123

Probably without legal counsel present. And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

They forced medication to Loughner so he would be mentally "competent" to face trial.

I don't want to see him die, then his journey would be complete. Stick him in a dark rapey corner and forget about him.
 
2013-04-22 02:26:26 PM

NostroZ: nekom: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

I can think of two mitigating factors. 1. His age. He's old enough to execute, but young enough that a jury might consider that. 2. The fact that it seems he was heavily influenced by his brother. Every single other aspect of the case are aggravating factors, though. It may be possible to cop a plea for life if he talks.

I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.


So... burn him!?!
 
2013-04-22 02:26:30 PM

Vodka Zombie: What the hell else would you try an American citizen as?


Since he is a naturalized citizen, his citizenship could be revoked, but have any captured 'enemy combatants' been executed?
 
2013-04-22 02:26:46 PM

NostroZ: I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.


You might be showing yourself (and the rest of the 1st world countries) that, but your enemies see only weakness.  You don't even have the stones to execute a murderer of children.  They will respect you even less than they already do.  Of course, if you do kill him, you make a martyr out of him.
 
2013-04-22 02:26:55 PM

slayer199: Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


And, what if that is exactly what happened?  Do we ignore that just to feel better?

The fact that you (and so many others) are willing to abandon what could be the truth just to exact some vengeance is one of greatest things wrong with this country.
 
2013-04-22 02:26:57 PM

Joe Blowme: If ever there was a time to use teh Patriot act, now would seem to be it.


Wrong! Now is the time to show we DON'T USE the Patriot act against every deranged US Citizen.
 
2013-04-22 02:27:32 PM

ManRay: TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

Yeah. The idea of a "special terrorism interrogator" getting to him before he is officially questioned bothers me. You can't put due process on hold.


If they're using that questioning to potentially track down others but not use it during the trial, what's the problem?


slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.


Just because everyone's pissed off right now doesn't mean it isn't true. It wouldn't surprise me at all if this kid didn't truly understand what was going on. Of course he should be held accountable, but we shouldn't pile his brother's punishment onto him just because the brother is dead.

As for the brother; if the reports of him being interested in joining an extremist group and/or going overseas for training are true, it wouldn't surprise me if this was some sort of initiation or proof that he's not a cop. Ultimately, though, it's probably going to come down to a case the petulant soul who's mad at the world for some perceived slight.


AngryJailhouseFistfark: But what if he's a Sovereign Citizen, not subject to the Crown or some phoney-baloney Imperial Navy of the British Colonies laws? He should be free to not pay taxes and do as he pleases without Federal harassment, seems to me.


Those claims always struck me as a great opportunity to say, "OK, fine, Sovereign Citizen. You are not subject to our laws, nor will you be protected by them. We're going to let you go, and if someone guns your ass down the second you reach the sidewalk, so be it."
 
2013-04-22 02:27:40 PM

HMS_Blinkin: He's a citizen?  I thought I read that he had a green card, and was a legal immigrant, but not a US citizen.

Or is that just CNN/NYPost being derpy again?


That was his brother. The younger one got naturalized last year -- on September 11, as it happens.

TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.


If I understand correctly, the questioning before he's Mirandized can't be used against him in court. They apparently are more interested in getting answers than gaining evidence -- probably because they've got plenty of that already.

I wonder if that could backfire. For example, Oliver North's convictions were thrown out because witnesses were affected by his immunized testimony. There's so much press on this, any potential jurors will know what he said, and probably find it hard to ignore.

Damn, can you imagine if he walked on this? Eh, probably impossible.
 
2013-04-22 02:27:49 PM

FarkedOver: gilgigamesh: People get tried on federal charges all the time. Mail fraud, wire fraud, bank robbery, drug importation, RICO... its pretty commonplace. I don't see why its a problem here.

Massachusetts is state that doesn't have the death penalty.  If he is charged federally he will face the death penalty.  I'd rather him not be executed.


Oh yes. There is that, and I agree with you.

I was thinking you had a problem with the federal system itself versus state.

Yeah, I'd rather he didn't get executed as well.
 
2013-04-22 02:28:01 PM
Now THAT'S a jury I want to serve on. Just ask Theo Van Gogh.

There is no way any jury member is going to vote for the death penalty. They want to sell their books and their movie rights and that means they have to drop anonymity. So they'll play nice and give him life without parole. Then sell their books.
 
2013-04-22 02:28:03 PM

FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

Sadly, that's a fact.  I'm sure he is being charged with some P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act crap, which is why I'd rather let MA handle this.

He's probably gonna be charged as a mass murdering terrorist because he's a farking mass murdering terrorist.

Not saying he isn't a terrorist.  I just don't want him executed for his crimes.  I want him incarcerated.

I agree. I am not fond of capital punishment for several reasons. However, if he gets poked with Old Stabby, I'm not gonna lose much sleep.

I'd rather him rot with that pathetic attempt of a suicide hole in his neck for the rest of his crap life.


works for me
 
2013-04-22 02:28:12 PM
Now that's Mighty White of you America...Mighty White!

You feeling OK?
 
2013-04-22 02:28:19 PM
do we even know that this crime was motivated by religion yet?
 
2013-04-22 02:28:25 PM
Carney said that because Tsarnaev is a naturalized U.S. citizen, he cannot be tried by a military commission.

Which Lindsay Graham and John McCain would know if they ever bothered to read the Constitution that they swore to uphold.

 
2013-04-22 02:28:47 PM

Therion: Galloping Galoshes: Shrugging Atlas: A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.

I have an Attorney General-approved potato gun.  Max magazine capacity of 7 potatoes, no folding stock, forehand grip, or bayonet mount.

Before today I had never considered mounting a bayonet on a spud gun.

Molon Labe, Idaho!


Depending on where you live, it may be ok to own an assault spud gun.
 
2013-04-22 02:28:51 PM

FlashHarry: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

yeah... i dunno... i mean there were mass casualties, but this would mean that just about any bomber could be charged with this. not that i'm against it, i guess, but it does seem to lump it in with someone with a dirty bomb or sarin canister or something similar.


This is why there needs to be laws about weapons of -mass- mass destruction, or mass, mass mass destruction. We could get creative with the punishments, what with all the advances in medical tech, too. Imagine, double death penalty. We kill you, bring you back to life to taunt you, then kill you for reals. Also, sterilize your entire family or some shiat.
 
2013-04-22 02:28:52 PM
Let him plead out to life in exchange for becoming the figurehead of American anti-extremist propaganda.
 
2013-04-22 02:29:01 PM
Interesting choice of charges.  I'd expected 3-4 counts of murder, several dozen counts of attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon, and the usual mismash of property destruction, explosives, yatta yatta.

Makes me wonder if they chose something with a death penalty, to get him to plead out to a lesser murder charge for life in exchange for any information about his brother.
 
2013-04-22 02:29:11 PM
Let us take this moment to reflect on the death penalty itself, a cherished public institution whose existence means that if a single innocent is ever convicted and executed, we are all accessories to and responsible for that murder. So in this fervor where we joyously hope for the death and rape of a teenage boy, let us take a moment of silence for ourselves, and for the innocent blood we all have on our hands.
 
2013-04-22 02:29:20 PM

skullkrusher: FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

Sadly, that's a fact.  I'm sure he is being charged with some P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act crap, which is why I'd rather let MA handle this.

He's probably gonna be charged as a mass murdering terrorist because he's a farking mass murdering terrorist.

Not saying he isn't a terrorist.  I just don't want him executed for his crimes.  I want him incarcerated.

I agree. I am not fond of capital punishment for several reasons. However, if he gets poked with Old Stabby, I'm not gonna lose much sleep.


I am opposed to the death penalty, but it is just a fact of life that some people need killin'.
 
2013-04-22 02:29:28 PM

NostroZ: Joe Blowme: If ever there was a time to use teh Patriot act, now would seem to be it.

Wrong! Now is the time to show we DON'T USE the Patriot act against every deranged US Citizen.


Actually, I think now is the time to repeal it, since we don't need it to prosecute these morons.
 
2013-04-22 02:29:52 PM

FlashHarry: do we even know that this crime was motivated by religion yet?


Well,  there's a helluva lot more evidence that this was motivated by religion, than there is evidence that God exists.
 
2013-04-22 02:30:12 PM

Galloping Galoshes: NostroZ: I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.

You might be showing yourself (and the rest of the 1st world countries) that, but your enemies see only weakness.  You don't even have the stones to execute a murderer of children.  They will respect you even less than they already do.  Of course, if you do kill him, you make a martyr out of him.


Yes, I say, lets play by the THIRD WORLD RULES.
Kill him, his relatives, & his relatives-relatives...  as an EXAMPLE.

Maybe that's why we live in the FIRST WORLD.
We follow a set of laws and principles that draws people of principle and intelligence to this country from all over the world.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-04-22 02:30:44 PM
Nutsac_Jim: Since he is heavily sedated, cant his defense use that as any statement made by him can be tossed out since he wasnt all the way there when read is rights?

Under state law, yes. The prosecution must prove confessions voluntary beyond reasonable doubt. Keywords: massachusetts humane practice.

Last year the state supreme court threw out a confession because police falsely told the guy an unintended death as a result of arson would not be considered murder. In fact it is a standard example of felony murder.

For federal law, I'd be inclined to agree but I don't know.
 
2013-04-22 02:30:50 PM
Nabb1: Iam opposed to the death penalty, but it is just a fact of life that some people need killin'.

yeah, that pretty much sums up my position too.

my main gripe against the DP is that it is irreversible.
 
2013-04-22 02:30:51 PM

AngryJailhouseFistfark: But what if he's a Sovereign Citizen, not subject to the Crown or some phoney-baloney Imperial Navy of the British Colonies laws? He should be free to not pay taxes and do as he pleases without Federal harassment, seems to me.

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

He'll probably get that, TP, and "Spit-Roasted", repeatedly for years on end if he's in Federal prison.


If he goes to federal prison, he'll get the McVeigh treatment--solitary confinement in the Supermax in Colorado until they give him the needle.
 
2013-04-22 02:31:08 PM
If a pressure cooker full of black powder and nails is a "Weapon of mass destruction" what the fark is a tomahawk cruise missile?
 
2013-04-22 02:31:27 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: and for the innocent blood we all have on our hands.


Of course, we must also consider the innocent blood on our hands if even one person is killed by someone who should have been put to death, but wasn't. And this includes other prisoners.

Just sayin', it's not a black and white issue.
 
2013-04-22 02:31:53 PM

StatelyGreekAutomaton: Also, sterilize your entire family or some shiat.


that's actually banned directly by the Constitution.  You don't punish anyone but the criminal in question.
 
2013-04-22 02:31:55 PM

FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?


The charges make him death penalty eligible, yes. But, the government still needs to make a decision before any trial whether it will seek the death penalty. And then the jury, assuming he is found guilty, would need to decide whether or not to impose it.

The decision on whether to even seek the death penalty is not made lightly, and the defense is permitted to try and convince the government not to do so. I'm not sure there is anything that could get the government to only seek life imprisonment, but if he were to cooperate and freely offer any information he had about anyone else, it could impact that decision (I haven't heard yet what, if anything, of substance he said while being questioned).

I would suspect that death will be sought based on the crime and the manhunt. But again, if there was some really compelling argument (I have no reason to think there is but I know a lot of people have been speculating about it) that this kid was completely brainwashed by the older brother, it is not inconceivable that a jury could decide he is guilty but doesn't deserve death.
 
2013-04-22 02:31:58 PM

The Skeptical Chemist: The living one became a naturalized citizen on... Sept. 11, 2012!


Wait, so you're saying he's Obama's Sleeper Muslin Agent and his naturalization ceremony was the wake-up trigger to make him Terror and keep Obama in power?

Then.....SOCIALISM!
 
2013-04-22 02:31:58 PM
Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.
 
2013-04-22 02:32:04 PM

The Southern Dandy: Well,  there's a helluva lot more evidence that this was motivated by religion, than there is evidence that God exists.


i was just wondering if it was confirmed - if they'd found a manifesto or anything. i know the older brother was religious, but the younger one just seems like he was a regular american kid and not a little johnny jihadi.
 
2013-04-22 02:32:45 PM

Radioactive Ass: The Newsflash tag is entirely optional and is used to generate page hits due to it being tied to email alerts for those who get them.

See: Kim Kardashian Divorced for an example.


Which means I get to explain why my coworkers just heard "squirrel with big nuts".  Again.
 
2013-04-22 02:33:13 PM

zorlack7: If a pressure cooker full of black powder and nails is a "Weapon of mass destruction" what the fark is a tomahawk cruise missile?


Sweet, sexy ordinance.
 
2013-04-22 02:33:19 PM

Nutsac_Jim: Since he is heavily sedated, cant his defense use that  as any statement made by him can be tossed out since he wasnt all the way there when read is rights?


A lot of people in and outside the media are missing this point - Miranda is only necessary if you want to use the suspect's testimony in court. You can ask them questions as long as you want without mirandizing. A case is not thrown out of court if there was no Miranda reading, only the evidence gathered from the questioning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_warning#Consequences_of_violatio n

In this case there (appears) to be sufficient evidence that he would go to jail without ever being read
 
2013-04-22 02:33:20 PM

Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.


This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia .
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-04-22 02:33:33 PM
Antimatter: Interesting choice of charges. I'd expected 3-4 counts of murder, several dozen counts of attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon, and the usual mismash of property destruction, explosives, yatta yatta.

I had the same reaction. Then I decided they would save the piling-on for indictment. For now they just need at least one charge to support holding him in custody, and it may be desirable to have a death-eligible charge for procedural reasons.  If he doesn't make a deal you can expect a foot high list of charges after a grand jury takes the case.
 
2013-04-22 02:33:36 PM

whenIsayGO: The weirdest thing about all this is the definition of WMD. The Iraq War made it sound like it's limited to nukes, bio/chem weapons -- the kind of things that can kill millions in a single attack.  Not a pot with some gunpowder and nails in it.

Now we need a new word for the things that can kill more people than conventional weapons.


Let me help you and some other people that can't figure this out.

There is US law and there is International Law. WMDs are categorized differently under each law. Under International Law they are categorized as Nuclear, Biological or Chemical. US law has a broader definition. Same term, two different definitions because of what the laws are meant to prevent.
 
2013-04-22 02:33:44 PM

FlashHarry: Nabb1: Iam opposed to the death penalty, but it is just a fact of life that some people need killin'.

yeah, that pretty much sums up my position too.

my main gripe against the DP is that it is irreversible.


That, of course, and it is hideously expensive and has never really been shown to have any true deterrent effect.  Most people who get executed in this day and age, of course, are horrible people who deserved their fate, but there have been some who did not deserve it.  I just can't justify an institution that could execute the innocent.

You and I have been agreeing a lot the past few days.  People are going to start talking.
 
2013-04-22 02:33:52 PM

NostroZ: FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.

Right.  That's what being TRIED in COURT means... Justice.

Or, we can tear him apart in the streets to feed the hungry mob.


No, I think a mob tearing him apart in the street would be Justice.

Trying him in court is Civilized.
 
2013-04-22 02:34:02 PM

ZAZ: Nutsac_Jim: Since he is heavily sedated, cant his defense use that as any statement made by him can be tossed out since he wasnt all the way there when read is rights?

Under state law, yes. The prosecution must prove confessions voluntary beyond reasonable doubt. Keywords: massachusetts humane practice.

Last year the state supreme court threw out a confession because police falsely told the guy an unintended death as a result of arson would not be considered murder. In fact it is a standard example of felony murder.

For federal law, I'd be inclined to agree but I don't know.


Who needs a confession though?  They probably have his fingerprints all over some bombs.
 
2013-04-22 02:34:13 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


A weapon of mass destruction has specific legal definition in the US criminal code. See


18 USC § 2332a - Use of weapons of mass destruction

.......
(2)the term "weapon of mass destruction" means-
(A) any destructive device as defined in section 921

18 USC § 921 - Definitions


........

(4)The term "destructive device" means-
(A) any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas-(i) bomb,(ii) grenade,(iii) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces,(iv) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce,(v) mine, or(vi) device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses;
 
2013-04-22 02:34:44 PM

FlashHarry: The Southern Dandy: Well,  there's a helluva lot more evidence that this was motivated by religion, than there is evidence that God exists.

i was just wondering if it was confirmed - if they'd found a manifesto or anything. i know the older brother was religious, but the younger one just seems like he was a regular american kid and not a little johnny jihadi.


I think he's probably just a kid that looked up to his older brother, and unfortunately, blindly followed his older brother into the whackiness.
 
2013-04-22 02:34:44 PM

FlashHarry: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

yeah... i dunno... i mean there were mass casualties, but this would mean that just about any bomber could be charged with this. not that i'm against it, i guess, but it does seem to lump it in with someone with a dirty bomb or sarin canister or something similar.


Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.

/not trying to troll here, sorry if it comes off that way
//just that this may be the most pathetic "terrorist" attack in the history of terrorist attacks
 
2013-04-22 02:34:59 PM

NostroZ: Galloping Galoshes: NostroZ: I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.

You might be showing yourself (and the rest of the 1st world countries) that, but your enemies see only weakness.  You don't even have the stones to execute a murderer of children.  They will respect you even less than they already do.  Of course, if you do kill him, you make a martyr out of him.

Yes, I say, lets play by the THIRD WORLD RULES.
Kill him, his relatives, & his relatives-relatives...  as an EXAMPLE.

Maybe that's why we live in the FIRST WORLD.
We follow a set of laws and principles that draws people of principle and intelligence to this country from all over the world.


Perhaps you missed my point: either action has a downside.  If your enemy does not respect you, he is more likely to attack you.  On the other hand, if you make a martyr, his actions can be used to inspire further attacks.
 
2013-04-22 02:35:04 PM

DubyaHater: Anyone venture over to FreeRepublic for their reaction?  I can't visit that website anymore. It frightens me and I have to be sedated when I close the page.


I'll let everyone know when my dad forwards me headlines from there and Infowars.
 
2013-04-22 02:35:09 PM
I have a gentle reminder for the "enemy combatant" bullshiat crowd.

Our criminal justice system worked just fine for dealing with the following terrorists:

Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, the Unabomber, Eric Rudolph, Kevin Harpham, Charles Polk, Willy Lampley, Joseph Bailie, Peter Langan, Ray Hamblin, Larry Shoemake, Robert Starr III, John Pitner, Charles Barbee, Floyd Looker, Edward Taylor, Jr., Todd Vanbiber, William Goehler, James Cleaver, Chevie Kehoe, Daniel Lee, Faron Lovelace, Jack Grebe Jr., Johnnie Wise, Buford Furrow, Richard Baumhammers, Fritz Springmeier, Clayton Wagner, Michael Smith, Charles Barefoot, Jr., Larry Raugust, Matt Hale, David Hinkson, Sean Gillespie, Wade Lay, Ivan Braden, Demetrius "Van" Crocker, Daniel Schertz, Raymond Dillard, and Dennis Mahon.

/So sit the fark down, shut the fark up, and stop trying to spread fear, you maroons.
//Your unjustified poutrage is giving the adults among us headaches.
 
2013-04-22 02:35:24 PM

Nabb1: That, of course, and it is hideously expensive and has never really been shown to have any true deterrent effect.  Most people who get executed in this day and age, of course, are horrible people who deserved their fate, but there have been some who did not deserve it.  I just can't justify an institution that could execute the innocent.

You and I have been agreeing a lot the past few days.  People are going to start talking.


like kid rock and sean penn!
 
2013-04-22 02:35:33 PM

FlashHarry: The Southern Dandy: Well,  there's a helluva lot more evidence that this was motivated by religion, than there is evidence that God exists.

i was just wondering if it was confirmed - if they'd found a manifesto or anything. i know the older brother was religious, but the younger one just seems like he was a regular american kid and not a little johnny jihadi.


I read his Twitter feed a few days ago, and in recent weeks, some religious stuff started to pop up. I seem to recall his friends said something about it, too.  I don't think he was in as deep as his brother, but if he wasn't, then he's just a cold-blooded psycho to sign on to something like this for no other reason than to kill.
 
2013-04-22 02:35:33 PM

Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.


Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment.

OK, maybe you're not Frodo. But you get the point.
 
2013-04-22 02:35:34 PM

Antimatter: StatelyGreekAutomaton: Also, sterilize your entire family or some shiat.

that's actually banned directly by the Constitution.  You don't punish anyone but the criminal in question.


Oh, please, bill of attainder!  Please!  Please!
 
2013-04-22 02:35:43 PM

FlashHarry: Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia .


lh4.ggpht.com

No, this is AMERICA!
In Russia the executioner's don't put on ski masks
 
2013-04-22 02:35:58 PM

Electrify: FlashHarry: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

yeah... i dunno... i mean there were mass casualties, but this would mean that just about any bomber could be charged with this. not that i'm against it, i guess, but it does seem to lump it in with someone with a dirty bomb or sarin canister or something similar.

Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.

/not trying to troll here, sorry if it comes off that way
//just that this may be the most pathetic "terrorist" attack in the history of terrorist attacks


And, you know, the police officer they killed. And the hundred plus injured including people missing arms and legs, locking down the city of Boston for a day.
 
2013-04-22 02:36:09 PM

Electrify: FlashHarry: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

yeah... i dunno... i mean there were mass casualties, but this would mean that just about any bomber could be charged with this. not that i'm against it, i guess, but it does seem to lump it in with someone with a dirty bomb or sarin canister or something similar.

Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.

/not trying to troll here, sorry if it comes off that way
//just that this may be the most pathetic "terrorist" attack in the history of terrorist attacks


dozens were maimed, many severely. Those are casualties too
 
2013-04-22 02:36:12 PM

Nadie_AZ: Why is this even an argument?


From a legal/constitutional perspective, it is the difference between a criminal act, and an act of war.
As a criminal act, the accused will get the trial in a criminal court with the various rights and presumptions that go with that.
If it were considered an act of war, he would be tried by a military tribunal, where the rules are similar but a little tighter regarding some of the protections given to the accused.

A fair amount of the clamor on both sides has to do with how we define an act of war. Those of you who think "Americans on American soil: never classifiable an act of war", sit down, relax, get a drink, and then read the examples.

If these two had used their bombs and guns solely to rob a check cashing place: criminal act.
If these two had climbed in a Panzer-2050 tank, provided by Future Zombie Hitler, and announced over the radio that they were going to unload their main gun into the White House and Capitol Building to overthrow the US Government: act of war.

One easy thing about these is that in the second example, the U.S. Military could use force to stop them without the President's specific authorization. The first example, not so much.
Now, in between the two, specifically at Boston, we start looking at a greyer area. One where both sides can make arguable claims. These two were on a simple murder spree. These two wanted to replace the US Government with Sharia. These two were just violent. These two had a plan to destabilize the authority of the United States. And so on, and so forth.

So, that is why this is even an argument. Constitutional law is such that criminal acts, and acts of war are treated differently, because we can't just send F-16s to bomb Bernie Madoff's house, and Future Zombie Hitler will eat the brains of the guy that tries to serve a warrant in his floating pleasure palace.
 
2013-04-22 02:36:31 PM

Electrify: Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.


casualties doesn't imply just deaths. i was referring to the deaths and the hundreds wounded - including many who lost limbs.
 
2013-04-22 02:36:33 PM

FlashHarry: Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia .


What does Russia have to do with anything?
 
2013-04-22 02:36:44 PM
LOUD WHINING NOISES in this thread.
 
2013-04-22 02:37:25 PM

Nabb1: FlashHarry: Nabb1: Iam opposed to the death penalty, but it is just a fact of life that some people need killin'.

yeah, that pretty much sums up my position too.

my main gripe against the DP is that it is irreversible.

That, of course, and it is hideously expensive and has never really been shown to have any true deterrent effect.  Most people who get executed in this day and age, of course, are horrible people who deserved their fate, but there have been some who did not deserve it.  I just can't justify an institution that could execute the innocent.

You and I have been agreeing a lot the past few days.  People are going to start talking.


*whispers and points at FlashHarry and Nabb1, giggling*
 
2013-04-22 02:37:27 PM

ManRay: slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.

How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.


How about "Guilty of multiple counts of Felony Murder"? Do you want life in prison with no possibility of parole, or the same shot we give stray dogs?
 
2013-04-22 02:37:48 PM

Treygreen13:
And the hundred plus injured including people missing arms and legs


That's worth remembering. A dozen or two people who have LIFE CHANGING injuries. Sure, at least they are alive, but there are some seriously MANGLED people because of this jackass.
 
2013-04-22 02:37:50 PM

Vodka Zombie: What the hell else would you try an American citizen as?


I was tol that Obama is way worse than Bush because Bush admitted he tortured people while Obama forbade it publicly but we JUST KNOW he is lying. Since he's worse than Bush, he is capable of doing anything, including trying this kid as an enemy combatant.
 
2013-04-22 02:37:54 PM
He's not going to get executed. I mean, even the 20th 9/11 hijacker didn't get the death penalty, and it's not like this kid is somehow worse.
 
2013-04-22 02:37:57 PM

FlashHarry: slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.

well, that's their job.


Yep.
"The part I took in defense of captain Preston and the soldiers, procured me anxiety, and obloquy enough. It was, however, one of the most gallant, generous, manly and disinterested actions of my whole life, and one of the best pieces of service I ever rendered my country. Judgment of death against those soldiers would have been as foul a stain upon this country as the executions of the Quakers or witches, anciently."

John Adams (in his diary, thus the bit of backslapping) - a member of the original Tea Party, not the farce that currently calls itself that.
 
2013-04-22 02:38:02 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: I have a gentle reminder for the "enemy combatant" bullshiat crowd.

Our criminal justice system worked just fine for dealing with the following terrorists:

Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, the Unabomber, Eric Rudolph, Kevin Harpham, Charles Polk, Willy Lampley, Joseph Bailie, Peter Langan, Ray Hamblin, Larry Shoemake, Robert Starr III, John Pitner, Charles Barbee, Floyd Looker, Edward Taylor, Jr., Todd Vanbiber, William Goehler, James Cleaver, Chevie Kehoe, Daniel Lee, Faron Lovelace, Jack Grebe Jr., Johnnie Wise, Buford Furrow, Richard Baumhammers, Fritz Springmeier, Clayton Wagner, Michael Smith, Charles Barefoot, Jr., Larry Raugust, Matt Hale, David Hinkson, Sean Gillespie, Wade Lay, Ivan Braden, Demetrius "Van" Crocker, Daniel Schertz, Raymond Dillard, and Dennis Mahon.

/So sit the fark down, shut the fark up, and stop trying to spread fear, you maroons.
//Your unjustified poutrage is giving the adults among us headaches.


I don't notice anyone on there from a large, well-financed, broad-based militant religious sect.  In some instances, other methods may be appropriate.  In this case, though, I think the criminal justice system will work just fine.
 
2013-04-22 02:38:15 PM

Great Janitor: FlashHarry: Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia .

What does Russia have to do with anything?


it's a caddyshack quote.

my point was, your post read like you wanted a soviet-style kangaroo court in which the verdict is already known before it begins. and that here in america, everyone has the right to a fair trial.
 
2013-04-22 02:38:17 PM

Treygreen13: we must also consider the innocent blood on our hands if even one person is killed by someone who should have been put to death, but wasn't.


Maybe you do. I don't.
 
2013-04-22 02:38:28 PM

Galloping Galoshes: NostroZ: Galloping Galoshes: NostroZ: I think it would be a bigger show compassion to not kill him.

To show that we Americans are not some blood thirsty savages who can only be satiated by the icy grip of death.

You might be showing yourself (and the rest of the 1st world countries) that, but your enemies see only weakness.  You don't even have the stones to execute a murderer of children.  They will respect you even less than they already do.  Of course, if you do kill him, you make a martyr out of him.

Yes, I say, lets play by the THIRD WORLD RULES.
Kill him, his relatives, & his relatives-relatives...  as an EXAMPLE.

Maybe that's why we live in the FIRST WORLD.
We follow a set of laws and principles that draws people of principle and intelligence to this country from all over the world.

Perhaps you missed my point: either action has a downside.  If your enemy does not respect you, he is more likely to attack you.  On the other hand, if you make a martyr, his actions can be used to inspire further attacks.


No, I very much understand your logic of intimidating your enemy.
Yet, what I am trying to point out is that setting an example of being BETTER than your enemy in terms of respecting human rights, gets you more ALLIES from the ENEMIES corner.

It also clearly defines you.  What you believe in.
Why you fight.  Who you are. Who they are
 
2013-04-22 02:38:29 PM

bloatboy: Nadie_AZ: Why is this even an argument?

From a legal/constitutional perspective, it is the difference between a criminal act, and an act of war.


To be fair, I don't think 2 guys going nutso is the same as a large group or country attacking the country.

I want them tried, so the idiots who actually liked what they did can see that our system is intact and stronger than their attempts to shake it.
 
2013-04-22 02:38:33 PM

Nabb1: I am opposed to the death penalty, but it is just a fact of life that some people need killin'.


Not this one.

No martyrdom for this asshat, just a long, long lifetime of sitting in a box contemplating just how badly he screwed the pooch.
 
2013-04-22 02:38:47 PM

Antimatter: Interesting choice of charges.  I'd expected 3-4 counts of murder, several dozen counts of attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon, and the usual mismash of property destruction, explosives, yatta yatta.

Makes me wonder if they chose something with a death penalty, to get him to plead out to a lesser murder charge for life in exchange for any information about his brother.


Probably, and I assume he'll face those charges (murder, assault etc.) in state court after he's likely found guilty in federal court,
 
2013-04-22 02:38:51 PM

NostroZ: No, this is AMERICA!
In Russia the executioner's don't put on ski masks


Ah yes, Baghdad. One of America's most well known cities. There might not be any Americans in the shot either, but we won't let that get in the way!
 
2013-04-22 02:39:19 PM

Galloping Galoshes: Perhaps you missed my point: either action has a downside. If your enemy does not respect you, he is more likely to attack you. On the other hand, if you make a martyr, his actions can be used to inspire further attacks.


In other words, worrying about consequences is irrelevant. What matters is what is right.
 
2013-04-22 02:39:23 PM

Kittypie070: Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.

Wonderful.

They're gonna RAGE about lawful Constitutional legal procedure being correctly upheld.

This is a police matter, not war.


You ever read Michael German's essay, "Squaring the Error," about Law v War?
 
2013-04-22 02:40:08 PM
If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.

Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.
 
2013-04-22 02:40:28 PM

thurstonxhowell: Treygreen13: we must also consider the innocent blood on our hands if even one person is killed by someone who should have been put to death, but wasn't.

Maybe you do. I don't.


Well we'll have to agree to disagree. There are plenty of stories of people getting out of prison and killing again. We're responsible (as a society) for that as well.
 
2013-04-22 02:40:35 PM

Kittypie070: Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.

Wonderful.

They're gonna RAGE about lawful Constitutional legal procedure being correctly upheld.

This is a police matter, not war.


www.cheshirecatstudios.com
 
2013-04-22 02:40:39 PM

Treygreen13: There might not be any Americans in the shot either, but we won't let that get in the way!


i'm pretty sure they're all followers of muqtada al-sadr.

i do know that bush was watching live. i wonder if he jizzed in his pants as saddam's neck snapped.
 
2013-04-22 02:40:48 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


How is killing 3 people, blowing off 15 limbs and wounding 180 people NOT mass destruction?
 
2013-04-22 02:41:19 PM
Can we please call them the brothers Krazymazov?

/also, the former Soviet republic of Dickasstan
 
2013-04-22 02:41:30 PM

HotWingConspiracy: Phony GOP Americans must be inconsolable.


Got it if ya spot it. GOP'ers are almost as fake as you Dems that run demonizing them at every chance while hypocritically doing worse.
 
jvl
2013-04-22 02:41:33 PM
I really don't see this as surprising. During the Bush admin, twice a terrorist was found on US soil and twice they were tried normally. I'm pretty sure the Supremes would be pissed if it went any other way.
 
2013-04-22 02:41:48 PM
Funny how the people who claim to love the constitution and their rights the most are usually the first to want to take them away from someone they disagree with.

Sorry rednecks, no lynching for you.
 
2013-04-22 02:41:56 PM

sirgrim: How is killing 3 people, blowing off 15 limbs and wounding 180 people NOT mass destruction?


plus, boston is in mass., so there's that.
 
2013-04-22 02:42:09 PM

letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.

Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.


What do Miranda rights have to do with anything? These aren't rights that are conveyed to a person prior to an interrogation, these are rights all U.S. citizens always have. The only relevance Miranda has is that anything he says prior to being given the Miranda warning may not be admissible in court.
 
2013-04-22 02:42:10 PM

ManRay: How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.


Except you know, for the video of him dropping the bomb and running.
Court doesn't care about explanations.
Did you do it, or didn't you? That's the question.
 
2013-04-22 02:42:12 PM

Galloping Galoshes: I don't notice anyone on there from a large, well-financed, broad-based militant religious sect.  In some instances, other methods may be appropriate.  In this case, though, I think the criminal justice system will work just fine.


No, there are plenty of fundie christians in that bunch.
 
2013-04-22 02:42:21 PM

Treygreen13: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: and for the innocent blood we all have on our hands.

Of course, we must also consider the innocent blood on our hands if even one person is killed by someone who should have been put to death, but wasn't. And this includes other prisoners.

Just sayin', it's not a black and white issue.


It's fairly black and white. In one situation we're all metaphorically pushing the needle into an innocent man's arm. The other is a situation should probably be taken care of by proper sentencing guidelines and housing the prisoners properly. If a would-be death penalty case ends up being life in prison, the nature of that crime should determine whether or not the prisoner is ever in a position again to kill, be that through supermax confinement or whatnot.

While not a perfect example, would Peter Parker be more or less responsible for Uncle Ben's death if he had stabbed him with his own hands? Does the street thug not have any agency in this situation?
 
2013-04-22 02:42:25 PM

Treygreen13: NostroZ: No, this is AMERICA!
In Russia the executioner's don't put on ski masks

Ah yes, Baghdad. One of America's most well known cities. There might not be any Americans in the shot either, but we won't let that get in the way!


Lol.  You got me there... Baghdad might as well be ours after a TRILLION dollars spent.
 
2013-04-22 02:42:31 PM
I just feel sorry for who ever sold them their guns. Even if it was a 100% on the level legal sale from a gun shop, that shop is going to be run out of town when it is announced that they sold them the guns.
 
2013-04-22 02:42:35 PM

Random Anonymous Blackmail: TheShavingofOccam123

Probably without legal counsel present. And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

They forced medication to Loughner so he would be mentally "competent" to face trial.

I don't want to see him die, then his journey would be complete. Stick him in a dark rapey corner and forget about him.


In Arizona, if you're mentally ill, they'll still try you and convict you. You serve out your sentence in a state mental institution until you are judged competent, then it's off to a state prison for the rest of your term.

Yeah, compassion.

I tend to think the people who do that to the mentally ill do it because they are mentally ill and full of self-loathing. Much like many homophobes who are actually homosexual. I know, that's crazy thinking.
 
2013-04-22 02:42:47 PM

Joe Blowme: Kittypie070: Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.

Wonderful.

They're gonna RAGE about lawful Constitutional legal procedure being correctly upheld.

This is a police matter, not war.

[www.cheshirecatstudios.com image 400x302]


No, she's right. We screwed up by letting it be defined by Al Qaeda. I'd rather AQ not get to tell us how we treat the matter.
 
2013-04-22 02:42:48 PM

sirgrim: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

How is killing 3 people, blowing off 15 limbs and wounding 180 people NOT mass destruction?


Every US soldier using grenades is now using WMDs?
 
2013-04-22 02:42:50 PM

whenIsayGO: The weirdest thing about all this is the definition of WMD. The Iraq War made it sound like it's limited to nukes, bio/chem weapons -- the kind of things that can kill millions in a single attack.  Not a pot with some gunpowder and nails in it.

Now we need a new word for the things that can kill more people than conventional weapons.


These guys killed four people. Lanza killed 26 with a gun. "Killing more people" has little to do with it.

A farking spork will be a WMD before some people are done.
 
2013-04-22 02:43:04 PM

Treygreen13: thurstonxhowell: Treygreen13: we must also consider the innocent blood on our hands if even one person is killed by someone who should have been put to death, but wasn't.

Maybe you do. I don't.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree. There are plenty of stories of people getting out of prison and killing again. We're responsible (as a society) for that as well.


Again, no, we're not. We are absolutely not responsible for the future misdeeds of every person we could have killed. That's ridiculous.
 
2013-04-22 02:43:38 PM

cretinbob: Except you know, for the video of him dropping the bomb and running.


Where is this?
 
2013-04-22 02:44:16 PM

Glendale: That honestly seems like very few charges and skips over a lot of other things they did.


..creating a nuisance.
 
2013-04-22 02:44:31 PM

skullkrusher: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

I think any bomb is considered a WMD. Not to be confused with the WMDs that Saddam moved to Syria


True, True. The Boston Marathon bombs actually existed
 
2013-04-22 02:44:50 PM

ongbok: I just feel sorry for who ever sold them their guns. Even if it was a 100% on the level legal sale from a gun shop, that shop is going to be run out of town when it is announced that they sold them the guns.


i wonder if a background check would have prevented anything.

/ducks
 
2013-04-22 02:45:09 PM

Eirik: ever given federal parole?


skullkrusher: I am pretty sure double jeopardy would apply if he were first acquitted federally and then retried locally for the same crimes


There is no parole in the federal system. A sentence of life imprisonment is just that. There is no getting out early. If you are sentenced to a term of years, you can get a slight break for good behavior, but it is only about 32 days for each year you are in prison.

I doubt it would be a double jeopardy problem. All you need is for one element of the crime to be different, and the federal crime is pretty specific. I am sure there is a state crime about blowing people up that could be charged even if he were acquitted on the federal charges. And he could certainly be charged for state crimes of murder and attempted murder (both for the bomb and the shootouts with cops). If you wanted to get really technical about it he could also be charged with weapons possession, reckless driving, vehicular homicide (for running his brother over), breaking and entering (the boat), etc.
 
2013-04-22 02:45:13 PM

uncleacid: Who's going to pay for the guys boat?


His insurance company. That's why you buy insurance.
 
2013-04-22 02:45:37 PM

ManRay: Yeah. The idea of a "special terrorism interrogator" getting to him before he is officially questioned bothers me. You can't put due process on hold.


That there is the kind of stuff people used to get mad about, back in the 'aughties.
 
2013-04-22 02:45:45 PM

letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.

Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.


This is so idiotic is it to be a troll, but I'll bite...

I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.
 
2013-04-22 02:46:29 PM

Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.


I dunno. He's kinda cute. I'd do him.
static2.businessinsider.com
Sentence him to life chained in my basement.
 
2013-04-22 02:46:36 PM

jvl: I really don't see this as surprising. During the Bush admin, twice a terrorist was found on US soil and twice they were tried normally. I'm pretty sure the Supremes would be pissed if it went any other way.


The Supremes were so pissed about Jose Padilla that they chose not to hear the case on a technical issue.
 
2013-04-22 02:46:40 PM

cretinbob: uncleacid: Who's going to pay for the guys boat?

His insurance company. That's why you buy insurance.


There's often an exclusion for damage caused by action taken by police or other civil authorities in an emergency.
 
2013-04-22 02:47:37 PM

gilgigamesh: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

What's wrong with handling it at the federal level?

I doubt MA has any laws against terrorism or murder by weapon of mass destruction that would be required to prosecute this effectively.


Well, they have laws against murder.  That's 3 people killed by bombs they set, and one police officer that they killed eluding pursuit.

Not to mention 100+ charges of attempted murder for all the people missing limbs after the bombs went off.

Carjacking charges too, as something else that happened in the crime spree.

They have enough state-level charges to make sure he never sees daylight again, without touching anything labelled "terrorism" or "weapon of mass destruction".  The "big gun" of going to Federal charges is that they can bring the death penalty to the table, since Massachusetts abolished it.
 
2013-04-22 02:48:44 PM

Glendale: That honestly seems like very few charges and skips over a lot of other things they did.


It's enough, and there is enough evidence to make what he's been charged with stick, so why do all the paperwork for lesser charges. That costs moneythat doesn't exist because of the sequester.
 
2013-04-22 02:49:30 PM

Biological Ali: He's not going to get executed. I mean, even the 20th 9/11 hijacker didn't get the death penalty, and it's not like this kid is somehow worse.


The "20th hijacker" didn't kill or hurt anyone, and turned out to be a lame Al Qaeda wannabe, not actually the intended 20th.

A better example: The bombers who hit the World Trade Center the first time in 1993 got life, despite killing 6 and injuring over 1K, not to mention trying to bring the building down and kill thousands. (Damn NY lib'ruhls.)
 
2013-04-22 02:49:44 PM

cretinbob: uncleacid: Who's going to pay for the guys boat?

His insurance company. That's why you buy insurance.


They will find away to weasel out of it, they always do. I remember one of my neighbors had his car totaled by a guy that crashed into it while running from the police in a stolen car. The insurance company refused to pay because they said the accident was a result of a police chase and the town is responsible.
 
2013-04-22 02:49:46 PM

FarkedOver: gilgigamesh: People get tried on federal charges all the time. Mail fraud, wire fraud, bank robbery, drug importation, RICO... its pretty commonplace. I don't see why its a problem here.

Massachusetts is state that doesn't have the death penalty.  If he is charged federally he will face the death penalty.  I'd rather him not be executed.


This. The death penalty is barbaric; the government should not be in the business of revenge. Keeping him behind bars for the rest of his life should suffice.

/Probably won't happen. Pretty good odds that he gets the needle.
 
2013-04-22 02:50:16 PM

cretinbob: I'll just leave this here.........

Xyphoid:

Pretty disturbing reading how many people want him tortured and/or extrajudicially punished, or just plain wishing suffering upon him.

My opinion, as an American, is I want him afforded every right I'd expect myself as an American. Those rights and the treatment we espouse to be sacred are a significant portion of what makes our country better than many others. As well, my country claims to stand against, and has hung people for, torture/"enhanced interrogation"/increasing suffering (even through inaction). In that regard I also believe any intentional suffering caused upon someone in custody is a crime that should be punished, as is the opinion of the legal system* (*- sadly, your mileage may vary).

My opinion in regard to my faith and as a human being is that no unnecessary suffering (excluding any pain due to life-saving or life-maintaining actions) should come to him, even though I believe he likely did it (to the effect I'd have to sit out of a jury). I also believe that he shouldn't be sentenced to death unless his continued existence, no matter what actions we could possibly undertake, would still pose a threat to innocent life.

Some of you guys should be ashamed of yourselves. Whatever this persons motivations were, you wishing those kinds of things upon him, suggesting you'd be ambivalent to them happening, or wishing you could do it yourself makes you the same kind of person you believe this fellow to be. You don't think terrorists have their own justification, like you, for thinking their actions (or willingness to cause suffering) as right?

/Two Iraq deployments for a year and a half
//Despite being shot at, fellow soldiers injured and killed, poisoned, threatened, insulted and knowing that if I was captured that terrible things would be done to me, 100% of any prisoners or suspects I had control of were treated like human beings. Not just because of my beliefs, but that's how decent and civilized ...


You know what?
I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.
I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.
 
2013-04-22 02:50:48 PM

Sum Guye: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

I'd rather see him spend the next 60 years in one of these.

[sometimesinteresting.files.wordpress.com image 640x556]


You know, I've stayed in hotels that were worse than that.

Of course, I could always leave the hotels, but still...
 
2013-04-22 02:51:03 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: It's fairly black and white.


So what you're saying is, "it isn't black and white."

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: If a would-be death penalty case ends up being life in prison, the nature of that crime should determine whether or not the prisoner is ever in a position again to kill, be that through supermax confinement or whatnot.


I just think there's a point where it's obvious the person who committed the crime is the one you have convicted, and when that person is so dangerous that you can't even put them in prison because they'll murder people in prison too... keeping that person in a box until they die or putting them down are essentially the same outcome. Their rights are still gone forever. I'm not advocating that everyone convicted of murder get the death penalty. But sometimes I think it's really the same thing... if not more humane than living in solitary confinement until you die.

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: While not a perfect example, would Peter Parker be more or less responsible for Uncle Ben's death if he had stabbed him with his own hands? Does the street thug not have any agency in this situation?


You could ask Peter Parker. I mean, it's the whole reason he fights crime - that he should have done the right thing instead of letting the guy go.
 
2013-04-22 02:51:04 PM
farm4.static.flickr.com

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.
 
2013-04-22 02:51:23 PM

LordJiro: FarkedOver: gilgigamesh: People get tried on federal charges all the time. Mail fraud, wire fraud, bank robbery, drug importation, RICO... its pretty commonplace. I don't see why its a problem here.

Massachusetts is state that doesn't have the death penalty.  If he is charged federally he will face the death penalty.  I'd rather him not be executed.

This. The death penalty is barbaric; the government should not be in the business of revenge. Keeping him behind bars for the rest of his life should suffice.

/Probably won't happen. Pretty good odds that he gets the needle.


Agreed.
We don't prove how civilized we are by government sanctioned killing of citizens.
 
2013-04-22 02:51:31 PM

Silverstaff:
They have enough state-level charges to make sure he never sees daylight again, without touching anything labelled "terrorism" or "weapon of mass destruction".  The "big gun" of going to Federal charges is that they can bring the death penalty to the table, since Massachusetts abolished it.


Yep. He'll never be a free man again. If by some miracle he's acquitted of federal charges, he'll face a whole host of state charges. They tend to stack on as much as they can. Everything from murder and attempted murder to unlawful discharge of a firearm in a public place, risking a catastrophe, using an illegal firearm during the commission of a felony, whatever else they can drum up.
 
2013-04-22 02:51:33 PM

FlashHarry: Great Janitor: FlashHarry: Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch.  Make the execute as soon as possible.  He doesn't deserve to live.

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia .

What does Russia have to do with anything?

it's a caddyshack quote.

my point was, your post read like you wanted a soviet-style kangaroo court in which the verdict is already known before it begins. and that here in america, everyone has the right to a fair trial.


Never saw Caddyshack.

As for the bit about the kangaroo court, his trial will be anything but.  It last weeks at least.  But there is no denying his guilt.  And when he gets sentenced, he should be sentenced to death and it should be carried out quickly.
 
2013-04-22 02:53:15 PM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Glendale: That honestly seems like very few charges and skips over a lot of other things they did.

..creating a nuisance.


He'll have to pay $50 and pick up the garbage.
 
2013-04-22 02:54:01 PM
letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.
Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.


The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.


Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?
 
2013-04-22 02:54:08 PM

sirgrim: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

How is killing 3 people, blowing off 15 limbs and wounding 180 people NOT mass destruction?


Well, my point was the term WMD which harkens from the Cold War used to only apply to Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical Weapons.  The term seems to have expanded quite a bit since back in the day to now include pressure cooker bombs.

But to your point, that the number of injured or killed dictates mass destruction.  Be careful with that kind of stupidity.  The cretin in Aurora killed 12 and wounded 50 something with a gun, all on his own.  Are guns now WMDs?
 
2013-04-22 02:54:08 PM

dallylamma: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 479x383]

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.


Why do we as American citizens tolerate RAPE in prison?
If there's a CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment, it's to be PHYSICALLY RAPED while you're in the "custody of the government".

Seriously people.
Prison rape in the USA is a casual joke... about human rights abuse!!!
 
2013-04-22 02:54:43 PM

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: snivelly handwringing & broad-brush accusation


Don't you be pinning that on every single person in here. Honestly, you can't READ!!??
 
2013-04-22 02:55:28 PM

dallylamma: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 479x383]

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.


What is it with you guys and your prison-rape fantasies? Get help.
 
2013-04-22 02:55:30 PM

Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.


They'd find a reason to rage no matter what. Don't be naive. Raging at stupid shiat is what right wingers do.
 
2013-04-22 02:55:33 PM
States rights! Let massachusetts try him!
 
2013-04-22 02:56:18 PM
Too bad for the rightwingers who seemed to be getting sexually excited about torturing him.

I think that torture as punishment can often contain religious overtones - "Our God is better than yours because yours is powerless to stop the torture".

But still, why is the bombing a Federal crime rather than a state one?
 
2013-04-22 02:56:23 PM
Just watched a moment of silence. It was kind of boring.
 
2013-04-22 02:57:01 PM

ongbok: I just feel sorry for who ever sold them their guns. Even if it was a 100% on the level legal sale from a gun shop, that shop is going to be run out of town when it is announced that they sold them the guns.


Apparently, you haven't been paying attention to current events.
 
2013-04-22 02:57:03 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: You know what?
I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.
I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.


Thomas Hobbes would like a word with you  r u, uncivilized ass.
FTFM
 
2013-04-22 02:57:21 PM

gerbilpox: Biological Ali: He's not going to get executed. I mean, even the 20th 9/11 hijacker didn't get the death penalty, and it's not like this kid is somehow worse.

The "20th hijacker" didn't kill or hurt anyone, and turned out to be a lame Al Qaeda wannabe, not actually the intended 20th.

A better example: The bombers who hit the World Trade Center the first time in 1993 got life, despite killing 6 and injuring over 1K, not to mention trying to bring the building down and kill thousands. (Damn NY lib'ruhls.)


Not being to carry out your part of the plot due to logistical issues/general failure doesn't somehow excuse the fact that you were part of the plot to begin with. Moussaoui was eligible for the death penalty, he just didn't get it (only barely; he was saved by just one juror's vote).
 
2013-04-22 02:58:55 PM

letrole: letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.
Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.


Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?


No. [drops the mic]
 
2013-04-22 02:59:22 PM

Tommy Moo: Not sure, but maybe these are the only two charges the federal government has jurisdiction over, and the reckless endangerment, carjacking, gunfights with cops, trespassing, etc. can still also be charged at the state level?


yes
 
2013-04-22 03:00:39 PM

cretinbob: Court doesn't care about explanations.
Did you do it, or didn't you? That's the question.


Yes, they do. Intent is important. Not that the state is going to have much trouble proving intent in this case.
 
2013-04-22 03:00:47 PM
So realistically, this guy killed 1, maybe 2 people.  The boy and potentially the police officer.  I'm all about seeing justice be done, but as the same time, why isn't there the same outrage and call for the head of the corporate suit mofo that is responsible for the negligence that killed 14 down in Texas.  I don't see anyone facing the death penalty for that little dust up.
 
2013-04-22 03:00:50 PM

The Southern Dandy: No. [drops the mic]


Then you're not an American. Get out.
 
2013-04-22 03:00:58 PM

Electrify: FlashHarry: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

yeah... i dunno... i mean there were mass casualties, but this would mean that just about any bomber could be charged with this. not that i'm against it, i guess, but it does seem to lump it in with someone with a dirty bomb or sarin canister or something similar.

Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.

/not trying to troll here, sorry if it comes off that way
//just that this may be the most pathetic "terrorist" attack in the history of terrorist attacks


A gun under the US code is considered a weapon of mass destruction for the purposes of these laws.  It makes no difference if you shoot someone, blow them up, use a nuke, use poison gas or biological weapons.  Furthermore, the murders themselves are rolled into the charge as proving deaths occured is an element of what is being charged in case anyone was wondering why there are only two charges with the multiple deaths and injuries.
 
2013-04-22 03:01:18 PM

vygramul: Kittypie070: Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.

Wonderful.

They're gonna RAGE about lawful Constitutional legal procedure being correctly upheld.

This is a police matter, not war.

You ever read Michael German's essay, "Squaring the Error," about Law v War?


Thanks, I just ganked a copy. I sure shall read it.
 
2013-04-22 03:01:29 PM

The Southern Dandy: letrole: letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.
Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.


Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?

No. [drops the mic]


[piclks up mic]  Ooops.  I read that wrong.   I thought you asked if I would approve of torture.  Absolutely not.  We should not torture.  Period. [the mic, I threw it on the ground!]
 
2013-04-22 03:02:45 PM

Electrify: Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.

/not trying to troll here, sorry if it comes off that way
//just that this may be the most pathetic "terrorist" attack in the history of terrorist attacks


Terrorist attacks don't usually have the goal of "get the highest kill count".   They're more aimed at "cause the most disruption".

The pitiful ones are the ones that disrupt a small goat herding town in the mountains somewhere for an afternoon and then it's back to normal the next day because it's so routine.  A major economic center was shut down for a full day because of two jokers with home made bombs.  Therepercussions to how security will be handled in the future are impossible to see yet, but we weren't back to normal the next day.  Hell, we're still not 'back to normal' from 2001.

This was far from pitiful.
 
2013-04-22 03:02:54 PM
letrole: Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?

The Southern Dandy : No. [drops the mic]


Welcome to Real Life.
 
2013-04-22 03:02:59 PM

The Southern Dandy: [piclks up mic]  Ooops.  I read that wrong.   I thought you asked if I would approve of torture.  Absolutely not.  We should not torture.  Period. [the mic, I threw it on the ground!]


Okay that's better, you may stay.
 
2013-04-22 03:03:25 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: You know what?
I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.
I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.


You're right.  Underneath the thin veneer of civilization we're a bunch of tribal apes.  We've had a lot more practice at being apes.  It's only the decision we make every day that we're not going to give in and pound the crap out of whoever pisses us off that makes us civilized.

We have to remember that it's up to each of us to be better than that.  That we are stronger as a community, that we will deal humanely with the broken examples among us and not revert to our baser selves that is what this whole enlightened civilization thing is all about.  Not about being the alpha ape and being scarier than the other tribe, but about being the example that lights up the darker corners of a world that is still driven more by fear and power-seeking.

As far as the appropriate penalty, I think the best in terms of justice and safety would be to securely incarcerate him so that he has all of his days to come to grips with the horror of his acts.  If he is judged unsane, he should be made whole so he can more fully appreciate the enormity of what he did, in the solitude of his remaining years.
 
2013-04-22 03:03:26 PM

Fubar: So realistically, this guy killed 1, maybe 2 people.  The boy and potentially the police officer.  I'm all about seeing justice be done, but as the same time, why isn't there the same outrage and call for the head of the corporate suit mofo that is responsible for the negligence that killed 14 down in Texas.  I don't see anyone facing the death penalty for that little dust up.


It's called "white peoples' money," Fubar.  You can do a lot with it.
 
2013-04-22 03:03:49 PM

cameroncrazy1984: The Southern Dandy: No. [drops the mic]

Then you're not an American. Get out.


I am an American.  My education [reading comprehension]  failed me.
 
2013-04-22 03:05:11 PM

letrole: letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.
Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.


Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?


Yes.

/24 is not a farking documentary.
//Nobody buys the "it's a surname' bullshiat, troll.
 
2013-04-22 03:05:16 PM
What does his citizenship to do with anything?
 
2013-04-22 03:05:31 PM
What a disappointment.

But at least your high-minded priciples won't suffer as a little girl picks up a booby-trapped doll left at a playground.
 
2013-04-22 03:05:36 PM

HotWingConspiracy: Phony GOP Americans must be inconsolable.


ummm...no.  Because if he was a US Citizen and held indefinitely without charges, you can sure bet the GOP would be in a tizzy about Obama assuming dictatorial powers.
 
2013-04-22 03:05:43 PM

cameroncrazy1984: The Southern Dandy: [piclks up mic]  Ooops.  I read that wrong.   I thought you asked if I would approve of torture.  Absolutely not.  We should not torture.  Period. [the mic, I threw it on the ground!]

Okay that's better, you may stay.


meh... in the imaginary hypothetical where torture will reveal a bomb about to explode in time to save many lives, I think you gotta torture every time.
Of course, the imaginary hypothetical doesn't exist... so we should just torture everyone all the time to make sure.
 
2013-04-22 03:05:48 PM
NostroZ:
Seriously people.
Prison rape in the USA is a casual joke... about human rights abuse!!!


I can't imagine where the law or at least the case law is explaining how accepting rape in prison does not fall under the category "cruel and unusual"

Either way, I'm just hoping for due process and justice.
 
2013-04-22 03:06:11 PM
The decision to charge Tsarnaev in civilian court put an end to speculation that he would be charged as an enemy combatant, a designation sometimes used against terrorists,and the rest of the time is used against anyone who's brown and might maybe have known a terrorist three lives ago.

/FTFTFA...
 
2013-04-22 03:07:10 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Uchiha_Cycliste: You know what?
I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.
I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.

Thomas Hobbes would like a word with you  r u, uncivilized ass.
FTFM


You know what, I thin kI'm gonna do my work and casually check in on fark instead of reading a several hundred year old tome that may or may not be relevant. Why don't you make an argument about why I'm wrong instead of directing me toward something that else.
 
2013-04-22 03:07:21 PM

Fubar: So realistically, this guy killed 1, maybe 2 people.  The boy and potentially the police officer.  I'm all about seeing justice be done, but as the same time, why isn't there the same outrage and call for the head of the corporate suit mofo that is responsible for the negligence that killed 14 down in Texas.  I don't see anyone facing the death penalty for that little dust up.


We generally don't impose the death penalty on acts of negligence.  Not even in Texas.
 
2013-04-22 03:07:57 PM

BafflerMeal: cretinbob: Except you know, for the video of him dropping the bomb and running.

Where is this?


They've discussed it, but because they plan on using as evidence, they haven't released it.
Apparently the Federal Government and Massachusetts have been paying attention to the Zimmerman thing (Drink!!)
 
2013-04-22 03:08:30 PM

NostroZ: dallylamma: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 479x383]

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.

Why do we as American citizens tolerate RAPE in prison?
If there's a CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment, it's to be PHYSICALLY RAPED while you're in the "custody of the government".

Seriously people.
Prison rape in the USA is a casual joke... about human rights abuse!!!


I would say we tolerate it not so much because most we want to (regardless of the callous comments), but rather because it is difficult and almost impossible to stop.  Prisoners do not typically bring a complaint about rape because that is against the norms of prisoners to cooperate with prison officials against other inmate.  Usually it results in an attempt on the life of the inmate for cooperation.  So the rapes occur and there is nothing that can be done because there is no cooperation with any investigation (assuming officials know something was going on). No one outside ignorant individuals in jest really wants crime to occur in prisons, it is just so darn hard to stop it because prisons are full of criminals who typically don't obey rules or cooperate with law enforcement to solve crimes.

TL:DR Rapes don't happen because snitches get stitches.
 
2013-04-22 03:08:56 PM
It should be tried as a criminal act... unless if there is more information that we don't know yet it appears to be a criminal act by a couple of malcontents rather than an act with a political message. I guess it depends on what one's definition of terrorism is. I always imagine terrorism as something with a message, possibly backed by an organisation of some kind, targetting the public, aiming to strike fear into the population in hopes of furthering one's political cause, whatever screwball cause it might be.   Its not the method of murder that makes it terrorism but the message behind it.  I also figured terrorist act intends to undermine state authourity, therefore lessening the legitimacy of a states domestic power (since it can't protect its own people) and leading to increased domestic chaos, especially as the state resorts to more extreme measures to stop terrorism and therefore cracks down on civil liberties in the name of security,  thus fuelling discontent.

I just don't see that kind of motivation here.  Charge him with murder and bodily harm or whatever. Life imprisonment or death penalty, whatever the laws are. :Let's not bring terrorism into the equation.  I'm sick of hearing oh noes islams are terrorists! . What new draconian thing are they going to introduce to prevent this kind of attack?   The thing is, there are always going to be people who are murderous and discontented. Some people might be simply drawn to the notoriety presented by such a large attack. This attack seems closer to a columbine type thing rather than a "terrorist" attack. Just the method of murder is different.  Would we be talking about terrorism if they had just used a gun to shoot randomly into a crowd, potentially killing even more people?

1st degree murder and take away the notoriety that comes with being labelled a terrorist.

/end rant
 
2013-04-22 03:09:28 PM

thurstonxhowell: Treygreen13: thurstonxhowell: Treygreen13: we must also consider the innocent blood on our hands if even one person is killed by someone who should have been put to death, but wasn't.

Maybe you do. I don't.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree. There are plenty of stories of people getting out of prison and killing again. We're responsible (as a society) for that as well.

Again, no, we're not. We are absolutely not responsible for the future misdeeds of every person we could have killed. That's ridiculous.


You should tell that to the victims who were killed by murderers released from prison who killed again. There has to be more to our justice system than "you did your time, get out there and start murdering again."  If that means more life sentences and more psychoanalysis of people who have "served their time" before they're released, I'm ok with that too.

Personally, I will never lose a wink of sleep worrying about whether or not the obviously guilty admitted murderers feel distressed as they are lethally injected. If that really bothers you, then campaign against the death penalty all you want.
 
2013-04-22 03:09:57 PM

ManateeGag: TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

are you retarded?


Either that or he's super-trolling.
 
2013-04-22 03:10:34 PM

ManRay: slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.

How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.


It doesn't even really need to be under threat of life. The father returned to Russia, so it seems like Tamerlan was probably the father figure in Dzhokar's life. I dunno. When you're 19 and your family tells you to drop a backpack somewhere, you may not be smart enough to know better.

Be a whole lot easier if the other brother was alive instead of the young one.
 
2013-04-22 03:11:01 PM

NostroZ: dallylamma: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 479x383]

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.

Why do we as American citizens tolerate RAPE in prison?
If there's a CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment, it's to be PHYSICALLY RAPED while you're in the "custody of the government".

Seriously people.
Prison rape in the USA is a casual joke... about human rights abuse!!!


Because we want prison to be a punishment.  We, as a people, want the guilty to suffer for what they have done.  (Not saying it's me personally, but this seems to be our consensus as a society).  We have completely given up on rehabilitation, and have turned prisons into long-term criminal containment/disposal facilities.  Remove the criminal element from society forever by locking them away.

The idea of just locking somebody up for a long time doesn't seem like much of a punishment though.  They get food, and shelter, and medical care, and probably a TV and a gym too.  They won't have to worry about losing their job and thus their home and health insurance, they won't have to worry about the cost of living or commuting to work.  People want prison to be something to fear, to be scared of, and just going into a safe, clean, well built and orderly prison where there is no real risk of brutal violence seems. . .not much to fear at all compared to everyday life.

The idea of prison rape, that seems to add the "Karmic justice" factor.  As a people, we would never officially sanction this, we'd never sentence people to be raped. . .but if some criminal gets brutalized by his fellow degenerates for being bad even by their standards (much like it's common knowledge that pedophiles get the worst treatment in prison), we feel better knowing justice was served.  Jeffrey Dahmer eluded the death penalty for his cannibalistic serial-killer spree. . .so a fellow inmate killed him, and no tears were shed.

My theory on this anyway.
 
2013-04-22 03:11:13 PM

Daedalus27: Furthermore, the murders themselves are rolled into the charge as proving deaths occured is an element of what is being charged in case anyone was wondering why there are only two charges with the multiple deaths and injuries.


Also, these are preliminary charges. The Grand Jury has not convened yet, much less returned indictments.
 
2013-04-22 03:11:26 PM

letrole: What a disappointment.

But at least your high-minded priciples won't suffer as a little girl picks up a booby-trapped doll left at a playground.


Or when a fertilizer plant explodes in your daddy's face.

Or, when a meth-addicted polar bear rapes your mother and dials phone sex lines from your house.

Or...

26.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-04-22 03:11:51 PM

SithLord: HotWingConspiracy: Phony GOP Americans must be inconsolable.

ummm...no.  Because if he was a US Citizen and held indefinitely without charges, you can sure bet the GOP would be in a tizzy about Obama assuming dictatorial powers.


I would hope that everyone in the U.S. would be in more than a tizzy about Obama assuming dictatorial powers...
 
2013-04-22 03:12:00 PM

starsrift: ManRay: slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.

How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.

It doesn't even really need to be under threat of life. The father returned to Russia, so it seems like Tamerlan was probably the father figure in Dzhokar's life. I dunno. When you're 19 and your family tells you to drop a backpack somewhere, you may not be smart enough to know better.

Be a whole lot easier if the other brother was alive instead of the young one.


Well from reports coming out it seems like the younger bro actually killed his brother by running him over.  That was the death blow, from what i've been hearing.
 
2013-04-22 03:12:04 PM

somedude210: well...from everything that's been released, it was his older brother that got pissy and started planning this, they younger brother was more of "oh hey, I'll help you bro"


Whoppy-do...  He's a dead man regardless of whether or not he followed his brother like a lap dog.

Either the dude spends the rest of his life in solitary waiting to be executed, or the dude spends the rest of his life in solitary waiting for his natural death... either way... it is going to suck to be him (good).
 
2013-04-22 03:13:08 PM

Daedalus27: Electrify: FlashHarry: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

yeah... i dunno... i mean there were mass casualties, but this would mean that just about any bomber could be charged with this. not that i'm against it, i guess, but it does seem to lump it in with someone with a dirty bomb or sarin canister or something similar.

Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.

/not trying to troll here, sorry if it comes off that way
//just that this may be the most pathetic "terrorist" attack in the history of terrorist attacks

A gun under the US code is considered a weapon of mass destruction for the purposes of these laws.  It makes no difference if you shoot someone, blow them up, use a nuke, use poison gas or biological weapons.  Furthermore, the murders themselves are rolled into the charge as proving deaths occured is an element of what is being charged in case anyone was wondering why there are only two charges with the multiple deaths and injuries.


The only firearms I've seen that match the caliber requirements for the WMD laws are old (or reproduction) muzzle-loaders.
 
2013-04-22 03:13:10 PM

ongbok: cretinbob: uncleacid: Who's going to pay for the guys boat?

His insurance company. That's why you buy insurance.

They will find away to weasel out of it, they always do. I remember one of my neighbors had his car totaled by a guy that crashed into it while running from the police in a stolen car. The insurance company refused to pay because they said the accident was a result of a police chase and the town is responsible.


Yeah, The biggest insurance fraud is the insurance industry itself.
 
2013-04-22 03:14:48 PM

MassD: somedude210: well...from everything that's been released, it was his older brother that got pissy and started planning this, they younger brother was more of "oh hey, I'll help you bro"

Whoppy-do...  He's a dead man regardless of whether or not he followed his brother like a lap dog.

Either the dude spends the rest of his life in solitary waiting to be executed, or the dude spends the rest of his life in solitary waiting for his natural death... either way... it is going to suck to be him (good).


upload.wikimedia.org
"Yeeeehaaaa!"
 
2013-04-22 03:15:06 PM

cretinbob: I'll just leave this here.........

Xyphoid:

Pretty disturbing reading how many people want him tortured and/or extrajudicially punished, or just plain wishing suffering upon him.

My opinion, as an American, is I want him afforded every right I'd expect myself as an American. Those rights and the treatment we espouse to be sacred are a significant portion of what makes our country better than many others. As well, my country claims to stand against, and has hung people for, torture/"enhanced interrogation"/increasing suffering (even through inaction). In that regard I also believe any intentional suffering caused upon someone in custody is a crime that should be punished, as is the opinion of the legal system* (*- sadly, your mileage may vary).

My opinion in regard to my faith and as a human being is that no unnecessary suffering (excluding any pain due to life-saving or life-maintaining actions) should come to him, even though I believe he likely did it (to the effect I'd have to sit out of a jury). I also believe that he shouldn't be sentenced to death unless his continued existence, no matter what actions we could possibly undertake, would still pose a threat to innocent life.

Some of you guys should be ashamed of yourselves. Whatever this persons motivations were, you wishing those kinds of things upon him, suggesting you'd be ambivalent to them happening, or wishing you could do it yourself makes you the same kind of person you believe this fellow to be. You don't think terrorists have their own justification, like you, for thinking their actions (or willingness to cause suffering) as right?

/Two Iraq deployments for a year and a half
//Despite being shot at, fellow soldiers injured and killed, poisoned, threatened, insulted and knowing that if I was captured that terrible things would be done to me, 100% of any prisoners or suspects I had control of were treated like human beings. Not just because of my beliefs, but that's how decent and civilized ...


SO MUCH THIS. ^^^

Thanks to being wayyy oversaturated with the background early on, I already understood these guys had citizenship.

The Miranda Rights exceptions bother me, but I'm aware that police "time" the Miranda readings very carefully and to their own advantage, most of the time anyway. That's kind of a foregone conclusion.

When later there was this immediate noise of "Try them as Enemy Combatants!!!111" making the rounds in certain news media, I was incredulous.

They're citizens, try them as citizens to the fullest possible extent of the law and quit even considering extrajudicial nonsense. It worked against Timothy McVeigh, it'll work here.

You don't have to be a frothing conspiracy theorist to want to see others' rights respected as American citizens, however heinous the crime and charges.

Always, always remember:

Rights eroded in the name of prosecutorial fervor will quickly come to bear on the rest of us.
 
2013-04-22 03:15:30 PM

praxcelis: Uchiha_Cycliste: You know what?
I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.
I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.

You're right.  Underneath the thin veneer of civilization we're a bunch of tribal apes.  We've had a lot more practice at being apes.  It's only the decision we make every day that we're not going to give in and pound the crap out of whoever pisses us off that makes us civilized.

We have to remember that it's up to each of us to be better than that.  That we are stronger as a community, that we will deal humanely with the broken examples among us and not revert to our baser selves that is what this whole enlightened civilization thing is all about.  Not about being the alpha ape and being scarier than the other tribe, but about being the example that lights up the darker corners of a world that is still driven more by fear and power-seeking.

As far as the appropriate penalty, I think the best in terms of justice a ...


I feel like this is an over idealized response. We are inching towards a society where people are equals, and we can detach emotion from our judicial responses to horrific acts but we aren't there yet. There is a lot of anger about what these kids did and there is going to be a lot of resentment for a very long time. Just playing devil's advocate here. If letting the limbless beat this kid were able to annihilate the majority of that anger. I'm not talking about beating him to death, I'm not talking about permanently ruining his body, but just a good old fashioned ass whooping was able to satiate the population who right now is rightfully angry and has no where to funnel those feelings isn't it worth considering?  Let's add some silly numbers and scenarios   to the situation: let's say that all that pent up rage results in an uptick in domestic violence and child beatings. Angry people who decided to take out their anger on those close to them because they are cowards and have no other outlet. And let's say a public act of this kid being beaten by the limbs he dismembered were able to prevent those acts of domestic violence. Can you truly say it's still not worth considering?
 
2013-04-22 03:15:59 PM

FarkedOver: starsrift: ManRay: slayer199: He should be tried as an American citizen.

Of course, his defense will blame it on his older brother in an effort to get a reduction.

How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.

It doesn't even really need to be under threat of life. The father returned to Russia, so it seems like Tamerlan was probably the father figure in Dzhokar's life. I dunno. When you're 19 and your family tells you to drop a backpack somewhere, you may not be smart enough to know better.

Be a whole lot easier if the other brother was alive instead of the young one.

Well from reports coming out it seems like the younger bro actually killed his brother by running him over.  That was the death blow, from what i've been hearing.


See, and that's exactly the sort of thing a good defense lawyer could use. Does he kill his brother to strangle evidence? Because he knew his brother would want to go out in a blaze of glory? He hated his brother for putting him this position? He had second thoughts? He just panicked?
 
2013-04-22 03:16:04 PM
letrole: What a disappointment. But at least your high-minded priciples won't suffer as a little girl picks up a booby-trapped doll left at a playground.

vodka zombie: [list of redacted non-sequiters]


I'm not sure about your point.

But if you comb your hair the other way, it may not show as bad.
 
2013-04-22 03:16:11 PM

StatelyGreekAutomaton: This is why there needs to be laws about weapons of -mass- mass destruction, or mass, mass mass destruction. We could get creative with the punishments, what with all the advances in medical tech, too. Imagine, double death penalty. We kill you, bring you back to life to taunt you, then kill you for reals. Also, sterilize your entire family or some shiat.


i236.photobucket.com

Approves.
 
2013-04-22 03:17:41 PM
Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.
 
2013-04-22 03:17:54 PM
Talk of the nation is discussing right now about how these peoples lives are going to change because they are now single or double amputees. It's something I can't imagine going through, and it's something I'm regularly grateful I don't have to worry about.
It's partially why I've pursued this vein of arguments.
 
2013-04-22 03:18:16 PM

letrole: letrole: What a disappointment. But at least your high-minded priciples won't suffer as a little girl picks up a booby-trapped doll left at a playground.

vodka zombie: [list of redacted non-sequiters]


I'm not sure about your point.

But if you comb your hair the other way, it may not show as bad.


Don't worry, sunshine.  If you dream it, it will come true.
 
2013-04-22 03:19:01 PM

keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.


and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list
 
2013-04-22 03:21:42 PM

skullkrusher: keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.

and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list


He'll be locked in a tiny cell deep underground with the worst of the worst where he'll spend 23 hours a day and get one hour a day to go out and get exercise.  He'll basically be cut off from the world, and certainly won't be anybody's biatch.
 
2013-04-22 03:22:36 PM

skullkrusher: keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.

and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list


My guess is he will be spending most of his time in a protective custody unit if he avoids the death penalty.
 
2013-04-22 03:23:31 PM

NostroZ: LordJiro: FarkedOver: gilgigamesh: People get tried on federal charges all the time. Mail fraud, wire fraud, bank robbery, drug importation, RICO... its pretty commonplace. I don't see why its a problem here.

Massachusetts is state that doesn't have the death penalty.  If he is charged federally he will face the death penalty.  I'd rather him not be executed.

This. The death penalty is barbaric; the government should not be in the business of revenge. Keeping him behind bars for the rest of his life should suffice.

/Probably won't happen. Pretty good odds that he gets the needle.

Agreed.
We don't prove how civilized we are by government sanctioned killing of citizens.


We don't prove that taking someone and keeping them in a small room against their room by taking people and putting them in a small room against their will.
 
2013-04-22 03:24:25 PM

keylock71: skullkrusher: keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.

and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list

My guess is he will be spending most of his time in a protective custody unit if he avoids the death penalty.


Hopefully he will be protected from other inmates and himself as we can reasonably assume he has no desire to live considering that reports suggest that his injuries are mostly self inflicted.

Giving him the death penalty is the easy way.  This farker needs to rot.  He then needs to be thrown into an unmarked grave when he dies a slow natural death.
 
2013-04-22 03:24:39 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Well, my point was the term WMD which harkens from the Cold War used to only apply to Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical Weapons. The term seems to have expanded quite a bit since back in the day to now include pressure cooker bombs.

But to your point, that the number of injured or killed dictates mass destruction. Be careful with that kind of stupidity. The cretin in Aurora killed 12 and wounded 50 something with a gun, all on his own. Are guns now WMDs?


It all depends on use. Lobbing a grenade in a fox hole with a terrorist or two is a tactical choice. Lobbing a grenade into a crowded movie theater is mass destruction. I also believe that in the Aurora case that yes, that gun was a weapon of mass destruction. I also live in Aurora and my coworker was shot...so I may be biased.

By the same account, is detonating a Nuke in the middle of the Gobi still mass destruction?
 
2013-04-22 03:25:52 PM

keylock71: skullkrusher: keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.

and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list

My guess is he will be spending most of his time in a protective custody unit if he avoids the death penalty.


spending the rest of your life on lockdown at 19 years of age sounds sufficiently awful
 
2013-04-22 03:26:44 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: I feel like this is an over idealized response. We are inching towards a society where people are equals, and we can detach emotion from our judicial responses to horrific acts but we aren't there yet. There is a lot of anger about what these kids did and there is going to be a lot of resentment for a very long time. Just playing devil's advocate here. If letting the limbless beat this kid were able to annihilate the majority of that anger. I'm not talking about beating him to death, I'm not talking about permanently ruining his body, but just a good old fashioned ass whooping was able to satiate the population who right now is rightfully angry and has no where to funnel those feelings isn't it worth considering? Let's add some silly numbers and scenarios to the situation: let's say that all that pent up rage results in an uptick in domestic violence and child beatings. Angry people who decided to take out their anger on those close to them because they are cowards and have no other outlet. And let's say a public act of this kid being beaten by the limbs he dismembered were able to prevent those acts of domestic violence. Can you truly say it's still not worth considering?


I'm glad you prefaced that with an admission it was a silly conjecture.  If you have to reach that far to justify giving in to atavistic violence then I think that might be a tacit acceptance that it's not worth the stretch.

Yes, I'm an idealist.  There needs to be something worthy to strive for, to keep reminding ourselves that we're members of a civilization.  It's precisely at moments like this that we have to be better than our ape selves.  It's easy to be civilized when things are pleasant and drama-free.  It matters more right now, when our animal natures are screaming for blood to answer for blood.
 
2013-04-22 03:27:10 PM

Treygreen13: You should tell that to the victims who were killed by murderers released from prison who killed again.


Tell them that I'm not responsible for that? Sure thing, chief.

Treygreen13: There has to be more to our justice system than "you did your time, get out there and start murdering again."


There's really quite a bit more to it than that. If you're somehow under the impression that that's all there is to it, I can understand why you're upset.

Treygreen13: Personally, I will never lose a wink of sleep worrying about whether or not the obviously guilty admitted murderers feel distressed as they are lethally injected. If that really bothers you, then campaign against the death penalty all you want.


Who are you talking to here? It can't be me; we've never discussed this subject before.
 
2013-04-22 03:27:13 PM
Tsarnaev, 19, was charged with one count of using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction resulting in death and one count of malicious destruction of property by means of an explosive device resulting in death, according to a statement from the Justice Department.

So then technically, Colin Powell and the Bush Administration was right all along?

Fark me.
 
2013-04-22 03:27:55 PM

Shrugging Atlas: ZAZ: Shrugging Atlas

Quoting my post from yesterday's thread:

For purposes of federal criminal law, a "weapon of mass destruction" includes any "destructive device." 18 USC 2332a. A "destructive device" includes any bomb, grenade, rocket with more than four ounces of propellant, and any projectile launcher with a caliber over .50 inches (except for Attorney General approved shotguns). 18 USC 921. A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.

Ah, thanks for the knowledge.  Sweet christ that's a pretty wide open definition.


Well, it makes sense. Something that can harm a number of people at once would be considered a mass destruction weapon.
 
2013-04-22 03:28:42 PM

skullkrusher: spending the rest of your life on lockdown at 19 years of age sounds sufficiently awful


sounds appropriate for the level of mayhem and scars this brat has inflicted
 
2013-04-22 03:30:57 PM

praxcelis: Uchiha_Cycliste: I feel like this is an over idealized response. We are inching towards a society where people are equals, and we can detach emotion from our judicial responses to horrific acts but we aren't there yet. There is a lot of anger about what these kids did and there is going to be a lot of resentment for a very long time. Just playing devil's advocate here. If letting the limbless beat this kid were able to annihilate the majority of that anger. I'm not talking about beating him to death, I'm not talking about permanently ruining his body, but just a good old fashioned ass whooping was able to satiate the population who right now is rightfully angry and has no where to funnel those feelings isn't it worth considering? Let's add some silly numbers and scenarios to the situation: let's say that all that pent up rage results in an uptick in domestic violence and child beatings. Angry people who decided to take out their anger on those close to them because they are cowards and have no other outlet. And let's say a public act of this kid being beaten by the limbs he dismembered were able to prevent those acts of domestic violence. Can you truly say it's still not worth considering?

I'm glad you prefaced that with an admission it was a silly conjecture.  If you have to reach that far to justify giving in to atavistic violence then I think that might be a tacit acceptance that it's not worth the stretch.

Yes, I'm an idealist.  There needs to be something worthy to strive for, to keep reminding ourselves that we're members of a civilization.  It's precisely at moments like this that we have to be better than our ape selves.  It's easy to be civilized when things are pleasant and drama-free.  It matters more right now, when our animal natures are screaming for blood to answer for blood.


You are reiterating what you said before. And I agree it's one hell of a stretch, but let's work through the thought experiment. Do we deny society as a whole the public catharsis of a righteously (and poetically) administered asswhooping in order to strive for a utopia that is many generations out of our reach. Even at the cost of some innocents we will never hear about that will suffer the brunt of that absent catharsis?
 
2013-04-22 03:30:58 PM

skullkrusher: Vodka Zombie: What the hell else would you try an American citizen as?

sometimes we don't try them at all...

[mycatbirdseat.com image 450x300]


Hey, if you want to go into enemy territory, find the person, arrest them, and drag them back to the US for trial, go right ahead.

If they're in enemy arms and actively working for the enemy, they're enemy combatants and will be dealt with as such.
 
2013-04-22 03:32:12 PM
*sigh*

Once again, to all of the Farkers fantasizing about male rape and prison justice... prisoners in Federal Supermax don't see each other. Ever. No communal dining, exercise, anything. Supermax was created because some inmates had a habit of killing other people while in prison. It's simply not possible in Supermax, where you spend 23 hours a day in 'solitary' and all time outside of that is just you under heavy guard. The place is supposedly quiet as a tomb.
 
2013-04-22 03:32:14 PM

skullkrusher: keylock71: skullkrusher: keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.

and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list

My guess is he will be spending most of his time in a protective custody unit if he avoids the death penalty.

spending the rest of your life on lockdown at 19 years of age sounds sufficiently awful



I was thinking yesterday this is the perfect litmus test for whether or not someone is pro or anti death penalty.  And it's a perfect situation for why I'm pro death penalty (with reforms).  Here, we have all sorts of video shots of this kid committing the crime, there is no doubt of guilt.  And we have a heinous crime for which I bet a lot of people are willing to compromise their stance/morals.

I know you're not, don't mean to imply you are, this back and forth just made me think of that.
 
2013-04-22 03:33:54 PM

skullkrusher: spending the rest of your life on lockdown at 19 years of age sounds sufficiently awful


Indeed... It's basically what they do with the worst of the worst in prison or prisoners in danger of being killed /raped by other prisoners. 23 hour lockdown. No contact at all with any other prisoners. Meals alone in cell. One hour in a small yard by themselves to exersize. Nothing but time to think. Assuming he lives the average life span... 60+ years of that.

I think it's a fitting punishment, myself. (If he's found guilty, of course) He choose to remove himself from society by his actions, so the state will oblige him.


FarkedOver: Giving him the death penalty is the easy way.


It's also barbaric and not befitting a supposedly civilized society, but that's just my opinion.
 
2013-04-22 03:34:32 PM
Good.
 
2013-04-22 03:34:33 PM

letrole: Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?


THAT LEVEL OF BARBARITY IS ONLY ACCEPTABLE WHEN DEALING WITH TROLLS.
 
2013-04-22 03:35:17 PM

cretinbob: ManRay: How about this: My older brother was the mastermind of the bomb plot and trigger man in the shooting. He threatened me with my life if I didn't go along with it. I was hiding out because I was scared and didn't know who to trust.

Except you know, for the video of him dropping the bomb and running.
Court doesn't care about explanations.
Did you do it, or didn't you? That's the question.


Actually, I think you'll find during the sentencing part of the trial "explanations" may save you from lethal injection.  See Terry Nichols, state trial.
 
2013-04-22 03:35:39 PM

SilentStrider: Good.


should done it with a grumpy cat =P
 
2013-04-22 03:35:51 PM

lennavan: skullkrusher: keylock71: skullkrusher: keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.

and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list

My guess is he will be spending most of his time in a protective custody unit if he avoids the death penalty.

spending the rest of your life on lockdown at 19 years of age sounds sufficiently awful

I was thinking yesterday this is the perfect litmus test for whether or not someone is pro or anti death penalty.  And it's a perfect situation for why I'm pro death penalty (with reforms).  Here, we have all sorts of video shots of this kid committing the crime, there is no doubt of guilt.  And we have a heinous crime for which I bet a lot of people are willing to compromise their stance/morals.

I know you're not, don't mean to imply you are, this back and forth just made me think of that.


still opposed to it but from a philosophical-spiritual perspective, not because of any doubt about his guilt. I don't like people being killed in my name unnecessarily. Life in prison with no chance of seeing the outside again makes his death unnecessary imo
 
2013-04-22 03:37:49 PM

keylock71: FarkedOver: Giving him the death penalty is the easy way.

It's also barbaric and not befitting a supposedly civilized society, but that's just my opinion.


Oh that too.  But killing him is playing into his hand.  He will be dead probably by the time he is 30ish if he gets the needle.
 
2013-04-22 03:38:17 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: You are reiterating what you said before. And I agree it's one hell of a stretch, but let's work through the thought experiment. Do we deny society as a whole the public catharsis of a righteously (and poetically) administered asswhooping in order to strive for a utopia that is many generations out of our reach. Even at the cost of some innocents we will never hear about that will suffer the brunt of that absent catharsis?


Yes, we do deny it.  That was the point I was making.  We're supposed to be better than that.

Fantasize about bloody limb-beating all you like--I never said it was possible to eliminate our animal inside, it's what makes us human after all--but the moment you put that into practice you've demonstrated you're just as broken.
 
2013-04-22 03:39:12 PM
I have to agree, at this point 'WMD' has no meaning.
 
2013-04-22 03:42:03 PM

thurstonxhowell: Tell them that I'm not responsible for that? Sure thing, chief.


Ok. When Laylah Crawford of Cleveland grows up, email her. She's 5 now, but she'll be old enough one day. Tell her that the man who was paroled from a murder charge and then shot her mother and 4 of her family members in the head was not the fault of the justice system and there was nothing that could have been done to stop it.

thurstonxhowell: There's really quite a bit more to it than that. If you're somehow under the impression that that's all there is to it, I can understand why you're upset.


I understand there's more to it. That's why my original assertion in this thread that the death penalty is more than a black and white (right or wrong) issue is wrong. A lot goes into it.

thurstonxhowell: Who are you talking to here? It can't be me; we've never discussed this subject before.


One of you guys who I'm discussing with. It's hard to keep all the different aspects of this discussion straight since I'm arguing different facets with different people.
 
2013-04-22 03:42:45 PM

skullkrusher: still opposed to it but from a philosophical-spiritual perspective, not because of any doubt about his guilt. I don't like people being killed in my name unnecessarily. Life in prison with no chance of seeing the outside again makes his death unnecessary imo


Yeah that just seems to be the most common argument against it - doubt about guilt.  This eliminates that, so we can get straight at the philosophical-spiritual perspective.  So anyone willing to make an exception here has no philosophical beef with the death penalty.

I'd like to see him executed but don't feel that strongly.  They tried for more but only got 4 people and he's only 19, so he's still a stupid teenager.  I'd get over a life in prison sentence.
 
2013-04-22 03:45:10 PM
Have fun rotting at ADX Florence, dirtbag.
 
2013-04-22 03:45:47 PM
Well, using McVey as a guide,  Saturday, June 8, 2019  will be the day this farker gets a bolus of  Sodium thiopental.....
 
2013-04-22 03:46:21 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: Well, it makes sense. Something that can harm a number of people at once would be considered a mass destruction weapon.


Really though?  Are guns WMDs?  What about the model of planes flown into WTC 1 and 2?  A car driven by an 80 year old anywhere near a Farmer's Market?

I wouldn't consider them WMDs because I think the argument pivots to the intent of the item.  Planes and cars aren't designed to kill people, but what about guns?  If we're talking explosives, what about standard explosives used in highway construction?

Look at Sandy Hook.  26 dead in minutes through the use of a single weapon.  How is that not Mass Destruction?  And look at the impact...a nation further divided over yet another issue.  Talk of armed guards in schools, increased survelliance.

I'll be honest...I'm not sure where I'm going with this.  My original comment was just to point out the rather odd evolution of the term WMD from back in the day when I worked in the field and we were talking fusion bombs to now where it seems to include potato guns.
 
2013-04-22 03:49:18 PM
Good.

He's accused of blowing up an sweet 8 year old boy, two beautiful young women and a cop. Good luck with that...

Oh, I find it nice that this jackwad will also spend his time in jail until his execution by being maimed, injured and unable to speak.

funny-pictures-blog.com
 
2013-04-22 03:50:21 PM

FarkedOver: keylock71: FarkedOver: Giving him the death penalty is the easy way.

It's also barbaric and not befitting a supposedly civilized society, but that's just my opinion.

Oh that too.  But killing him is playing into his hand.  He will be dead probably by the time he is 30ish if he gets the needle.


They executed McVeigh a lot faster than that.  Odds are this toad will meet the same fate strapped to the same gurney.
 
2013-04-22 03:51:16 PM
Oh no...does this mean we can't torture him?  That's not fair!!
 
2013-04-22 03:51:40 PM

letrole: What a disappointment.

But at least your high-minded priciples won't suffer as a little girl picks up a booby-trapped doll left at a playground.


Torture is far less reliable than standard, LEGAL interrogation methods anyway. So take your Jack Bauer fetish and stuff it, troll.
 
2013-04-22 03:53:32 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: demaL-demaL-yeH: Uchiha_Cycliste: You know what?
I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.
I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.

Thomas Hobbes would like a word with you  r u, uncivilized ass.
FTFM

You know what, I thin kI'm gonna do my work and casually check in on fark instead of reading a several hundred year old tome that may or may not be relevant. Why don't you make an argument about why I'm wrong instead of directing me toward something that else.


Look at your question.
Since you asked it in the first damned place, I pointed you to a complete, clearly-delineated answer.
It's one of the basic documents at the very foundation of the Enlightenment,

/and you are in sore need of enlightenment.
//And Jean-Jacques Rousseau, but baby steps.
 
2013-04-22 03:53:44 PM

hinten: What does his citizenship to do with anything?


Think of his civil rights as a seesaw. On one side you have two smaller boulders - he's not brown enough (usually anything below Pantone 17-1128 TCX counts as "white" in America), and also he's a US citizen. On the other side there's only a single boulder, but it's bigger - he's definitely Muslim. So it's tough deciding on where things balance in this case as far as what rights he should have...
 
2013-04-22 03:56:24 PM

Treygreen13: thurstonxhowell: Tell them that I'm not responsible for that? Sure thing, chief.

Ok. When Laylah Crawford of Cleveland grows up, email her. She's 5 now, but she'll be old enough one day. Tell her that the man who was paroled from a murder charge and then shot her mother and 4 of her family members in the head was not the fault of the justice system and there was nothing that could have been done to stop it.



rubbercat.net

It really sounds like you've made your case. I mean, I must be the asshole here, what with not thinking of the children and all. Except for how you're a farking liar you farking asshole. Davon Crawford was in not way on parole for murder charges. Because he was never charged with murder. You made that up. It sounds real bad in your story based on real events. Speaking of those real events, why don't you go tell little Laylah how you felt so bad for her you chose to use her a prop to make other people feel bad?
 
2013-04-22 03:57:06 PM

Fubar: Texas


This. What I have been saying from day one.
Will the same kind of money and manpower be used in that case? I don't think so.

On the other hand, at least the US won't restrict its already piddling civil rights any further because of the Texas explosion.
 
2013-04-22 03:57:31 PM
AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

are you retarded?
 
2013-04-22 03:58:57 PM

hinten: What does his citizenship to do with anything?


well, it doesn't. however, if he were a tea party patriot named fred johnson, i guarantee lindsey graham wouldn't be asking him to be charged as an "enemy combatant." so i'm guessing his citizenship was mentioned to reinforce this fact.
 
2013-04-22 03:59:26 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Uchiha_Cycliste: demaL-demaL-yeH: Uchiha_Cycliste: You know what?
I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.
I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.

Thomas Hobbes would like a word with you  r u, uncivilized ass.
FTFM

You know what, I thin kI'm gonna do my work and casually check in on fark instead of reading a several hundred year old tome that may or may not be relevant. Why don't you make an argument about why I'm wrong instead of directing me toward something that else.

Look at your question.
Since you asked it in the first damned place, I pointed you to a complete, clearly-delineated answer.
It's one of the basic documents at the very foundation of the Enlightenment,

/and you are in sore need of enlightenment.
//And Jean-Jacques Rousseau, but baby steps.


Well demonstrate to me you understand the argument and apply it to the situation to answer my question. If I wanted to be lazy I would just point the people talking about prison rape and punishment to Foucault's "birth of the prison" if I wanted top be helpful I'd incorporate his major points to make a cogent argument about America's rape culture.
 
2013-04-22 04:00:18 PM

Treygreen13: thurstonxhowell: Tell them that I'm not responsible for that? Sure thing, chief.

Ok. When Laylah Crawford of Cleveland grows up, email her. She's 5 now, but she'll be old enough one day. Tell her that the man who was paroled from a murder charge and then shot her mother and 4 of her family members in the head was not the fault of the justice system and there was nothing that could have been done to stop it.


Fact fail. He had never been convicted of murder. He served time in the 90's for manslaughter, but was most recently in for assault with a firearm, and would have been out by then regardless.
 
2013-04-22 04:00:40 PM
Also, you don't help your argument by opening up calling me an uncivilized ass and then saying... cuz that old guy says so. What incentive do I have to follow your link in that situation?
 
2013-04-22 04:01:20 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Keizer_Ghidorah: Well, it makes sense. Something that can harm a number of people at once would be considered a mass destruction weapon.

Really though?  Are guns WMDs?  What about the model of planes flown into WTC 1 and 2?  A car driven by an 80 year old anywhere near a Farmer's Market?

I wouldn't consider them WMDs because I think the argument pivots to the intent of the item.  Planes and cars aren't designed to kill people, but what about guns?  If we're talking explosives, what about standard explosives used in highway construction?

Look at Sandy Hook.  26 dead in minutes through the use of a single weapon.  How is that not Mass Destruction?  And look at the impact...a nation further divided over yet another issue.  Talk of armed guards in schools, increased survelliance.

I'll be honest...I'm not sure where I'm going with this.  My original comment was just to point out the rather odd evolution of the term WMD from back in the day when I worked in the field and we were talking fusion bombs to now where it seems to include potato guns.


I will agree the definition has gotten murky.
 
2013-04-22 04:01:56 PM

Antimatter: StatelyGreekAutomaton: Also, sterilize your entire family or some shiat.

that's actually banned directly by the Constitution.  You don't punish anyone but the criminal in question.


Oh, so when you want to ignore the constitution it's cool, but the minute I suggest it "Oh lordy, lordy".

Geez. Thanks, Obama.
 
2013-04-22 04:06:06 PM

FlashHarry: the kid is guilty as hell, but justice must be served.


Yep, and yep. If we don't stick to the rule of law, what's the point of claiming that our nation has the rule of law?

He's an American citizen. He needs to be treated like one. We've tortured enough Americans this decade.
 
2013-04-22 04:07:03 PM

praxcelis: Uchiha_Cycliste: You are reiterating what you said before. And I agree it's one hell of a stretch, but let's work through the thought experiment. Do we deny society as a whole the public catharsis of a righteously (and poetically) administered asswhooping in order to strive for a utopia that is many generations out of our reach. Even at the cost of some innocents we will never hear about that will suffer the brunt of that absent catharsis?

Yes, we do deny it.  That was the point I was making.  We're supposed to be better than that.

Fantasize about bloody limb-beating all you like--I never said it was possible to eliminate our animal inside, it's what makes us human after all--but the moment you put that into practice you've demonstrated you're just as broken.


This I see, and it's why I created a scenario distinct from a pure revenge situation. By denying the public beating other innocent people will suffer. It's wacky and unrealistic, but it's the framework of the argument and scenario. I can see pure revenge as being detestable, I also feel that if the act of punishment results in a whole bunch of steam being blown off that would otherwise be turned towards those that don't deserve it, it's not something that should be dismissed out of hand. Convince me that a punishment restricted to incarceration is morally defensible even when it will result in unconnected actors will suffer instead to release that pressure.
 
2013-04-22 04:08:39 PM
 I got into a debate on facebook with a woman who didn't want to give him a trial.  What is wrong with people?   I told her it was un-American.  She said she wasn't un-American because her kid was in the Navy.  lulz
 
2013-04-22 04:09:51 PM

skullkrusher: keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.

and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list


What is it with you sick farks that you get off so hard on the idea of prison rape?
 
2013-04-22 04:11:39 PM

Purdue_Pete: He's accused of blowing up an sweet 8 year old boy, two beautiful young women and a cop.


Try not to weasel things up by playing Daily Mail with your sentences.
 
2013-04-22 04:12:03 PM

thurstonxhowell: Treygreen13: thurstonxhowell: Tell them that I'm not responsible for that? Sure thing, chief.

Ok. When Laylah Crawford of Cleveland grows up, email her. She's 5 now, but she'll be old enough one day. Tell her that the man who was paroled from a murder charge and then shot her mother and 4 of her family members in the head was not the fault of the justice system and there was nothing that could have been done to stop it.


[rubbercat.net image 120x120]

It really sounds like you've made your case. I mean, I must be the asshole here, what with not thinking of the children and all. Except for how you're a farking liar you farking asshole. Davon Crawford was in not way on parole for murder charges. Because he was never charged with murder. You made that up. It sounds real bad in your story based on real events. Speaking of those real events, why don't you go tell little Laylah how you felt so bad for her you chose to use her a prop to make other people feel bad?


Davon Crawford  plea bargained down to manslaughter after murdering someone. Then he shot at his wife who was holding their child. Not to mention trying to murder two police officers with a car two years prior.  The justice system failed him, and all of society, by letting a man who attempted to end 5 lives (and succeeded with one) out of prison so that he could kill 5 people and himself.
 
2013-04-22 04:12:16 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: Convince me that a punishment restricted to incarceration is morally defensible even when it will result in unconnected actors will suffer instead to release that pressure.


Convince me that utilitarian arguments are the only valid moral arguments first, because otherwise the actions of others are their own moral issues independent of what society does to this individual.
 
2013-04-22 04:12:44 PM
pipe bombs are WMDs now?  Iraq really did have WMDs, everyone.  Bush was right!
 
2013-04-22 04:13:59 PM

Electrify: mass casualties


...

Three people died.

"Casualties" is a term that includes both death and injury.  It sometimes gets mistaken as meaning deaths in modern usage, but the true meaning is more along the lines of "people who can't help on the battlefield anymore."
 
2013-04-22 04:14:33 PM

Great Janitor: I would hope that everyone in the U.S. would be in more than a tizzy about Obama assuming dictatorial powers...


Alas, the issue will break along ideological/party lines.

I'm not happy about it either, but there it is.
 
2013-04-22 04:15:01 PM

HMS_Blinkin: Subby said he was a citizen (not a legal alien as I had thought), and I was wondering if that was really the case. Unless I'm wrong, and I well could be since IANAL, I was under the impression that citizens and non-citizens were treated differently in the law.


There are differences, like entering the country, voting, and 2 or 3 other things. But for the most part, the Constitution protects the rights of "persons," not "citizens." With respect to criminal prosecution, the only difference is that non-citizens can be deported.

 
2013-04-22 04:16:16 PM

CheatCommando: skullkrusher: keylock71: Think the best outcome this kid can hope for is Life Without Parole...

If he truly is guilty, then I want him to live the rest of his miserable life in prison and be reminded daily he is nothing more than a murderer and a coward.

and the fact that he's slight and pretty, you can probably add "biatch" to that list

What is it with you sick farks that you get off so hard on the idea of prison rape?


I don't. We are talking about how miserable his life will be even if he is not executed. Rape is pretty miserable. What is it with you nimrods that you read shiat that isn't there?
 
2013-04-22 04:17:08 PM
Good he's standing trial.  Anything otherwise is cowardice on our parts.
 
2013-04-22 04:18:05 PM

Daedalus27: NostroZ: dallylamma: [farm4.static.flickr.com image 479x383]

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.

Why do we as American citizens tolerate RAPE in prison?
If there's a CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment, it's to be PHYSICALLY RAPED while you're in the "custody of the government".

Seriously people.
Prison rape in the USA is a casual joke... about human rights abuse!!!

I would say we tolerate it not so much because most we want to (regardless of the callous comments), but rather because it is difficult and almost impossible to stop.  Prisoners do not typically bring a complaint about rape because that is against the norms of prisoners to cooperate with prison officials against other inmate.  Usually it results in an attempt on the life of the inmate for cooperation.  So the rapes occur and there is nothing that can be done (Wrong) because there is no cooperation with any investigation (assuming officials know something was going on). No one outside ignorant individuals in jest really wants crime to occur in prisons, it is just so darn hard to stop it because prisons are full of criminals who typically don't obey rules or cooperate with law enforcement to solve crimes.

TL:DR Rapes don't happen because snitches get stitches.


Wrong.  It is PREVENTABLE.
The US has had a culture of abuse in their prisons.  Even though it is the world's LARGEST prison system.
If we truly value human rights, prison rape would not be a joking matter.
 
2013-04-22 04:22:14 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


Saying any bomb is a WMD is ridiculous.

Is a hand grenade a "weapon of mass destruction?" If so, then obviously Saddam did have WMD after all.

And, if an improvised bomb is indeed a WMD, then shouldn't we track the explosive material that could be used for them - you know, like we do with ammonium nitrate?

Ammonium nitrate is good as a fertilizer and an explosive. Gunpowder is for bullets and explosives, so naturally we can't do any proactive regarding that.

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/436-2nd-amendment-rights/170 46 -how-the-nra-impeded-the-boston-bomber-investigation
The inability to quickly track the gunpowders in the Boston bombs is due to government policy designed and promoted by the NRA, which has found a way to transform every massacre associated with weapons into an opportunity for the munitions companies that sustain it to sell more guns, gunpowder and bullets.

The price for such delays was put on terrible display Friday morning when the two brothers, who had been caught on video placing the bombs, killed one police officer, wounded another and carjacked a motorist, creating conditions so unsafe that the 7th largest population center in America spent Friday on lockdown.

But for the NRA-backed policy of not putting identifiers known as taggants in gunpowder, law enforcement could have quickly identified the explosives used to make the bombs, tracking them from manufacture to retail sale. That could well have saved the life of Sean Collier, the 26-year-old MIT police officer who was gunned down Thursday night by the fleeing bomb suspects.

If Tsarnaev had escaped on Friday, the NRA (and the GOP) would have been fine with him buying additional weapons without a background check. And if we didn't have numerous photos and videos to identify the bombers, they could very well be out and causing more death today, since there would have been no way to track the explosives they used..
 
2013-04-22 04:23:10 PM

CheatCommando: Uchiha_Cycliste: Convince me that a punishment restricted to incarceration is morally defensible even when it will result in unconnected actors will suffer instead to release that pressure.

Convince me that utilitarian arguments are the only valid moral arguments first, because otherwise the actions of others are their own moral issues independent of what society does to this individual.


this... is a good counter argument. One that I think was rattling around the back of my mind and refused to come forward. I'll need some time to see if I can further defend my scenario.
 
2013-04-22 04:24:03 PM
now lets break open that glow stick and pour it in homestarrunner's mountain dew.


\I hear they have to pump your stomach.
 
2013-04-22 04:25:04 PM

Silverstaff: The idea of just locking somebody up for a long time doesn't seem like much of a punishment though. They get food, and shelter, and medical care, and probably a TV and a gym too. They won't have to worry about losing their job and thus their home and health insurance, they won't have to worry about the cost of living or commuting to work. People want prison to be something to fear, to be scared of, and just going into a safe, clean, well built and orderly prison where there is no real risk of brutal violence seems. . .not much to fear at all compared to everyday life.

The idea of prison rape, that seems to add the "Karmic justice" factor. As a people, we would never officially sanction this, we'd never sentence people to be raped. . .but if some criminal gets brutalized by his fellow degenerates for being bad even by their standards (much like it's common knowledge that pedophiles get the worst treatment in prison), we feel better knowing justice was served. Jeffrey Dahmer eluded the death penalty for his cannibalistic serial-killer spree. . .so a fellow inmate killed him, and no tears were shed.


Right.
Prison Rape is a tool of fear to keep people in line.
Something like 200,000 a year and its only now slowly getting ANY voice to stop.
It's wrong. It's not what the justice system is supposed to represent.
It shows a disregard for that very justice that is supposed to be served when someone can be killed in prison and we say good.
 
2013-04-22 04:27:45 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.


If the pressure cooker was made out of state, it falls under the interstate commerce clause according to the government.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/amish-prosecuted-because-scissors-crossed -s tate-lines/

Yes, this is how farking ridiculous our federal government is.
 
2013-04-22 04:27:48 PM

LordJiro: letrole: letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.
Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.


Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?

Yes.

/24 is not a farking documentary.
//Nobody buys the "it's a surname' bullshiat, troll.


Seriously. Isn't there a "bash homos" thread on Fark somewhere?.
 
2013-04-22 04:28:41 PM

NostroZ: Wrong. It is PREVENTABLE.
The US has had a culture of abuse in their prisons. Even though it is the world's LARGEST prison system.
If we truly value human rights, prison rape would not be a joking matter.


You say that as though criminals in this country were treated as anything better than human cattle by a system more interested in profiting in warehousing than trying to rehab those that are saveable.

Yes, there are quite a few people that deserve to be, at the very least, sent to a deserted island in the subartic where no ships ever go and left to their own devices. But our criminal justice system sends just as many young men and women to jail for minor crimes that really should be handled in a different fashion who come out institutionalized because by now they have no other skills than crime and the abuse just makes them that much less willing to follow the rules to get by when they find out that ex cons have very few options post-prison.

Of course, this is a country that has fallen into the ideology that the only way to stop bad behavior is to be spanked harder rather than spending the time and energy to figure out if it's a spanking that is needed or if the person doing the crime should be given alternatives.
 
2013-04-22 04:30:22 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: this... is a good counter argument. One that I think was rattling around the back of my mind and refused to come forward. I'll need some time to see if I can further defend my scenario.


heh. that's pretty interesting. i have an essay in my mind to write about how people who truly believe in science would let people pee in their sinks. I'll let you know when I'm done.
 
2013-04-22 04:30:32 PM
He's a US citizen, protected by the Constitution. End of story. He wasn't a combatant in the theater of war, he is accused of committing a single violent act of terrorism on the streets of Boston.

We start down the slippery slope of deciding citizens are not protected by the rule of law because the are accused of doing something especially heinous we open Pandora's box. When we start calling citizens "enemy combatants" we start to give up everything that the Bill of Rights were written for. It may seem harmless now, only using a reduced justice system on enemy combatants  or terrorists as we know them now, but it is not hard to see some future administration come in different or varied criteria as to what is a terrorist act and could possibly strip anyone who does not agree with the government of their due process rights.

As to the questioning without Miranda, all it means, at worse, is that prosecutors may be prevented from using whatever he may tell them when his trial starts.
 
2013-04-22 04:33:15 PM
Thanks, Obama.

No, really.
 
2013-04-22 04:36:47 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?
I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.

Thomas Hobbes would like a word with you  r u, uncivilized ass.
FTFM

You know what, I thin kI'm gonna do my work and casually check in on fark instead of reading a several hundred year old tome that may or may not be relevant. Why don't you make an argument about why I'm wrong instead of directing me toward something that else.

Look at your question.
Since you asked it in the first damned place, I pointed you to a complete, clearly-delineated answer.
It's one of the basic documents at the very foundation of the Enlightenment,
/and you are in sore need of enlightenment.
//And Jean-Jacques Rousseau, but baby steps.

Well demonstrate to me you understand the argument and apply it to the situation to answer my question. If I wanted to be lazy I would just point the people talking about prison rape and punishment to Foucault's "birth of the prison" if I wanted top be helpful I'd incorporate his major points to make a cogent argument about America's rape culture.


To quote Hobbes, where he speaks of justice and the laws of nature:

A seventh is,  that in revenges, that is, retribution of evil for evil,  men look not at the greatness of the evil past, but the greatness of the good to follow. Whereby we are forbidden to inflict punishment with any other design, than for correction of the offender, or direction of others. For this law is consequent to the next before it, that commandeth pardon, upon security of the future time. Besides, revenge without respect to the example, and profit to come, is a triumph, or glorying in the hurt of another, tending to no end; for the end is always somewhat to come; and glorying to no end, is vain-glory, and contrary to reason, and to hurt without reason, tendeth to the introduction of war; which is against the law of nature; and is commonly styled by the name of  cruelty.


And because all signs of hatred, or contempt, provoke to fight; insomuch as most men choose rather to hazard their life, than not to be revenged; we may in the eighth place, for a law of nature, set down this precept,  that no man by deed, word, countenance, or gesture, declare hatred, or contempt of another. The breach of which law, is commonly called  contumely.


/Now go and study.
 
2013-04-22 04:37:08 PM

JohnBigBootay: Uchiha_Cycliste: this... is a good counter argument. One that I think was rattling around the back of my mind and refused to come forward. I'll need some time to see if I can further defend my scenario.

heh. that's pretty interesting. i have an essay in my mind to write about how people who truly believe in science would let people pee in their sinks. I'll let you know when I'm done.


Heh, I think you would enjoy John FInnemore's souvenoir program and a skit involving Vegemite flavored toothpaste.

\just trust me on this one.
 
2013-04-22 04:37:12 PM

Bravo Two: NostroZ: Wrong. It is PREVENTABLE.
The US has had a culture of abuse in their prisons. Even though it is the world's LARGEST prison system.
If we truly value human rights, prison rape would not be a joking matter.

You say that as though criminals in this country were treated as anything better than human cattle by a system more interested in profiting in warehousing than trying to rehab those that are saveable.

Yes, there are quite a few people that deserve to be, at the very least, sent to a deserted island in the subartic where no ships ever go and left to their own devices. But our criminal justice system sends just as many young men and women to jail for minor crimes that really should be handled in a different fashion who come out institutionalized because by now they have no other skills than crime and the abuse just makes them that much less willing to follow the rules to get by when they find out that ex cons have very few options post-prison.

Of course, this is a country that has fallen into the ideology that the only way to stop bad behavior is to be spanked harder rather than spending the time and energy to figure out if it's a spanking that is needed or if the person doing the crime should be given alternatives.


The prison system is a modern outstretch of the slave labor concept.
Slaves in the past were usually losers of wars, or sold by their tribes, or couldn't pay their debts, etc. "outcasts / subservient in society"

The need for CHEAP LABOR has been the backbone of this country and prison is just a way for license plates to get made and now an expanding amount of other goods too.  Therefore, the prison system is too seductive to the way things get done in a capitalistic enterprise.

I would argue that in a lot of cases capitalism and Democracy are not compatible.
 
2013-04-22 04:38:08 PM

ManateeGag: HMS_Blinkin: He's a citizen?  I thought I read that he had a green card, and was a legal immigrant, but not a US citizen.

Or is that just CNN/NYPost being derpy again?

He took the oath in september.


If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?
 
2013-04-22 04:39:44 PM

TheShavingofOccam123: LordJiro: letrole: letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.
Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.


Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?

Yes.

/24 is not a farking documentary.
//Nobody buys the "it's a surname' bullshiat, troll.

Seriously. Isn't there a "bash homos" thread on Fark somewhere?.


First, for me, it'd depend on the kind of bomb. If it was a nuke somewhere in NY? fark it. I'll hook up the goddamn testical clamps myself.

Secondly, this needs to be repeated because of retarded bullshiat that keeps coming up:

Miranda Rights are a colloquial term that encompasses all of the rights provided by the BoR to a person accused of a crime.  They always apply to citizens in the civilian justice system. Similar laws apply under the UCMJ, but I digress.

What the cops did not give to the bomber is a Miranda WARNING. This is basically reading the suspect a notification of what his rights are, not an invocation that grants that person his or her rights.

Just because the police were ordered not to tell the subject what his rights were (Since I presume they were holding off on charging him and shoving him into a criminal court vs. sending him to gitmo until they had more data on what his crimes and affiliations were, and in hopes that they could get him to talk before they lowered the hammer and got lawyers involved), does not mean that that invalidates or somehow removes the subject's rights under the law. At any time he could have retained an attorney, and at any time since first contact with a cop, he could have requested legal council, as his his right. He could at any time invoke his fifth amendment right to not incriminate himself and remain silent.

Whatever level of knowledge he had of his rights, they continued to apply.
 
2013-04-22 04:43:31 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Uchiha_Cycliste: Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?
I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.

Thomas Hobbes would like a word with you  r u, uncivilized ass.
FTFM

You know what, I thin kI'm gonna do my work and casually check in on fark instead of reading a several hundred year old tome that may or may not be relevant. Why don't you make an argument about why I'm wrong instead of directing me toward something that else.

Look at your question.
Since you asked it in the first damned place, I pointed you to a complete, clearly-delineated answer.
It's one of the basic documents at the very foundation of the Enlightenment,
/and you are in sore need of enlightenment.
//And Jean-Jacques Rousseau, but baby steps.

Well demonstrate to me you understand the argument and apply it to the situation to answer my question. If I wanted to be lazy I would just point the people talking about prison rape and punishment to Foucault's "birth of the prison" if I wanted top be helpful I'd incorporate his major points to make a cogent argument about America's rape culture.

To quote Hobbes, where he speaks of justice and the laws of nature:

A seventh is,  that in revenges, that is, retribution of evil for evil,  men look not at the greatness of the evil past, but the greatness of the good to follow. Whereby we are forbidden to inflict punishment with any other design, than for correction of the offender, or direction of others. For this law is consequent to the next before it, that commandeth pardon, upon security of the future time. Besides, revenge without respect to the example, and profit to come, is a triumph, or glorying in the hurt of another, tending to no end; for the end is always somewhat to come; and glorying to no end, is vain-glory, and contrary to reason, and to hurt without reason, tendeth to the introduction of war; which is against the law of nature; and is commonly styled by the name of  cruelty.


A ...


So on the first order, revenge results in vendettas that soon lose sight of their origin and become self sustaining.
On the second order, the capacity to recognize the revenge is not necessary but merely desirable is an important aspect of self-awareness where in the triumph of mans compassion over his baser instincts is all that keeps society stable.

OTOH, but shiat man! He REALLY deserves to get his ass-whooped.  tough call =/
 
2013-04-22 04:43:42 PM

Cybernetic: ManateeGag: HMS_Blinkin: He's a citizen?  I thought I read that he had a green card, and was a legal immigrant, but not a US citizen.

Or is that just CNN/NYPost being derpy again?

He took the oath in september.

If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?


Sort of hard to prove that he took the oath of citizenship in order to use the privileges to aid in committing an act of terror, though. Especially considering the other conspirator succeeded in the attack without his citizenship.
 
2013-04-22 04:44:14 PM

damageddude: He's a US citizen, protected by the Constitution. End of story. He wasn't a combatant in the theater of war, he is accused of committing a single violent act of terrorism on the streets of Boston.

We start down the slippery slope of deciding citizens are not protected by the rule of law because the are accused of doing something especially heinous we open Pandora's box. When we start calling citizens "enemy combatants" we start to give up everything that the Bill of Rights were written for. It may seem harmless now, only using a reduced justice system on enemy combatants  or terrorists as we know them now, but it is not hard to see some future administration come in different or varied criteria as to what is a terrorist act and could possibly strip anyone who does not agree with the government of their due process rights.

As to the questioning without Miranda, all it means, at worse, is that prosecutors may be prevented from using whatever he may tell them when his trial starts.


You do realize that even during the Civil War, Lincoln suspended the rule of habeas corpus and all that for captured southerners and southern combatants, right?
 
2013-04-22 04:46:20 PM

HMS_Blinkin: He's a citizen?  I thought I read that he had a green card, and was a legal immigrant, but not a US citizen.

Or is that just CNN/NYPost being derpy again?


casventures.webstarts.com
 
2013-04-22 04:47:25 PM

Cybernetic: If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?


Why would you even want that in the first place?
 
2013-04-22 04:49:53 PM

Bravo Two: damageddude:

You do realize that even during the Civil War, Lincoln suspended the rule of habeas corpus and all that for captured southerners and southern combatants, right?


Actually, he just suspended it for everybody.  Lots of folks got their butts thrown in prison with no charges on suspicion alone.  But, there was a pretty good war on at the tiem, IIRC.
 
2013-04-22 04:51:30 PM

Bravo Two: TheShavingofOccam123: LordJiro: letrole: letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.
Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.


Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?

Yes.

/24 is not a farking documentary.
//Nobody buys the "it's a surname' bullshiat, troll.

Seriously. Isn't there a "bash homos" thread on Fark somewhere?.

First, for me, it'd depend on the kind of bomb. If it was a nuke somewhere in NY? fark it. I'll hook up the goddamn testical clamps myself.

Secondly, this needs to be repeated because of retarded bullshiat that keeps coming up:

Miranda Rights are a colloquial term that encompasses all of the rights provided by the BoR to a person accused of a crime.  They always apply to citizens in the civilian justice system. Similar laws apply under the UCMJ, but I digress.

What the cops did not give to the bomber is a Miranda WARNING. This is basically reading the suspect a notification of what his rights are, not an invocation that grants that person his or her rights.

Just because the police were ordered not to tell the subject what his rights were (Since I presume they were holding off on chargin ...


by avoiding giving him the warning, they were implicitly guaranteeing him that nothing he said could be used to prosecute him. It is basically a protection in exchange for actionable information. You're right though, at any time he could have stopped talking and asked for a lawyer.
 
2013-04-22 04:53:56 PM

skullkrusher: Eirik: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

I wouldn't say zero.  Couldn't the state choose to prosecute when the feds are done with him for state level crimes?  If he somehow is found not guilty of the fed charges, couldn't the state indict?  Even go through with it, just to have the sentence in place if he's ever given federal parole?  For example, the murder of the MIT police officer.  I suspect he won't be charged with that by the feds, but the state could if they so chose.

I'd imagine that MA could try him on charges in addition to the Fed charges but it certainly won't be in lieu of Fed charges. I am pretty sure double jeopardy would apply if he were first acquitted federally and then retried locally for the same crimes


Double jeopardy only applies within the same sovereignty. The Feds and the State of Massachusetts are different sovereignties, so double jeopardy does not apply. He could be charged with the same crime in both court systems and tried in both systems.

Practically, the Feds do not pursue charges against people acquitted in state court for the same charges, unless there are abnormalities during the trial (bribery of jury/court officials).
 
2013-04-22 04:54:00 PM

HMS_Blinkin: ManateeGag:He took the oath in september.

Ah, thank you.

Warlordtrooper: Does it matter? The military is not for things inside the us

Subby said he was a citizen (not a legal alien as I had thought), and I was wondering if that was really the case.  Unless I'm wrong, and I well could be since IANAL, I was under the impression that citizens and non-citizens were treated differently in the law.  I'm not implying he ought to be given a military trial---the question was more a matter of what KIND of civilian trial should he get?  Since he's officially a citizen that negates the question anyway.


No we are not treated differently. I (a resident alien) am just as entitled to the protections afforded by the Constitution as you are.
 
2013-04-22 04:54:05 PM
I was a hard core patriot for 30 years, even did an honorable stint in the Marine Corps.  The last 14 years of government, however, have completely purged that from me.  From the black hole of Gitmo, to the Department of Fatherland, errr, Homeland Security, to warrantless wiretaps, to having an actual discussion about whether or not the President should be allowed to Kill List American citizens, and such a large section of the population actually believing in "the most transparent Presidency in history..."   well, I don't have much hope any more that we can pull out of this.  The people are too willfully and stubbornly ignorant and the government is too willing to cash in on that.

The concept of "America" is dead and gone.
 
2013-04-22 04:56:28 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: So on the first order, revenge results in vendettas that soon lose sight of their origin and become self sustaining.
On the second order, the capacity to recognize the revenge is not necessary but merely desirable is an important aspect of self-awareness where in the triumph of mans compassion over his baser instincts is all that keeps society stable.

OTOH, but shiat man! He REALLY deserves to get his ass-whooped.  tough call =/


No. That is not justice:
On this law, dependeth another,  that at the entrance into conditions of peace, no man require to reserve to himself any right, which he is not content should be reserved to every one of the rest. As it is necessary for all men that seek peace, to lay down certain rights of nature; that is to say, not to have liberty to do all they list: so is it necessary for man's life, to retain some; as right to govern their own bodies; enjoy air, water, motion, ways to go from place to place; and all things else, without which a man cannot live, or not live well. If in this case, at the making of peace, men require for themselves, that which they would not have to be granted to others, they do contrary to the precedent law, that commandeth the acknowledgment of natural equality, and therefore also against the law of nature.

/Plus, you know, that whole Amendment VIII thing.
 
2013-04-22 04:56:47 PM

Moopy Mac: skullkrusher: Eirik: skullkrusher: FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.

There is quite literally zero chance of that happening.

I wouldn't say zero.  Couldn't the state choose to prosecute when the feds are done with him for state level crimes?  If he somehow is found not guilty of the fed charges, couldn't the state indict?  Even go through with it, just to have the sentence in place if he's ever given federal parole?  For example, the murder of the MIT police officer.  I suspect he won't be charged with that by the feds, but the state could if they so chose.

I'd imagine that MA could try him on charges in addition to the Fed charges but it certainly won't be in lieu of Fed charges. I am pretty sure double jeopardy would apply if he were first acquitted federally and then retried locally for the same crimes

Double jeopardy only applies within the same sovereignty. The Feds and the State of Massachusetts are different sovereignties, so double jeopardy does not apply. He could be charged with the same crime in both court systems and tried in both systems.

Practically, the Feds do not pursue charges against people acquitted in state court for the same charges, unless there are abnormalities during the trial (bribery of jury/court officials).


huh, TMYK.
 
2013-04-22 05:01:02 PM

Bravo Two: You do realize that even during the Civil War, Lincoln suspended the rule of habeas corpus and all that for captured southerners and southern combatants, right?


*AHEM*
Article I Section 9:  The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

There's no civil war and nobody has invaded*


/*since the Brits in the 60s.
 
2013-04-22 05:04:07 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Uchiha_Cycliste: So on the first order, revenge results in vendettas that soon lose sight of their origin and become self sustaining.
On the second order, the capacity to recognize the revenge is not necessary but merely desirable is an important aspect of self-awareness where in the triumph of mans compassion over his baser instincts is all that keeps society stable.

OTOH, but shiat man! He REALLY deserves to get his ass-whooped.  tough call =/

No. That is not justice:
On this law, dependeth another,  that at the entrance into conditions of peace, no man require to reserve to himself any right, which he is not content should be reserved to every one of the rest. As it is necessary for all men that seek peace, to lay down certain rights of nature; that is to say, not to have liberty to do all they list: so is it necessary for man's life, to retain some; as right to govern their own bodies; enjoy air, water, motion, ways to go from place to place; and all things else, without which a man cannot live, or not live well. If in this case, at the making of peace, men require for themselves, that which they would not have to be granted to others, they do contrary to the precedent law, that commandeth the acknowledgment of natural equality, and therefore also against the law of nature.

/Plus, you know, that whole Amendment VIII thing.


I do know that's not justice, that's pure good old fashioned revenge. Our humanity suppresses acting upon it. But to deny the desire for such actions is just silly.
 
2013-04-22 05:04:18 PM

rufus-t-firefly: If Tsarnaev had escaped on Friday, the NRA (and the GOP) would have been fine with him buying additional weapons without a background check.


They would have been free to do alot of things, with not being in custody and all.
If the DHS didn't put their names in a computer (names which it seems they didn't know for days, despite the patriot act) then they still could have bought guns with the feds blessing.

The downside of liberty is you give your fellow citizens a chance to hurt you.
The question is if you are willing to deny justice to everyone, deny rights to everyone, and enforce a permanent state of lockdown just to see that a handful of terror suspects might be caught.
Remembering that its possible to both lose your liberty and still get hurt.

In this most recent case, Homeland security was too busy snooping through their wives emails to notice a new threat at our feet.  It seems all those patriot act powers weren't needed to follow leads from the witnesses that actually directed cops to the bombers.
We gave up alot of money and privacy to get the same result as before 9/11.

They'll come with more suggestions for how to make us "safe", but we should be skeptical of seemingly easy solutions or obvious scapegoats.
They've got all the tools they need and then some.  This guy doesn't need some special trial when a normal one is plenty.
 
2013-04-22 05:04:28 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: No. That is not justice:
On this law, dependeth another, that at the entrance into conditions of peace, no man require to reserve to himself any right, which he is not content should be reserved to every one of the rest. As it is necessary for all men that seek peace, to lay down certain rights of nature; that is to say, not to have liberty to do all they list: so is it necessary for man's life, to retain some; as right to govern their own bodies; enjoy air, water, motion, ways to go from place to place; and all things else, without which a man cannot live, or not live well. If in this case, at the making of peace, men require for themselves, that which they would not have to be granted to others, they do contrary to the precedent law, that commandeth the acknowledgment of natural equality, and therefore also against the law of nature.

/Plus, you know, that whole Amendment VIII thing.


Your jib is well cut.
 
2013-04-22 05:04:41 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Bravo Two: You do realize that even during the Civil War, Lincoln suspended the rule of habeas corpus and all that for captured southerners and southern combatants, right?

*AHEM*
Article I Section 9:  The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

There's no civil war and nobody has invaded*


/*since the Brits in the 60s.


Actually, it should be noted that while Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, the Supreme Court said he was wrong for doing so. (Ex Parte Merryman)
 
2013-04-22 05:10:43 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Bravo Two: You do realize that even during the Civil War, Lincoln suspended the rule of habeas corpus and all that for captured southerners and southern combatants, right?

*AHEM*
Article I Section 9:  The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

There's no civil war and nobody has invaded*


/*since the Brits in the 60s.


Haven't you heard? Rep. Peter King (R-NY) says this is now the "homeland battlefield." Plus the bombers are fur'ners. Close enough, right?

/derp
 
2013-04-22 05:14:54 PM

ZAZ: A "destructive device" includes any bomb, grenade, rocket with more than four ounces of propellant, and any projectile launcher with a caliber over .50 inches (except for Attorney General approved shotguns). 18 USC 921.


Is the determination for shotguns by model or class, or is it an individual determination?  There are many millions of shotguns in circulation, and every common gauge other than .410 is over .50, so does every owner run the risk of a cop or prosecutor deciding his bird gun is a weapon of mass destruction?
 
2013-04-22 05:15:50 PM

ArcadianRefugee: Purdue_Pete: He's accused of blowing up an sweet 8 year old boy, two beautiful young women and a cop.

Try not to weasel things up by playing Daily Mail with your sentences.


really?
 
2013-04-22 05:27:20 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: SilentStrider: Good.

should done it with a grumpy cat =P


This is true.
 
2013-04-22 05:45:31 PM

Shrugging Atlas: ZAZ: Shrugging Atlas

Quoting my post from yesterday's thread:

For purposes of federal criminal law, a "weapon of mass destruction" includes any "destructive device." 18 USC 2332a. A "destructive device" includes any bomb, grenade, rocket with more than four ounces of propellant, and any projectile launcher with a caliber over .50 inches (except for Attorney General approved shotguns). 18 USC 921. A potato gun is a weapon of mass destruction, if "designed for use as a weapon" and used against a U.S. national.

Ah, thanks for the knowledge.  Sweet christ that's a pretty wide open definition.


That's what I've been thinking.  So we consider a couple of pressure cookers filled with nails to be on the same level as a goddamned nuclear bomb? How does that even work?  I had to look it up because I thought my co-worker was crazy when she said any bomb falls under "weapon of mass destruction"
 
2013-04-22 05:47:07 PM

Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.


Fun. Projection.

Liberals are angry they simply couldn't use a drone strike and avoid the trial completely.

Fun stuff.
 
2013-04-22 05:50:23 PM

Ctrl-Alt-Del: HMS_Blinkin: Subby said he was a citizen (not a legal alien as I had thought), and I was wondering if that was really the case. Unless I'm wrong, and I well could be since IANAL, I was under the impression that citizens and non-citizens were treated differently in the law.

There are differences, like entering the country, voting, and 2 or 3 other things.


Like holding (most?) elected offices, thereby giving Sheriff Joe, Oily Taintz, and an untold number of less high-profile nutbags something to keep them busy for the past four years or so.
 
2013-04-22 06:04:20 PM

Cream of Meat: FlashHarry: plus, he'll likely get the DP if he's convicted on federal charges, yes?

He'll get the DP in prison too.


It's more likely that he'll end up in a supermax prison with zero contact with the other inmates and only minimal contact with prison personnel.
 
2013-04-22 06:11:15 PM

MyRandomName: Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.

Fun. Projection.

Liberals are angry they simply couldn't use a drone strike and avoid the trial completely.

Fun stuff.


If you'd extract your head from your colon, you'd realize that liberals are the biggest and most consistent critics of Obama's drone strikes. But then, you wouldn't be a Republican.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-04-22 06:11:24 PM
fnordfocus

The only precedent I can find deals with transfer tax and manufacturing licenses. There is a $200 tax to transfer a scary weapon as opposed to a normal weapon. The mess at Waco 20 years ago started when ATF suspected somebody hadn't paid the tax.

Apparently the ATF will, in response to an application to transfer, manufacture, or import, determine whether a weapon is a destructive device. I hope a determination that a shotgun is not a destructive device, i.e. has a sport use, benefits users of the shotgun.

The ATF has determined that shotguns with a pistol grip or with large magazines are "destructive devices", so shooting somebody with one of those is considered use of a weapon of mass destruction.
 
2013-04-22 06:22:06 PM
I totally agree with trying the accused in a court of law as a citizen.  I am amused at the differences of opinions on life or DP in this thread.  Personally I believe in the Death Penalty but not in the sheer amount of time one on death row can languish there.  If it takes 28 years (4 appeals @ 7 yrs each) to die on death row than it is NOT producing any fear that would cause a reduction in the actions that warrent a death penalty.  On the other hand, Life in prison is a waste of yours and mine tax dollars.

And before everyone explodes with these statements, my point is that every criminal in jail has more rights and privileges than your average citizenry.  Where else can you get three square meals a day, a roof over your head, free medical and dental, free education, and possibly free cable?  The average Joe that is at or below poverty level may not know where their next meal is coming, will most likely not have medical or dental even if they are working, and there living conditions would be below that of a prisoner.  And to think that we are building more prisons all the time.

I would rather the expense of one lethal injection than footing the bill for him for 60+ years, cheaper in the long run.
 
2013-04-22 06:29:41 PM

Shrugging Atlas: Well, my point was the term WMD which harkens from the Cold War used to only apply to Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical Weapons.  The term seems to have expanded quite a bit since back in the day to now include pressure cooker bombs.

But to your point, that the number of injured or killed dictates mass destruction.  Be careful with that kind of stupidity.  The cretin in Aurora killed 12 and wounded 50 something with a gun, all on his own.  Are guns now WMDs?


Exactly. It's interesting how the rhetoric is so different, isn't it?

We should be rightly skeptical of how a pressure cooker bomb has been called "weapon of mass destruction" in the modern law.  The term originated as a term for unconventional weapon that can take out a city, that even "civilized" armies aren't supposed to blithely use in a full on war.

What if these guys had decided to pick off runners at the finish line (or the crowds, or both) with machine guns?  What if the Aurora murderer had put pressure cooker bombs in the theater?

This guy has at least 4 counts of premeditated murder on his hands.  Not only that, but all the maiming, plus the whole "extreme indifference to life" part that comes when you use a bomb or set fires.  That's more than enough to put him away, in regular court.
 
2013-04-22 06:32:55 PM

World Traveling Navy Vet: I totally agree with trying the accused in a court of law as a citizen.  I am amused at the differences of opinions on life or DP in this thread.  Personally I believe in the Death Penalty but not in the sheer amount of time one on death row can languish there.  If it takes 28 years (4 appeals @ 7 yrs each) to die on death row than it is NOT producing any fear that would cause a reduction in the actions that warrent a death penalty.  On the other hand, Life in prison is a waste of yours and mine tax dollars.

And before everyone explodes with these statements, my point is that every criminal in jail has more rights and privileges than your average citizenry.  Where else can you get three square meals a day, a roof over your head, free medical and dental, free education, and possibly free cable?  The average Joe that is at or below poverty level may not know where their next meal is coming, will most likely not have medical or dental even if they are working, and there living conditions would be below that of a prisoner.  And to think that we are building more prisons all the time.

I would rather the expense of one lethal injection than footing the bill for him for 60+ years, cheaper in the long run.


The problem is our system works, where law enforce and prosecutors are rewarded for convictions, rather than justice.  That creates an incentive for the prosecution to lie, cheat, whatever it takes to convict.  Resulting in innocent people being executed.

If you're one of those that think you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet, then I invite you to volunteer to be executed to show the rest of us that one innocent person's life, wrongly taken from them, is worth the money saved by a quick execution of the death penalty.
 
2013-04-22 06:33:43 PM
The problem is how* our system works...
 
2013-04-22 06:36:56 PM

The Southern Dandy: World Traveling Navy Vet: I totally agree with trying the accused in a court of law as a citizen.  I am amused at the differences of opinions on life or DP in this thread.  Personally I believe in the Death Penalty but not in the sheer amount of time one on death row can languish there.  If it takes 28 years (4 appeals @ 7 yrs each) to die on death row than it is NOT producing any fear that would cause a reduction in the actions that warrent a death penalty.  On the other hand, Life in prison is a waste of yours and mine tax dollars.

And before everyone explodes with these statements, my point is that every criminal in jail has more rights and privileges than your average citizenry.  Where else can you get three square meals a day, a roof over your head, free medical and dental, free education, and possibly free cable?  The average Joe that is at or below poverty level may not know where their next meal is coming, will most likely not have medical or dental even if they are working, and there living conditions would be below that of a prisoner.  And to think that we are building more prisons all the time.

I would rather the expense of one lethal injection than footing the bill for him for 60+ years, cheaper in the long run.

The problem is our system works, where law enforce and prosecutors are rewarded for convictions, rather than justice.  That creates an incentive for the prosecution to lie, cheat, whatever it takes to convict.  Resulting in innocent people being executed.

If you're one of those that think you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet, then I invite you to volunteer to be executed to show the rest of us that one innocent person's life, wrongly taken from them, is worth the money saved by a quick execution of the death penalty.



Literally the only entity on your side in a trial is the defense council.  Sounds more obvious than it is.  The prosecution, judge, state, police, etc... are there for one reason and it is not to determine truth.
 
2013-04-22 06:39:14 PM

detritus: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

If the pressure cooker was made out of state, it falls under the interstate commerce clause according to the government.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/amish-prosecuted-because-scissors-crossed -s tate-lines/

Yes, this is how farking ridiculous our federal government is.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-04-22 06:44:29 PM

ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: detritus: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb?  WMD
Home made bomb in a pressure cooker?  Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

If the pressure cooker was made out of state, it falls under the interstate commerce clause according to the government.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/amish-prosecuted-because-scissors-crossed -s tate-lines/

Yes, this is how farking ridiculous our federal government is.

[i.imgur.com image 640x359]


BRB, I'm consulting LOTUS
 
2013-04-22 06:45:23 PM

BafflerMeal: are there for one reason and it is not to determine truth.


You got that right. I learned that at a civil trial from my own attorney who informed me, 'look, what really happened here isn't the point - it's what we can document'. Because what really happened was kind of important to me at the time and I was the guy writing the checks.
 
2013-04-22 06:46:55 PM
Anwar al-Awlaki was a US citizen, and we dropped a couple drone bombs on his ass!!
 
2013-04-22 06:50:52 PM

Uchiha_Cycliste: I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.


Sorry, had to run some errands.

I can't disagree with your statement. I don't think he should be given a puppy and told that it's going to be OK. I believe in the death penalty and I believe that once he's convicted, he should recieve that sentence.
It is difficult to look past emotion and deal with logic. It is something that has to be learned and isn't taught. But if we are supposed to be enlightened human beings in the 21st century, then we souldn't be acting like the apes around the monolith. I know that's not realistic, and we are much closer to the apes around the monolith now more than ever, but if people like Xiphoid don't point out a better way then those who are screwing up won't know they are screwing up and won't have an idea on how to change.
Yes, the people who deny this even happened at all other than as a staged play to take away our guns (yes, people are spreading that shiat already) aren't likely to be swayed from their views. But to stand by idly and not call bullshiat the really whacked out stuff is irresponsible at best.  I'm not saying that there isn't a larger terrorist connection, as we are still on just the first few pages of this story.
 
2013-04-22 06:52:39 PM

JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?

Why would you even want that in the first place?


Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant. If the government can show reasonable evidence that citizenship was obtained under false pretenses, then strip his citizenship, which again makes him a foreign national, and dump him in Guantanamo and let the military interrogators have a go at him before his tribunal.

Anyone who prefers he be tried in U.S. civilian courts will obviously have a different opinion.
 
2013-04-22 06:53:57 PM

World Traveling Navy Vet: I would rather the expense of one lethal injection than footing the bill for him for 60+ years, cheaper in the long run.


You've just monetized a human life.  Tell me, how does that make you feel?

And once his life has been extinguished, what has changed?  His death doesn't heal the injured, counsel the stricken.  The only difference in the world is that we've lowered ourselves to the level of those we condemn, and given in to the atavistic need to inflict harm for the sake of harm done.  Let's be better than killer apes.

Again, the most we should do is heal his broken mind so that for the rest of his days he can contemplate fully the enormity of what he's done, in the solitude of concrete and steel.
 
2013-04-22 06:56:24 PM

Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?

Why would you even want that in the first place?

Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant. If the government can show reasonable evidence that citizenship was obtained under false pretenses, then strip his citizenship, which again makes him a foreign national, and dump him in Guantanamo and let the military interrogators have a go at him before his tribunal.

Anyone who prefers he be tried in U.S. civilian courts will obviously have a different opinion.


The Constitution still applies to non-citizens
 
2013-04-22 06:56:31 PM

docilej: Anwar al-Awlaki was a US citizen, and we dropped a couple drone bombs on his ass!!


He was a little hard to get a hold of.
 
2013-04-22 06:59:10 PM

The Southern Dandy: The problem is how* our system works...


This ^^^^^

From a wikipedia on incarceration at year end of 2010 there were 2,266,800 inmates between federal and state penitentiaries.  At a quick look at annual costs per inmates in Iowa ($34,758), Texas ($21,390), and North Carolina ($27,747) and lets make an assumption of about $30,000 per inmate per annum across the US then we are looking at about $68B per annum of our tax dollars wasted IMHO.  We could better use that to fund schools, fix infastructure, etc.

The problem is how the system works and there is no easy solution to fix it.
 
2013-04-22 07:00:15 PM

Cybernetic: Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant.


But he wasn't an enemy combatant. The dude moved here when he was like seven or eight years old. He was a US citizen who committed a crime on US soil and he should be tried as such. I mean we could do what you suggest but it would be rather pointless considering the mountains of evidence they have. he's going to be found guilty and after his sentencing never see the light of day again. All the rest of it is just emotional horseshiat that serves no constructive purpose.
 
2013-04-22 07:02:05 PM

FarkedOver: Let's hope this is handled at the state level rather than the federal level.


It is already at the federal level, the charges were laid about by the federal prosecutor not the state or county attorney.
 
2013-04-22 07:03:39 PM

ManRay: TheShavingofOccam123: AFTER BEING INTERROGATED  BY THE CIA AND OTHER "INTERROGATION" EXPERTS.

Probably without legal counsel present.  And I'm sure they'll wait until he's off all medication, out of critical condition  and in reasonable health before they tortu...er, question him.

Yeah. The idea of a "special terrorism interrogator" getting to him before he is officially questioned bothers me. You can't put due process on hold.


This has probably been mentioned but that is due process.  They invoked the public safety exception, which can be done in any case authorities feel is warranted.  They can do it to your granny when she gets hit with her latest DUI.
Further, Mirandizing is not required in any arrest.  His rights are still in intact but anything he my have said cannot be used in the court case.  They only use this when they know it is a slam dunk anyway, so they don't care about getting inadmissible statements. It is allperfectly legal and has been that way for a long time.
 
2013-04-22 07:09:30 PM

Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?

Why would you even want that in the first place?

Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant. If the government can show reasonable evidence that citizenship was obtained under false pretenses, then strip his citizenship, which again makes him a foreign national, and dump him in Guantanamo and let the military interrogators have a go at him before his tribunal.

Anyone who prefers he be tried in U.S. civilian courts will obviously have a different opinion.


Before you go messing around with taking away citizenship you should probably have some evidence. We are supposed to represent the good guys. He is a citizen of this country and his rights should only be affected with due process. Do you honestly think he'll walk?

Take away his citizenship then what do you have? A legal resident of the US charged with a crime and taken to an offsite prison for interrogation? What stops the government from taking away your citizenship if you do something un-citizenly?

If we are going to claim to be the good guys, then we should practice that approach. Afford him his day in court, upon conviction and exhaustion of appeals, then maybe you revoke citizenship, or maybe you don't.
 
2013-04-22 07:13:26 PM
The real tragedy here is that the Obama administration isn't doing anything arguably stupid or evil in this matter that I can pitch a huge hissy-fit about.
Guess I'll get drunk and listen to Glenn and Rush until I feel better.
 
2013-04-22 07:21:02 PM

World Traveling Navy Vet: The Southern Dandy: The problem is how* our system works...

This ^^^^^

From a wikipedia on incarceration at year end of 2010 there were 2,266,800 inmates between federal and state penitentiaries.  At a quick look at annual costs per inmates in Iowa ($34,758), Texas ($21,390), and North Carolina ($27,747) and lets make an assumption of about $30,000 per inmate per annum across the US then we are looking at about $68B per annum of our tax dollars wasted IMHO.  We could better use that to fund schools, fix infastructure, etc.

The problem is how the system works and there is no easy solution to fix it.


You sure you don't want to take up that offer to show us how taking an innocent life is worth all the money we'd save?  Because life is cheap, and money is valuable, and you're just the person to show us that.
 
2013-04-22 07:28:05 PM

World Traveling Navy Vet: Where else can you get three square meals a day, a roof over your head, free medical and dental, free education, and possibly free cable?


*AHEM*
I'll give you a hint: Your fark handle.
 
2013-04-22 07:31:35 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: World Traveling Navy Vet: Where else can you get three square meals a day, a roof over your head, free medical and dental, free education, and possibly free cable?

*AHEM*
I'll give you a hint: Your fark handle.


You forgot the free PMITA
 
2013-04-22 07:32:53 PM

World Traveling Navy Vet: The Southern Dandy: The problem is how* our system works...

This ^^^^^

From a wikipedia on incarceration at year end of 2010 there were 2,266,800 inmates between federal and state penitentiaries.  At a quick look at annual costs per inmates in Iowa ($34,758), Texas ($21,390), and North Carolina ($27,747) and lets make an assumption of about $30,000 per inmate per annum across the US then we are looking at about $68B per annum of our tax dollars wasted IMHO.  We could better use that to fund schools, fix infastructure, etc.

The problem is how the system works and there is no easy solution to fix it.


It's amazing how out laws are actually not terribly dissimilar from a country like Australia, nor is the culture, and yet they somehow manage to have much lower incarceration rates.
 
2013-04-22 07:33:12 PM

JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant.

But he wasn't an enemy combatant. The dude moved here when he was like seven or eight years old. He was a US citizen who committed a crime on US soil and he should be tried as such. I mean we could do what you suggest but it would be rather pointless considering the mountains of evidence they have. he's going to be found guilty and after his sentencing never see the light of day again. All the rest of it is just emotional horseshiat that serves no constructive purpose.


I guess that depends on how you define "enemy combatant". There absolutely are segments of radical Islam that consider themselves to be at war with the United States. Should the fact that those people are not tied to a specific geopolitical entity upon which the United States can declare war determine whether or not they are enemy combatants? Or should it instead cause us to realize that the nature of modern conflict has evolved in part away from conflict between nation-states, and therefore reevaluate the definition of what causes a person to be recognized as a combatant?

Had the Boston bombing been perpetrated by agents of a foreign nation, it would be an act of war. Period. There would be no discussion or debate.

Instead, the bombings were carried out by agents of an ideology that considers itself at war with the United States. IMHO (and others will disagree) that makes the bombing an act of war, and the perpetrators enemy combatants.

This is certainly not "emotional horseshiat". This is recognizing a situation for what it is, and responding accordingly.
 
2013-04-22 07:46:38 PM

Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant.

But he wasn't an enemy combatant. The dude moved here when he was like seven or eight years old. He was a US citizen who committed a crime on US soil and he should be tried as such. I mean we could do what you suggest but it would be rather pointless considering the mountains of evidence they have. he's going to be found guilty and after his sentencing never see the light of day again. All the rest of it is just emotional horseshiat that serves no constructive purpose.

I guess that depends on how you define "enemy combatant". There absolutely are segments of radical Islam that consider themselves to be at war with the United States. Should the fact that those people are not tied to a specific geopolitical entity upon which the United States can declare war determine whether or not they are enemy combatants? Or should it instead cause us to realize that the nature of modern conflict has evolved in part away from conflict between nation-states, and therefore reevaluate the definition of what causes a person to be recognized as a combatant?

Had the Boston bombing been perpetrated by agents of a foreign nation, it would be an act of war. Period.


Would it?  It depends on whether the agents were acting in the agency of a foreign power, or if they were acting on their own.  For example, what if a foreign diplomat was just trying to kill his wife's lover who he knew to be at the race, and he wanted to do it with a bomb.  Is that an act of war?   Or a murder?
 
2013-04-22 07:49:37 PM

Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.


At least everyone else can find comfort in knowing you are a dick.
 
2013-04-22 07:57:51 PM

king_nacho: Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?

Why would you even want that in the first place?

Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant. If the government can show reasonable evidence that citizenship was obtained under false pretenses, then strip his citizenship, which again makes him a foreign national, and dump him in Guantanamo and let the military interrogators have a go at him before his tribunal.

Anyone who prefers he be tried in U.S. civilian courts will obviously have a different opinion.

Before you go messing around with taking away citizenship you should probably have some evidence. We are supposed to represent the good guys. He is a citizen of this country and his rights should only be affected with due process. Do you honestly think he'll walk?

Take away his citizenship then what do you have? A legal resident of the US charged with a crime and taken to an offsite prison for interrogation? What stops the government from taking away your citizenship if you do something un-citizenly?

If we are going to claim to be the good guys, then we should practice that approach. Afford him his day in court, upon conviction and exhaustion of appeals, then maybe you revoke citizenship, or maybe you don't.


No, I don't think he'll walk. If he's tried in civilian courts, he will likely get the same treatment that McVeigh got--confinement in Supermax until he gets the needle. And if that happens, I'll be fine with it, as far as it goes.

But I believe that the desire to treat him as a common criminal betrays a certain fuzziness of thinking--an inability or unwillingness to recognize the situation in which we find ourselves. This same fuzziness of thinking dominated after the 1993 WTC bombing, and led to six convictions and a threat that continued to grow until we got attacked again eight years later.

There are people who consider themselves to be at war with the United States, acting on behalf of a stateless ideological and political entity that will continue to carry out attacks like this at any opportunity. History has shown convincingly that treating those who act on behalf of that entity as criminals rather than enemy combatants is folly.
 
2013-04-22 07:59:45 PM
It's depressing how eager much of the population has gotten when it comes to revoking rights they don't like, and the rights of people they don't like. And politicians are happy to indulge them. After all, who would want more restrictions on their personal power, when they could just be efficient and get shiat done and not have to worry about distractions like getting prosecuted?

And, every 4 to 8 years, rather than undoing the abuses of the previous Administration, the new Administration simply grabs the baton and continues the race towards ever greater government power.
 
2013-04-22 08:01:32 PM

The Southern Dandy: Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant.

But he wasn't an enemy combatant. The dude moved here when he was like seven or eight years old. He was a US citizen who committed a crime on US soil and he should be tried as such. I mean we could do what you suggest but it would be rather pointless considering the mountains of evidence they have. he's going to be found guilty and after his sentencing never see the light of day again. All the rest of it is just emotional horseshiat that serves no constructive purpose.

I guess that depends on how you define "enemy combatant". There absolutely are segments of radical Islam that consider themselves to be at war with the United States. Should the fact that those people are not tied to a specific geopolitical entity upon which the United States can declare war determine whether or not they are enemy combatants? Or should it instead cause us to realize that the nature of modern conflict has evolved in part away from conflict between nation-states, and therefore reevaluate the definition of what causes a person to be recognized as a combatant?

Had the Boston bombing been perpetrated by agents of a foreign nation, it would be an act of war. Period.

Would it?  It depends on whether the agents were acting in the agency of a foreign power, or if they were acting on their own.  For example, what if a foreign diplomat was just trying to kill his wife's lover who he knew to be at the race, and he wanted to do it with a bomb.  Is that an act of war?   Or a murder?


Are you suggesting that the Tsarnaev brothers were just trying to kill Tamerlan's wife? Do you really think that their motive was anything other that political or ideological?
 
2013-04-22 08:05:32 PM

BigNumber12: It's depressing how eager much of the population has gotten when it comes to revoking rights they don't like, and the rights of people they don't like. And politicians are happy to indulge them. After all, who would want more restrictions on their personal power, when they could just be efficient and get shiat done and not have to worry about distractions like getting prosecuted?

And, every 4 to 8 years, rather than undoing the abuses of the previous Administration, the new Administration simply grabs the baton and continues the race towards ever greater government power.


I saw a interview with Sen Lindsey Graham last night and he was talking about how the FBI was aware of the older brother and his slide toward radical Islam.  The Senator said "We need to figure out whether the FBI simply failed in their task, or if we need new laws to help the FBI stop these things before they happen".

I was all "fark you Lindsey Graham!!!"  I farking KNEW this bombing was going to kick off a whole new round of congress shredding more of our rights, and right there we see that the Senators already have a plan in the works to do just that.
 
2013-04-22 08:06:45 PM

Cybernetic: The Southern Dandy: Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant.

But he wasn't an enemy combatant. The dude moved here when he was like seven or eight years old. He was a US citizen who committed a crime on US soil and he should be tried as such. I mean we could do what you suggest but it would be rather pointless considering the mountains of evidence they have. he's going to be found guilty and after his sentencing never see the light of day again. All the rest of it is just emotional horseshiat that serves no constructive purpose.

I guess that depends on how you define "enemy combatant". There absolutely are segments of radical Islam that consider themselves to be at war with the United States. Should the fact that those people are not tied to a specific geopolitical entity upon which the United States can declare war determine whether or not they are enemy combatants? Or should it instead cause us to realize that the nature of modern conflict has evolved in part away from conflict between nation-states, and therefore reevaluate the definition of what causes a person to be recognized as a combatant?

Had the Boston bombing been perpetrated by agents of a foreign nation, it would be an act of war. Period.

Would it?  It depends on whether the agents were acting in the agency of a foreign power, or if they were acting on their own.  For example, what if a foreign diplomat was just trying to kill his wife's lover who he knew to be at the race, and he wanted to do it with a bomb.  Is that an act of war?   Or a murder?

Are you suggesting that the Tsarnaev brothers were just trying to kill Tamerlan's wife? Do you really think that their motive was anything other that political or ideological?


What was their motive, and what evidence do you have to support your assertion?
 
2013-04-22 08:10:18 PM

Cybernetic: Instead, the bombings were carried out by agents of an ideology that considers itself at war with the United States. IMHO (and others will disagree) that makes the bombing an act of war, and the perpetrators enemy combatants.


Meh. You could just as easily be describing the crazy plural marriage sect of the mormons who think it is their duty to 'bleed the beast' with welfare fraud. Or any number of nutty weekend secessionists who talk shiat about the govt at their plinking parties and occasional do something actually dangerous. Hell, half the damn tea party and almost the entire fark libertarian brigade considers itself at war with the united states. Idiotic idea on its face. Is Sheriff joe an enemy combatant? Donald trump?
 
2013-04-22 08:10:32 PM

Cybernetic: There are people who consider themselves to be at war with the United States, acting on behalf of a stateless ideological and political entity that will continue to carry out attacks like this at any opportunity. History has shown convincingly that treating those who act on behalf of that entity as criminals rather than enemy combatants is folly.


No, it has not. However, history has shown people would gladly destroy the Bill of Rights, because they are scared.
 
2013-04-22 08:11:28 PM

BigNumber12: It's depressing how eager much of the population has gotten when it comes to revoking rights they don't like, and the rights of people they don't like. And politicians are happy to indulge them. After all, who would want more restrictions on their personal power, when they could just be efficient and get shiat done and not have to worry about distractions like getting prosecuted?

And, every 4 to 8 years, rather than undoing the abuses of the previous Administration, the new Administration simply grabs the baton and continues the race towards ever greater government power.


No shiat. It is truly depressing.
 
2013-04-22 08:14:09 PM

The Southern Dandy: demaL-demaL-yeH: World Traveling Navy Vet: Where else can you get three square meals a day, a roof over your head, free medical and dental, free education, and possibly free cable?

*AHEM*
I'll give you a hint: Your fark handle.

You forgot the free PMITA


I was never Navy.
 
2013-04-22 08:15:46 PM

The Southern Dandy: BigNumber12: It's depressing how eager much of the population has gotten when it comes to revoking rights they don't like, and the rights of people they don't like. And politicians are happy to indulge them. After all, who would want more restrictions on their personal power, when they could just be efficient and get shiat done and not have to worry about distractions like getting prosecuted?

And, every 4 to 8 years, rather than undoing the abuses of the previous Administration, the new Administration simply grabs the baton and continues the race towards ever greater government power.

I saw a interview with Sen Lindsey Graham last night and he was talking about how the FBI was aware of the older brother and his slide toward radical Islam.  The Senator said "We need to figure out whether the FBI simply failed in their task, or if we need new laws to help the FBI stop these things before they happen".

I was all "fark you Lindsey Graham!!!"  I farking KNEW this bombing was going to kick off a whole new round of congress shredding more of our rights, and right there we see that the Senators already have a plan in the works to do just that.


If he had said "better intelligence," or "more manpower," or even "more funding," instead of "new laws", I might agree with him. I seriously doubt that we need new laws.

If this is an intelligence failure--in the sense that we had data, but failed to connect the dots, or failed to act in time--then we need to identify the problems and fix them. If we were utterly blindsided, then that is an entirely different class of problem that needs to be addressed.

Graham's statement sounds like a politician who feels a need to "do something" so that he can tell his constituents that he "did something" during his next election cycle.
 
2013-04-22 08:17:41 PM

Cybernetic: I guess that depends on how you define "enemy combatant". There absolutely are segments of radical Islam that consider themselves to be at war with the United States. Should the fact that those people are not tied to a specific geopolitical entity upon which the United States can declare war determine whether or not they are enemy combatants? Or should it instead cause us to realize that the nature of modern conflict has evolved in part away from conflict between nation-states, and therefore reevaluate the definition of what causes a person to be recognized as a combatant?

Had the Boston bombing been perpetrated by agents of a foreign nation, it would be an act of war. Period. There would be no discussion or debate.

Instead, the bombings were carried out by agents of an ideology that considers itself at war with the United States. IMHO (and others will disagree) that makes the bombing an act of war, and the perpetrators enemy combatants.

This is certainly not "emotional horseshiat". This is recognizing a situation for what it is, and responding accordingly


Farking nonsense.
These assholes were no soldiers in an army.
Don't dignify them with the title "combatant".
Don't call their crimes "acts of war" - they were the acts of douchebag domestic criminals.
Period.

/Get your elbows off the table and chew before you swallow.
 
2013-04-22 08:22:46 PM

JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: Instead, the bombings were carried out by agents of an ideology that considers itself at war with the United States. IMHO (and others will disagree) that makes the bombing an act of war, and the perpetrators enemy combatants.

Meh. You could just as easily be describing the crazy plural marriage sect of the mormons who think it is their duty to 'bleed the beast' with welfare fraud. Or any number of nutty weekend secessionists who talk shiat about the govt at their plinking parties and occasional do something actually dangerous. Hell, half the damn tea party and almost the entire fark libertarian brigade considers itself at war with the united states. Idiotic idea on its face. Is Sheriff joe an enemy combatant? Donald trump?


Wow. You consider those to be morally equivalent to killing innocent civilians with a bomb?
 
2013-04-22 08:23:54 PM
cdn.prosebeforehos.com
 
2013-04-22 08:25:32 PM

Cybernetic: Graham's statement sounds like a politician who feels a need to "do something" so that he can tell his constituents that he "did something" during his next election cycle.


But people eat that shiat up. They think with their emotions and demand all sorts of new laws to protect everyone from planes crashing into highrises and scary machine guns killing children. And they ram it down the public's throat with appeals to emotion, think-of-the-children, accusations of being a terrorist-lover, and plenty of other tricks / logical fallacies. Because "doing something is better than doing nothing" and "either like the new law, or you're obviously against making anything illegal and you should go to Somalia."
 
2013-04-22 08:33:20 PM
He should be tried as a Plutonian Martian and then forced to submit fecal samples and then eat the fecal samples and then the fecal-fecal samples collected for fecanalysis.  And then we should strap one of several popular races' penises into his asshole because apparently that's considered a punishment in some circles of people who are fixed with non-white penises in asses and then we should make him live the rest of his life in solitary confinement until we execute him or not.
 
2013-04-22 08:38:58 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Cybernetic: I guess that depends on how you define "enemy combatant". There absolutely are segments of radical Islam that consider themselves to be at war with the United States. Should the fact that those people are not tied to a specific geopolitical entity upon which the United States can declare war determine whether or not they are enemy combatants? Or should it instead cause us to realize that the nature of modern conflict has evolved in part away from conflict between nation-states, and therefore reevaluate the definition of what causes a person to be recognized as a combatant?

Had the Boston bombing been perpetrated by agents of a foreign nation, it would be an act of war. Period. There would be no discussion or debate.

Instead, the bombings were carried out by agents of an ideology that considers itself at war with the United States. IMHO (and others will disagree) that makes the bombing an act of war, and the perpetrators enemy combatants.

This is certainly not "emotional horseshiat". This is recognizing a situation for what it is, and responding accordingly

Farking nonsense.
These assholes were no soldiers in an army.
Don't dignify them with the title "combatant".
Don't call their crimes "acts of war" - they were the acts of douchebag domestic criminals.
Period.

/Get your elbows off the table and chew before you swallow.


I suppose that we can agree to disagree on that point, seeing how neither of us has any input into the decision.

But where would you draw the line? At what point does an act committed on US soil cross the threshold where it is no longer a crime, but instead the action of an enemy combatant?
 
2013-04-22 08:50:33 PM

Cybernetic: But where would you draw the line? At what point does an act committed on US soil cross the threshold where it is no longer a crime, but instead the action of an enemy combatant?


There is no threshold or line to draw: You're conflating two very different concepts.

A crime is a crime when committed by US persons on US soil. Before "terroris*" got shoehorned into the criminal code, it was easy to see. It's only now that you're confused.

An act of war is an act of war, which is still, fortunately, very well defined in international law.
Who constitutes a combatant - and who is a noncombatant - is also defined in international law, as well as who is a saboteur or spy.
 
2013-04-22 08:50:38 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: World Traveling Navy Vet: Where else can you get three square meals a day, a roof over your head, free medical and dental, free education, and possibly free cable?

*AHEM*
I'll give you a hint: Your fark handle.



That is true and you even get free vacation time in foreign ports, you just have to remember that it is voluntary to serve.  I have been out of the military for many years now.  Our tax money does go to paying for all our military forces although we don't pay them nearly enough for all the time spent in harm's way.

I have been working at the poverty level before and it isn't fun making choices like do I pay the mortgage and food, or the electric bill and food.  That is why I have an issue with someone in jail not working, getting fed, clothed, housed, and medical when there are whole lot of people that have less than that on a daily basis.

With modern day forensics there should be very few innocents that actually goto jail these days.  I know and understand that not all people deserve the death penalty and I also believe that many of our existing death row inmates should have their cases re-examined with current forensic technology to free those that were innocent and wrongly accused.  I still maintain that a good working death penalty in the long run will lower overall violent crime rates because we prove that we kill those that kill.

Someone in the thread above mentioned that we no longer attempt to rehabilitate the criminals, our prisons are just a holding facility, and I agree with that.  There are many in jail that could be rehabilitated if we were to try.

How can we as a nation stop building more jails, reduce the amount of inmates currently in jail, and give criminals pause to think of what will happen when they are caught?  Tough question of which I know not the answer.

Everybody has an opinion on the choice of life or death but not one person has yet to comment on what we may do to make it better.
 
2013-04-22 08:52:23 PM

BigNumber12: Cybernetic: Graham's statement sounds like a politician who feels a need to "do something" so that he can tell his constituents that he "did something" during his next election cycle.

But people eat that shiat up. They think with their emotions and demand all sorts of new laws to protect everyone from planes crashing into highrises and scary machine guns killing children. And they ram it down the public's throat with appeals to emotion, think-of-the-children, accusations of being a terrorist-lover, and plenty of other tricks / logical fallacies. Because "doing something is better than doing nothing" and "either like the new law, or you're obviously against making anything illegal and you should go to Somalia."


Yes, people do eat it up, and the resulting laws are rarely pretty, or even effective. And they often end up making the problem worse, or having unforseen consequences that are worse than the problems that the law was meant to address. Daniel Patrick Moynihan called this phenomenon "iatrogenic government".

There seems to be some part of human nature that wants to believe that tragedy can be legislated out of existence, and when the tragedy is still fresh in people's minds, politicians use that impulse to pass legislation that wouldn't get through if cooler heads were to prevail.
 
2013-04-22 08:55:14 PM

World Traveling Navy Vet: How can we as a nation stop building more jails, reduce the amount of inmates currently in jail, and give criminals pause to think of what will happen when they are caught?  Tough question of which I know not the answer.


Three thoughts:
1. Ban all private, for-profit prisons. Imprisonment is strictly a government function.
2. Legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, then release all nonviolent marijuana offenders.
3. remove sentencing guidelines and truth in sentencing laws because they are unconstitutional interference with the judicial branch of government. Judges should be able to exercise judgment, for fark's sake.

/*dusts hands* What's next on your list, squidey?
 
2013-04-22 09:03:18 PM

Cybernetic: But where would you draw the line? At what point does an act committed on US soil cross the threshold where it is no longer a crime, but instead the action of an enemy combatant?


It would require affiliation with a group at the very least -in my opinion.
 
2013-04-22 09:29:36 PM

HotWingConspiracy: Phony GOP Americans must be inconsolable.


Comedy!

How many tears have you shed since you realized it was muslims who did this and not teabaggers?

/lol. you are so bitter
 
2013-04-22 09:30:38 PM
Comedy!

How many tears have you shed since you realized it was muslims who did this and not teabaggers?
 
2013-04-22 09:35:42 PM

Cybernetic: king_nacho: Cybernetic: JohnBigBootay: Cybernetic: If the oath of citizenship was taken with the intent of using the privileges of citizenship to aid in committing an act of terror on US soil, then wasn't the oath of citizenship taken fraudulently? And isn't the oath--and thus his citizenship--invalid on those grounds?

Why would you even want that in the first place?

Personally, I want that because I think he should be treated as an enemy combatant. If the government can show reasonable evidence that citizenship was obtained under false pretenses, then strip his citizenship, which again makes him a foreign national, and dump him in Guantanamo and let the military interrogators have a go at him before his tribunal.

Anyone who prefers he be tried in U.S. civilian courts will obviously have a different opinion.

Before you go messing around with taking away citizenship you should probably have some evidence. We are supposed to represent the good guys. He is a citizen of this country and his rights should only be affected with due process. Do you honestly think he'll walk?

Take away his citizenship then what do you have? A legal resident of the US charged with a crime and taken to an offsite prison for interrogation? What stops the government from taking away your citizenship if you do something un-citizenly?

If we are going to claim to be the good guys, then we should practice that approach. Afford him his day in court, upon conviction and exhaustion of appeals, then maybe you revoke citizenship, or maybe you don't.

No, I don't think he'll walk. If he's tried in civilian courts, he will likely get the same treatment that McVeigh got--confinement in Supermax until he gets the needle. And if that happens, I'll be fine with it, as far as it goes.

But I believe that the desire to treat him as a common criminal betrays a certain fuzziness of thinking--an inability or unwillingness to recognize the situation in which we find ourselves. This same fuzziness of thinki ...


I think it is premature to be making that kind of statement. We don't know this kid isn't some type of common criminal. This kid could hate marathons, or he could just like blowing stuff up. To assume that this is a larger statement about political views and the desire to bring down the United States is jumping to conclusions.

If, this kid is interested in bringing down the US government via violent means, and is conspiring to do so with other parties, then he should probably be tried for treason.
 
2013-04-22 09:37:58 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: World Traveling Navy Vet: How can we as a nation stop building more jails, reduce the amount of inmates currently in jail, and give criminals pause to think of what will happen when they are caught?  Tough question of which I know not the answer.

Three thoughts:
1. Ban all private, for-profit prisons. Imprisonment is strictly a government function.
2. Legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, then release all nonviolent marijuana offenders.
3. remove sentencing guidelines and truth in sentencing laws because they are unconstitutional interference with the judicial branch of government. Judges should be able to exercise judgment, for fark's sake.

/*dusts hands* What's next on your list, squidey?


1.  Make extras available based on level of incarceration, the higher the level of security the fewer the extras.
2.  Not sure what legalizing and regulating marijuana would do, but I would agree with letting go the users that are imprisoned.
3.  Not sure what you mean regarding the truth in sentencing laws.
4.  For the hard core I was thinking chain gangs, hard labor, etc.  Make the inmates truly work for a living, and making license plates does not constitute work.

/what brance were you in?
//the correct term is Swabby.... :D
 
2013-04-22 09:40:55 PM
@ demaL-demaL-yeH

/what branch of service were you in?

FTFM
 
2013-04-22 09:56:27 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Cybernetic: But where would you draw the line? At what point does an act committed on US soil cross the threshold where it is no longer a crime, but instead the action of an enemy combatant?

There is no threshold or line to draw: You're conflating two very different concepts.

A crime is a crime when committed by US persons on US soil. Before "terroris*" got shoehorned into the criminal code, it was easy to see. It's only now that you're confused.

An act of war is an act of war, which is still, fortunately, very well defined in international law.
Who constitutes a combatant - and who is a noncombatant - is also defined in international law, as well as who is a saboteur or spy.


The term "act of war" is far more a historical and political term than a legal one. If you have a citiation of international law that specifies what is and is not an act of war, I'd be very interested to see it.

Given that there is already substantial information tying Tamerlan Tsarnaev to radical Islamists, I believe that the Tsarnaev brothers can be considered "unlawful combatants," in that they do not meet the definition for lawful combatants as members of an irregular militia under Article IV of the Geneva Convention. Those criteria are:

(a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) that of carrying arms openly;
(d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war

They violate all four of those conditions, not the least of which is violating criterion (d) by directly targeting civilians.

As unlawful combatants, they still qualify for humane treatment under the Geneva Convention, but do not have to be treated as prisoners of war. They can be tried by a military tribunal, as validated by the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Quirin in 1942, in which case naturalized citizens were found to have maintained allegiance to a foreign power and renounced or abandoned their US citizenship by their actions on behalf of that power.
 
2013-04-22 10:00:10 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: How many tears have you shed since you realized it was muslims who did this and not teabaggers?


His religion will only be relevant if he is citing scripture for his actions.
 
2013-04-22 10:00:36 PM
The investigation is more and more certain that they were working alone, last I heard.

Merely being inspired by some crackpot ideology doesn't automatically make you a member in a secret army.
 
2013-04-22 10:40:24 PM
 
2013-04-22 10:44:58 PM
I want to know who is defending him and if that attorney will be looking to make a name for himself.
 
2013-04-22 11:01:51 PM

Kittypie070: docilej: Anwar al-Awlaki was a US citizen, and we dropped a couple drone bombs on his ass!!

I see, you are pro-traitor, and pro-al Qaeda, in that case.

In the case of an American citizen who turns on our country in an effort to do damage as part of a larger effort and who remains engaged as a major player in that fight no longer enjoys access to the courts or the same rights enjoyed by other US citizens under our Constitution. They become subject to the findings and decisions of our President acting as Commander in Chief to exercise justifiable force in our defense. Anwar al-Awlaki received his due process from the consideration of his status and behavior as a terrorist at war against this nation. I'm sure several wise legal consuls gave the President the best advice they could and that was that the President as Commander in Chief has the authority to order the killing of an unlawful combatant who was once a US citizen who is an ongoing threat to our nation. Had there been no evidence proving al Awlaki's actions, the President would not have considered this much less commited to this.

If you can not comprehend those very simple words then....


Pffftt...please.  He was snuffing out a gay ex-lover before he went public with their past of meth-fueled satanic buttsex.

Pretty sure I read that on WND...
 
2013-04-22 11:17:08 PM

World Traveling Navy Vet: @ demaL-demaL-yeH

/what branch of service were you in?

FTFM


Air Force and Army.
 
2013-04-22 11:24:37 PM

Cybernetic: The term "act of war" is far more a historical and political term than a legal one. If you have a citiation of international law that specifies what is and is not an act of war, I'd be very interested to see it.


Try the UN Charter, then work your way out to the conventions, treaties, and accords that are still in effect. Wiki might help you.

Cybernetic: Given that there is already substantial information tying Tamerlan Tsarnaev to radical Islamists, I believe that the Tsarnaev brothers can be considered "unlawful combatants,"


No, they are not. Association with criminals and acting like a criminal doesn't magically make the criminal a combatant. (And I'm fully aware of the Geneva criteria for combatants, noncombatants, saboteurs, spies, and the like, thankyouverymuch.

NB A foreign power is, by definition, a state actor: What is the identity of this alleged state actor, what territory does it control, who is its chief executive and where is its seat of government?
 
2013-04-22 11:28:54 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: World Traveling Navy Vet: @ demaL-demaL-yeH

/what branch of service were you in?

FTFM

Air Force and Army.


I won't hold that against you.  I have worked around the Air Force, and am currently working with the Army.
 
2013-04-22 11:29:01 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: HotWingConspiracy: Phony GOP Americans must be inconsolable.

Comedy!
How many tears have you shed since you realized it was muslims who did this and not teabaggers?
/lol. you are so bitter


You are over the line.
There is nothing funny about the murder and maiming of innocent human beings, no matter who does it.

HotWing was talking about the (R) cries for trial by military tribunal, and their poutrage over Mirandizing the accused.
 
2013-04-23 12:50:01 AM

Vodka Zombie: What the hell else would you try an American citizen as?


Unlawful combatant which, thanks to Bush, now gets called "enemy combatant" (a completely different thing altogether).   Prior to that deliberate confusion of terms, the two were known to be completely different things.

It's a bit like calling a fetus a "baby."
 
2013-04-23 01:21:34 AM
Comedy, huh?

Here's some comedy for ya.

*straps Debeo Summa Credo to a sturdy chair, carefully assures that he is comfortable and cannot perform flail damage, and commences to feed him a large oak dining table cut into bite-sized chunks, while occasionally hydrating him with adequate quantities of watered down generic beer*

Ha! Comedy!
 
2013-04-23 01:45:41 AM

The Southern Dandy: letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.

Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

This is so idiotic is it to be a troll, but I'll bite...


I have it on good authority that LeTrole is his surname.
 
2013-04-23 02:09:28 AM

ZAZ: The ATF has determined that shotguns with a pistol grip or with large magazines are "destructive devices", so shooting somebody with one of those is considered use of a weapon of mass destruction.


It turns out that Cabela's has weapons of mass destruction on sale for $230.

I'm not sure I understand the appeal of the pistol grip, but I am confident I'm not brave enough to use a $230 shotgun.
 
2013-04-23 02:56:47 AM

ciberido: The Southern Dandy: letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.

Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

This is so idiotic is it to be a troll, but I'll bite...

I have it on good authority that LeTrole is his surname.


Yeah, I looked at the name right after I hit Add Comment.  Who's the idiot?  I am.  :(
 
2013-04-23 03:30:00 AM

The Southern Dandy: Yeah, I looked at the name right after I hit Add Comment.  Who's the idiot?  I am.  :(


Ego Te Absolvo.

*purr of compassion*
 
2013-04-23 04:18:27 AM
Next time I'm in court for a speeding ticket I'll bring up my citizenship. Let's see if that gets me anywhere.
 
2013-04-23 10:13:46 AM

hinten: Next time I'm in court for a speeding ticket I'll bring up my citizenship. Let's see if that gets me anywhere.


the fact that you are in court already demonstrates that you have rights that many others around the world do not enjoy.
 
2013-04-23 03:22:52 PM
I love how so many people believe that because his rights weren't immediately read to him because they were more interested in determining if he had any more bombs scattered around it means that no one is an American citizen anymore and Obama can launch drone missiles at kindergartens in Missouri.
 
Displayed 492 of 492 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report