Sniper case

What a can of shit. These weren''t terrorist attacks. If anything, it should be classified as a serial murdering.

...and that''s how I successfully lead operation Desert Storm.

quote:

---

Original post by AnonymousPosterChild
What a can of shit. These weren't terrorist attacks. If anything, it should be classified as a serial murdering.

---

That's what I argued last time this was brought up but I was shouted down.

It seems that our understanding of the word "terrorism" is changing to encompass more things. To me (and many others in England, I'm sure) terrorism means trying to cause political change using violence or the threat of violence (e.g. the IRA, Mr Osama). But (in the US at least) it seems that many fans of semantics are taking the word as "causing terror" and so any number of things could now be attributed to "terrorism". The cynical part of me thinks that this could possibly be the publics current fear of terrorism finding it in places where it doesn't necessarily exist.

I think they were serial murderers who were holding an entire area to ransom. But I know there are many who would disagree.

---

pan narrans
Study + Hard Work + Loud Profanity = Good Code

[edited by - pan narrans on November 29, 2002 11:00:25 AM]

That''s the problem these days. There''s no distinction between terrorism and crime. In the last big witch hunts, i.e., the McCarthy era, everyone who was evil was a communist (before that, it was the fascists). Today, everyone who is evil is a terrorist. It''s ridiculous.

What differentiates terrorism from other crime? Motivation? Certain thoughts make an act more illegal? Reminds me of hate crime legislation.

quote:

---

That''s what I argued last time this was brought up but I was shouted down.

---

Yeah, when I argued this, I seem to remember being found guilty of racism along with the American media and anyone else that didn''t instantly denounce this as terrorism.


Mike

"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Frederick Bastiat, The Law

the decision to try them in Virginia is pure bullshit.

Their killings were mostly in Washington DC in the first place, in the second place, they were interstate killings, which means that it is now a federal case, and should be tried in federal courts.

They only want to use Virginia because it is so much easier to get the death penalty there. This is sad and savage.

quote:

---

This is sad and savage.

---

No way! Virginia is good because then the 17yr old can be executed too. Although I''d choose Alabama and make those bastards hang.

quote:

---

posted by Mithrandir
They only want to use Virginia because it is so much easier to get the death penalty there. This is sad and savage.

---

Agreed. It''s just an under-handed way of manipulating the outcome of a case. Why not just assign him the judge that gives the harshest penalties too..

Of course I despise the sniper''s intent, but the law should be objective.

New meaning for the word Terrorism:

Terrorism: To cause terror ''ONLY'' inside the United States of America or on american interests.

The new meaning to me is:

Terrorism: A useful government tool to change the public opinion around the globe to achieve political interests.

Oh please. You emotionally overworked fools are actually expressing sympathy for these two killers? Is the fact that two ruthless murderers may die really raining on your day?

Shed your fucking sympathies where they are wanted, shitheads.

No, ALL the people should be punished according the laws of the country they commited their crime. <-- But this statement only applies to common people. Your chances of going to jail are inverselly proportional to the contacts you have in the government and the zeros''s in your banks accounts.

quote:

---

Your chances of going to jail are inverselly proportional to the contacts you have in the government and the zeros''s in your banks accounts.

---

Bullshit.

Only recently a 7 times former prime minister of italy got 20+ years for ordering the mafia to kill someone.

Terrorism is the result of an organized group of individuals with the goal of causing mass destruction with the intent to harm civilians.

Everyone just wants to label any rogue shmuck a terrorist because it''s easier to make people go after them.

See we USED to put people to death for being serial killers like the sniper. But the US decided to puss out and just give life sentences. So now we have to screw around with semantics to get the punishment criminals like this deserve.

Ben


IcarusIndie.com [ The Labyrinth | DevZone | The Wall | Hosting | Tiberian Merchandise | GameShot | Fun With Cutouts ]

quote:

---

Original post by Antony Paul
Only recently a 7 times former prime minister of italy got 20+ years for ordering the mafia to kill someone.

---

Bullshit, O.J. Simpson isn''t in jail.

OJ's not in jail because it didn't fit. He's also not the 7 time prime minister of Italy.

Besides, no one is arguing the system is perfect. If you want to make sure all criminals go to jail you'd have to lock up everyone. If you want to make sure no innocent people get locked up you'd have to get rid of jails.

Rich people are less likely to go to jail because they can afford better lawyers to defend them. They also can afford better help to remove themselves from the crime. Us poor people have to rely on evidence and doing the dirty work ourselves. Life's not fair. Don't like the US system, Canada and Mexico aren't too far away.

Ben


IcarusIndie.com [ The Labyrinth | DevZone | The Wall | Hosting | Tiberian Merchandise | GameShot | Fun With Cutouts ]

[edited by - Kalvinb on November 29, 2002 12:09:45 AM]

quote:

---

Original post by KalvinB
OJ''s not in jail because it didn''t fit. He''s also not the 7 time prime minister of Italy.

Besides, no one is arguing the system is perfect. If you want to make sure all criminals go to jail you''d have to lock up everyone. If you want to make sure no innocent people get locked up you''d have to get rid of jails.

Rich people are less likely to go to jail because they can afford better lawyers to defend them. They also can afford better help to remove themselves from the crime. Us poor people have to rely on evidence and doing the dirty work ourselves. Life''s not fair. Don''t like the US system, Canada and Mexico aren''t too far away.

Ben

---

That was exactly my point.

quote:

---

Original post by KalvinB
Don''t like the US system, Canada and Mexico aren''t too far away.

---

Having the freedom to say we don''t like the US system IS the US system. Saying that people should just leave that don''t like the way things are done here goes against what America is about.

QUOTE
UM I DON''T KNOW.....
DUSTIN

"Saying that people should just leave that don''t like the way things are done here goes against what America is about."

"Love it or leave it?" Not fond of that one?

If you don''t like what''s laid down in the Constitution and Bill of Rights then take a hike.

There are some things that could only be corrected in a utopian society; in this case the justice system. So yeah, if you don''t like the US''s justice system then take a hike.

If you don''t like the laws or the punishments associated with breaking those laws, well that has nothing to do with the judicial system. Changing the laws doesn''t change how people are judged according to them.

If you want to bitch that certain laws or their punishments are rediculous then good for you. However, if you want to bitch because innocent get locked up and the guilty go free then you just need to be smacked with the Tiberian Trout of Reality and get over it. You''re got just as much right to a Porche as you do a good lawyer. Why should a good lawyer be forced a minimal fee because you''re poor? Why should anyone be forced to be poor because you are?

People have noticed that side effect of not being god for thousands of years. All you can do is everything in your power to avoid even the appearance of evil. If that doesn''t work out for you then such is life. No justice system in the history of the world has been perfect.

I''m not about to allow the govenment to watch my every move just so I don''t risk the possibilty of going to jail for a crime I didn''t commit. If that''s what you want there are plenty of other countries to choose from that may oblige you.

Ben


IcarusIndie.com [ The Labyrinth | DevZone | The Wall | Hosting | Tiberian Merchandise | GameShot | Fun With Cutouts ]

quote:

---

Original post by xaxa
Bullshit, O.J. Simpson isn''t in jail.

---

OJ didn''t go to jail mostly because he was famous, money played only a minor role. In this case, being black inarguably helped him also, though that''s obviously not always the case.


Mike

"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Frederick Bastiat, The Law

"Capitalism between consenting adults is a basic human right." - Unknown

in the picture on the CNN page, Chief Moose''s "salute to law enforcement" looks an awful lot like a Nazi salute...
anyone else notice that? i think he masterminded the whooooole thing