PDA

View Full Version : The High Court FAILS again



LegalSmash
06-25-2008, 10:08 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080625/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_rdp

I am not pleased.

Look for a spike in parent killed peds in a neighborhood near you.

Red
06-25-2008, 10:20 AM
Awesome! Hopefully they'll legalize post birth abortions too!! :w00t::w00t:

LegalSmash
06-25-2008, 10:22 AM
THAR STILL NEOCONS THO THEY GOT RID OF AFFURMATIVE ACTION!!!@!! OMGZNOOOOOO

PotshotPolka
06-25-2008, 10:24 AM
Why not say the fuck the punishments, bring on castration? How many crimes would go undone if they were told they would have to piss out an oil strainer for the rest of their life?

Red
06-25-2008, 10:25 AM
I'd settle for castration.

LitKey
06-25-2008, 02:13 PM
supreme fail court

Italian Jew
06-25-2008, 02:57 PM
How about an eye for an eye style punishment? Maybe they themselves get raped or the castration idea. As long as it is something that causes the most punishment and pain to the individual. Death isn't that bad for some people unless it is death by being crushed, trampled, drawn & quartered, or some other form of old timey justice.

Red
06-25-2008, 03:11 PM
How about death by being raped in the rear by Jerome

PotshotPolka
06-25-2008, 03:12 PM
How about an eye for an eye style punishment? Maybe they themselves get raped or the castration idea. As long as it is something that causes the most punishment and pain to the individual. Death isn't that bad for some people unless it is death by being crushed, trampled, drawn & quartered, or some other form of old timey justice.

Lol... drawn and quartered... the guys who did the sceenplay for Saw would shit bricks trying to incorporate that into a film.

GrayFox
06-25-2008, 06:23 PM
Why the death penalty isn't legal is beyond me. Our tax money is going to keeping people sit in a prison (where they have a chance to break out and kill some more, mind you) for the rest of their life. Whats the point of them still living after killing tons of people? They don't even die in a kick-ass way anymore, its all harmless drugs.

Dire
06-25-2008, 06:27 PM
I'll agree with LegalSmash on this one. For the Supreme Court to say that the death penalty for child rapists is "cruel and unusual punishment" is ironic. I wonder what a rape victim would say to that.

In my opinion if you kill or rape someone, you deserve death. They don't deserve to be fed or sheltered with taxpayer money. You're a disease and a disgrace to society.

Dire
06-25-2008, 06:30 PM
Why the death penalty isn't legal is beyond me. Our tax money is going to keeping people sit in a prison (where they have a chance to break out and kill some more, mind you) for the rest of their life. Whats the point of them still living after killing tons of people? They don't even die in a kick-ass way anymore, its all harmless drugs.

Exactly. Just get rid of them (is my opinion). They serve no purpose and are likely to become violent prisoners because they'll be stuck in prison all their life anyways. I don't want to pay for their meals, cable TV (yeah, some prisons do have cable TV), or anything that has to do with them.

Lux
06-25-2008, 06:46 PM
To be honest....here is how I think it should be, for the sake of taxpayers having to pay for shitheads, the culprits right to a second chance and to the people who could be affected in the future.

1st offence...Jailed. This doesn't count for multiple offences of something like rape or murder, where straight death penalty is the right thing to do. They took someones life or raped them which can cause trauma and whatever else....I say give a second chance because people can change, and being in jail for what, 20 years is a long time. I could NEVER stand being in jail for that, I felt like killing myself after working in a store for 2 weeks.

2nd offence...DEATH. Whether it be murder or robery, anti social behaviour etc you have been warned and if you don't take the first warning you won't take the second. Multiple offenders are a drain on society, and don't deserve anything better than death, I'd say torture them for a long time but I think death is a bit cheaper.

This would really lower the crime rate. Its not like people will say "Oh I am on my first offence might aswell get a 10 year prison sentence for armed robery. But they won't think to commit another crime if they value their lives.

Only problem I could see with this is that in the world of today it would be seen as "unfair". Also it could be a misunderstanding, an accident or they could be not guilty.

Slavic
06-25-2008, 10:09 PM
To be honest....here is how I think it should be, for the sake of taxpayers having to pay for shitheads, the culprits right to a second chance and to the people who could be affected in the future.

1st offence...Jailed. This doesn't count for multiple offences of something like rape or murder, where straight death penalty is the right thing to do. They took someones life or raped them which can cause trauma and whatever else....I say give a second chance because people can change, and being in jail for what, 20 years is a long time. I could NEVER stand being in jail for that, I felt like killing myself after working in a store for 2 weeks.

2nd offence...DEATH. Whether it be murder or robery, anti social behaviour etc you have been warned and if you don't take the first warning you won't take the second. Multiple offenders are a drain on society, and don't deserve anything better than death, I'd say torture them for a long time but I think death is a bit cheaper.

This would really lower the crime rate. Its not like people will say "Oh I am on my first offence might aswell get a 10 year prison sentence for armed robery. But they won't think to commit another crime if they value their lives.

Only problem I could see with this is that in the world of today it would be seen as "unfair". Also it could be a misunderstanding, an accident or they could be not guilty.

Some people will go the extra mile to steal to eat. You can't stop crime.

Also the sort of system you propose is ridiculous. All cases should be looked at individually. Not lumped into categories to be judged the same.

LegalSmash
06-26-2008, 12:19 AM
Why the death penalty isn't legal is beyond me. Our tax money is going to keeping people sit in a prison (where they have a chance to break out and kill some more, mind you) for the rest of their life. Whats the point of them still living after killing tons of people? They don't even die in a kick-ass way anymore, its all harmless drugs.

It is legal, but on a state by state basis, and on the federal level.

As for the proposed system, i disagree on several levels, there are some actions, crimes, behaviors by individuals that have no place within civilized society, one of these is child molestation. On the first offense, these heinous crimes should be punished as severely as possible, once the individual is proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I think non-provoked, premeditated, malicious murder should be punished with execution rather than life imprisonment, and I believe that crimes which result from acts of gross criminal negligence, which were obviously avoidable should be punished by death as well.

There is no reason why people that have committed crimes cannot rehabilitate, and I believe that someone who commits a stupid choice should get a second chance... here is the thing... a stupid choice... selling/buying drugs, shoplifting, shit, I'd even say battery or assault, these people should be put into "service battalions" where they learn discipline, proper behavior and a trade they can use, while serving the country in some capacity (picking up trash, working on public projects, working in an axillary military unit, etc.

However, there is something purely malicious, and downright uncivilized about murder, or about robbery, or rape.. and even more so sadistic and wrong when its rape of a child under 12, acts such as those, so thoroughly contrary to the interests of people and society, should be punished swiftly, efficiently, and without mercy.

I don't think anything is more cruel or unusual than letting down the American public in this fashion, this leaves thousands of families which have suffered this awful act without any real recourse.

GrayFox
06-26-2008, 12:30 AM
The biggest waste of money is going to jail for weed. I mean come on, its WEED. Its not going to kill anyone, you can't die of an overdose. I see no reason why that would be illegal and drinking is legal. Drinking is more deadly than weed any day.

LegalSmash
06-26-2008, 12:34 AM
The biggest waste of money is going to jail for weed. I mean come on, its WEED. Its not going to kill anyone, you can't die of an overdose. I see no reason why that would be illegal and drinking is legal. Drinking is more deadly than weed any day.

Its a vice crime. There are a great deal of people that can function just fine on a toke or three, then there are people that become complete fucktards when even slightly intoxicated. The law is aimed to deal with them.

Also, the court fees, fines, etc. gives counties LOTS of money.

In the end, its about the same in danger to a person as a cigarrette, but the latter is an American agency.

In short:
The substance itself is illegal because we have freedom of choice as to how we behave, and while the government can generally not regulate whether you decide to get high, drunk, etc., they CAN however, criminalize the instrument by which you do the above 3.

Molotov
06-26-2008, 01:32 AM
even moar fail :thumbdown: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/06/25/dead.witness.ap/index.html

Italian Jew
06-26-2008, 01:40 AM
"justice" is weird...

Legal go fix it

You will get Pizza! :laugh:

Lux
06-26-2008, 07:59 AM
Some people will go the extra mile to steal to eat. You can't stop crime.

Also the sort of system you propose is ridiculous. All cases should be looked at individually. Not lumped into categories to be judged the same.


Yeah well if they want to risk their life to steal food that is their choice.

If you don't give them an easy way to commit crime and get away with it they most likely won't do it. Tyrany and meaningful laws are a different thing. For my proposed "first offence" it is jail or whatever else...and it is looked at individually. For the "second offence" the same...they get a trial, if they are found guilty they will no longer be a problem, if they aren't guilty they get to live.......

The only difference between this and what we currently have is that the criminals get what is coming to them. Everyone has a choice, no one has to commit a crime, unless it is in self defence. If we don't give them the choice to commit a crime and walk away from it, you make them do the right thing. If you want to be an idiot you can say that people deserve the right to make a choice, but in the case of the law they shouldn't do.

LegalSmash
06-26-2008, 08:03 AM
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=07-343#dissent1

Ridiculous

kennedy's need to be gotten rid of politically.

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/d/d5/Pedobear.png


New SCOTUS portrait
http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/2/2c/Pedobear_and_friends.png

GrayFox
06-26-2008, 09:33 AM
Don't mind that red light in the bushes, its just a little birdy.