Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Jury made a 'fair' decision.

28 (21.5%)

Jury could have been less 'lenient'.

9 (6.9%)

Jury was way too 'lenient'.

6 (4.6%)

I do not agree with the decision made by the Jury, but still respect it.

8 (6.2%)

Jury should be hung.

6 (4.6%)

Evidence obtained via torture should have been used.

8 (6.2%)

The US should use Special Courts for Terrorists.

10 (7.7%)

Special exceptions to the law should be given for Terrorists.

1 (0.8%)

Special exceptions to how justice is handled should be given for Terrorists.

3 (2.3%)

I don't care.... or something...

7 (5.4%)

Jury has been too harsh.

3 (2.3%)

Terrorists are soldiers and you can't judge them in court.

11 (8.5%)

Terrorists are not soldiers, they have their own special classification.

5 (3.8%)

Terrorists are not soldiers, they have same rights as any other basic human.

25 (19.2%)

Total Members Voted: 61

[Realmfighter]

So should we let him go to kill again or do we let him rot until he dies of natural causes in prison?

[Dwarf]

You can't just go around and make exceptions to your principle "You're guilty of what you're fucking proved to be guilty of" just because he's apparently a terrorist and has got 200 something charges.

[Leafsnail]

So should we let him go to kill again or do we let him rot until he dies of natural causes in prison?

I think the answer to that one is fairly obvious...

If you take in the extra legal and security costs, the death penalty actually ends up pretty damn expensive to use :/.

[Neonivek]

That's all ww2 standart. Now you can't freely bomb area with civilian and such...
But it was not respected in the last war, along with the restrictions on torture, and that's pretty much why we're loosing.

*laughs*

No that is the illusion that was created about Modern war to allow it to be digested by an otherwise peaceful community. Though it comes from a misunderstanding on how wars are really fought. It is nearly impossible to actually defeat armies by focusing just on the enemy army.

Wars after World War 2 involve just as much civilian casualties as ever before. Just without the funding required for the mass civilian deaths, afterall death and destruction is expencive.

Honestly look it up, even in the "War of Terrorism" there were bombing runs on civilians, murder of surrendering/KOed troops, and even civilian slaughter by troops.

Why arn't they put on trial? because the winners don't go to court.

What if your killing a serial killer with a lethal injection? Who is the murderer there? The person who stuck the needle in his arm? The people who made the poison? The jury? The Government? His victims, who if had not been in a situation enabling him to kill them would not have been killed making him a murderer?

Ahh yes the "Stone Defense". In fact the reason why stoning was such a popular method of execution was because it was nearly impossible to tell who actually killed the person.

Human beings have trouble recognising collective guilt.

Though the Jury only imparts guilt, they don't do sentencing.

[Realmfighter]

When you really get down to it, prison and executions are punishing people for being themselves.

Kids are told to be themselves.

Conspiracy

[fqllve]

When you really get down to it, prison and executions are punishing people for being themselves.

Kids are told to be themselves.

Conspiracy

I mean, if you look at it like that, any punishment at all is punishing someone for being themself. John's an asshole so he can't help eating all the brownies.

And the punishers are just being themselves too right? So we can't punish people for punishing people.

Wow, this conspiracy sucks.

[Realmfighter]

And then you are sucked into a whirlpool of Negilogic never to be seen again.

It was planned all along.

[fqllve]

Yeah.

Too bad I actually think it's true. Not the conspiracy part, but that we all essentially do what we have to. So the question is planned by who?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

somebody drunk

[mainiac]

So this guy spends the rest of his life in prison, where he's no harm to anyone and we affirm the facts that we don't bend the rules and we don't need to bend the rules.  Sounds to me like a win/win/win.

On the lighter side it looks like we've got a liberal Ace Attorney on our hands.  Let's just hope the terrorists don't have 5k to spare if Osama ever goes to trial.

[Sowelu]

In World War I, with limited air and artillery and well-defined battle lines, military casualties outnumbered civilian casualties 5 to 1.
In World War II and every combat since, civilian casualties outnumbered military casualties 5 to 1.

At least, those are the numbers I've oft heard quoted.

[mainiac]

In World War I, with limited air and artillery and well-defined battle lines, military casualties outnumbered civilian casualties 5 to 1.
In World War II and every combat since, civilian casualties outnumbered military casualties 5 to 1.

At least, those are the numbers I've oft heard quoted.

Not even close.  Civilian deaths outnumbered military deaths by about %150 to %200 in WWII.  Military deaths outnumbered civilian deaths by about %150 to %200 in WWI.  The largest reason for the swing was deliberate campaigns of genocide against civilian populations: the holocaust of jews and other groups, the Japanese use of mass killings and the German efforts to ethnically cleanse eastern europe of eastern europeans.  In WWII both Japan and Germany were subjected to widescale attacks on heavily populated areas for years but civilian/military casualty ratio for those countries was about at WWI levels.  While your typical russian soldier or american bomber wouldn't lose too much sleep over killing german or japanese civilians, they weren't carrying out large scale campaigns specifically aimed at genocide.

[Neonivek]

While your typical russian soldier or american bomber wouldn't lose too much sleep over killing german or japanese civilians, they weren't carrying out large scale campaigns specifically aimed at genocide

Though I should state that it did happen

[Phmcw]

No that is the illusion that was created about Modern war to allow it to be digested by an otherwise peaceful community. Though it comes from a misunderstanding on how wars are really fought. It is nearly impossible to actually defeat armies by focusing just on the enemy army.

Wars after World War 2 involve just as much civilian casualties as ever before. Just without the funding required for the mass civilian deaths, afterall death and destruction is expencive.

No, war after WW2 killed a lot more civilian than before, and that's because war is now aimed at civilian.
"War against terrorist" mean war against civilian forces.
And for the whole "winner doesn't go to trial" well, we'll see. We'll see.

[Muz]

Soldiers kill more civilians from "collateral damage" than terrorists kill civilians intentionally. The worst terrorism case is 9/11 where 6k+ civilians died. Yet the small war in Iraq (which was tiny compared to say, Vietnam) killed ~100k civilians unintentionally. Where does the border lie? There's way more civilians killed in Iraq than American soldiers (and civilians!) killed, and it's worrying that the American public really doesn't care.

A modern terrorist is pretty similar to the guerrilla fighters back then. Guerrilla soldiers fight in mountains and jungles, dressing to suit the land, making use of the territory for a strong defensive advantage, striking the enemy where least expected. The terrorists fight in the enemy's land, camouflaging himself by pretending to be a member of the public.

Could you call a communist guerrilla fighter a soldier? If so, you could probably call an organized al-Qaeda terrorist a soldier too. Then again, what about if the Mafia makes an organized attack on say, a law enforcement building... would mobsters be considered soldiers too?

Anyway, I'm curious about what those hundreds of charges were about. So, he's caught on a conspiracy to destroy government buildings... does that mean that he wanted to destroy the building, talked to someone about it, but didn't do it? Makes me wonder if I'd get arrested if I was brown and joked about blowing up the White House with someone who really did want to blow it up.

[Neonivek]

No that is the illusion that was created about Modern war to allow it to be digested by an otherwise peaceful community. Though it comes from a misunderstanding on how wars are really fought. It is nearly impossible to actually defeat armies by focusing just on the enemy army.

Wars after World War 2 involve just as much civilian casualties as ever before. Just without the funding required for the mass civilian deaths, afterall death and destruction is expencive.

No, war after WW2 killed a lot more civilian than before, and that's because war is now aimed at civilian.
"War against terrorist" mean war against civilian forces.
And for the whole "winner doesn't go to trial" well, we'll see. We'll see.

Wow I was being conservative, but it turns out I just wasn't harsh enough.