NationStates Jolt Archive

In Washington State, USA, criminals can steal 5 cars before they are even considered to be put in a permanent prison (More than 7 days). I think the guy deserved serving around 10 years in prison from the little info i just read.

Your right that it has been changed but what you are suggesting is not going to happen as there will be massive outcry as it prevents religion from entering into politics. Take out the protective clause and all hell will break loose.



I'd protest the law and still practice it. I'd go to my death willingly if that is the punishment.

So even with the law coming from the government, set in place by god and all that, you would believe it was an unjust law?

So even with the law coming from the government, set in place by god and all that, you would believe it was an unjust law?

Unjust or no, if I violate it, I'll pay the penalty. Hence why I said, if the sentence is death, I'll go willingly to it.

Unjust or no, if I violate it, I'll pay the penalty. Hence why I said, if the sentence is death, I'll go willingly to it.
Watch closely, children, this is some masterful point-dodging we're witnessing here.

Unjust or no, if I violate it, I'll pay the penalty. Hence why I said, if the sentence is death, I'll go willingly to it.

Backtracking a bit there aren't we? I thought laws were just by virtue of being law or am I reading Romans wrong?

Backtracking a bit there aren't we? I thought laws were just by virtue of being law or am I reading Romans wrong?

Who decides what laws are just and what laws are not just?

Unjust or no, if I violate it, I'll pay the penalty. Hence why I said, if the sentence is death, I'll go willingly to it.

Well, don't go expecting any reasonable person to parrot your inaction.

Cost of keeping an inmate in prison in the US per year: $25,000
Total cost of keeping this man in prison throughout his term using this current figure: $4,000,000

Ruining a man's life?: Priceless

For real life, there is stupidity.
For everything else there is MasterCard.

Who decides what laws are just and what laws are not just?

We do. We have a moral compass and we use it to guide us.

I believe that the law in this case is unjust.

We do. We have a moral compass and we use it to guide us.

I believe that the law in this case is unjust.

We do? Who gave us the authority to decide what is just or not?

Who decides what laws are just and what laws are not just?

I think, AC2 - that you can be assured the widely-held consensus would be that common sense has a goodly amount to do with what is just and what is unjust. If you truly need that to be delineated for you, I can't help but despair. Your claim to be a moderate aside, the authoritarian bias you're displaying in this thread serves to underscore the extent to which (conservative) America has drifted away from moderation. Just as the original story does.

Thank you for illustrating that drift for us all. It's quite illuminating. Please do continue. Do.

We do? Who gave us the authority to decide what is just or not?

We gave it to ourselves when we began making laws to control the actions of those in our society.

We do? Who gave us the authority to decide what is just or not?

That's part of being a Christian, if you need your pastor to tell you what's right and wrong you're missing your moral compass.

We do? Who gave us the authority to decide what is just or not?

Its not "given" by any particular person/thing/puff of smoke, if thats what you're getting at.

We gave it to ourselves when we began making laws to control the actions of those in our society.

The leader made the laws and not the people when laws started to make its way into society.

Its not "given" by any particular person/thing/puff of smoke, if thats what you're getting at.

Actually....one can say that the Constitution gives us the Authority to decide what is and is not just.

The leader made the laws and not the people when laws started to make its way into society.

Yes and the leader gave himself that power. The leader would make laws guided by his own moral compass.

If his compass was particularly wayward then sometimes his people would rebel against him and change the laws, that was them using their own moral compasses to decide what was right and wrong.

I can't believe you really need this explaining to you, are you really this subservient to authority in RL?

The worst thing about this whole case, I think, is that America's judicial system is one of the most-developed and fairest in the world.

Yes and the leader gave himself that power. The leader would make laws guided by his own moral compass.

Or what his advisors advise that the laws be.

If his compass was particularly wayward then sometimes his people would rebel against him and change the laws, that was them using their own moral compasses to decide what was right and wrong.

Most rebellions failed back in those days. And if a rebellionn did succeed, the leader was killed.

I can't believe you really need this explaining to you, are you really this subservient to authority in RL?

I need nothing explained to me. As to your question, nope. I'm just a follower of the law who does not want to see the justice system up close.

Or what his advisors advise that the laws be.



Most rebellions failed back in those days. And if a rebellionn did succeed, the leader was killed.



I need nothing explained to me. As to your question, nope. I'm just a follower of the law who does not want to see the justice system up close.

So you accept that we decide as a society what our laws are yet you question where we get the authority to judge whether or not said laws are just? Am I understanding you right here or have I missed something?

I need nothing explained to me. As to your question, nope. I'm just a follower of the law who does not want to see the justice system up close.

It saddens me that you don't want to see how our justice system works, you just want to hide the problems and ignore them. That's pretty sad.

It saddens me that you don't want to see how our justice system works, you just want to hide the problems and ignore them. That's pretty sad.

I think AC2 means he doesn't want to "Experience the justice system," which is far different when he said he would be willing to die to do what he believes in.

I think AC2 means he doesn't want to "Experience the justice system," which is far different when he said he would be willing to die to do what he believes in.

Ah, if that's the case then that's my mistake.

I think this was a state court and not a federal court so any appeal has to go through the state system. Do not know if it was done or not. If not then his lawyers are just as stupid as this guy was.
If they do not appeal given the opportunity that would be for sure.

Was anybody injured due to his arson? If yes then you can call aggression, if no then its a simple crime against property.
Arson is by no means a simple crime against property - it is the destruction of it, of one's home. I'd take that as a pretty serious crime against property.

That is again down to a daft flaw in the US legal system. In the UK if you sue and lose then you pay the other sides legal costs, in this case even though the guys family never lost the legal fees they incurred still bankrupted them.
Aye, that is one of the benefits of the UK system. It limits litigants from abusing lawsuits, and gives both parties an incentive not to waste the court's time. On the other hand, the UK suffers from the reverse problem of the USA ; it tends to be too light-handed with its sentencing.

Finally Found it!

Thanks for the information. This story is highly suspicious, given how little facts it gives. The sentence (somewhat) makes more sense now.

There is no such Bible verse. There is one, however, about submitting to the government.
Render unto Caesar what is his, I believe?

Ah, if that's the case then that's my mistake.

well, he did say "See" which sounded like examine... ;)

So you accept that we decide as a society what our laws are yet you question where we get the authority to judge whether or not said laws are just? Am I understanding you right here or have I missed something?

I like to be obtuse and mess with people's minds :D

I think AC2 means he doesn't want to "Experience the justice system," which is far different when he said he would be willing to die to do what he believes in.

Thanks JuNii :)

If you truly need that to be delineated for you, I can't help but despair. Your claim to be a moderate aside, the authoritarian bias you're displaying in this thread serves to underscore the extent to which (conservative) America has drifted away from moderation.
It's clear to me that Allagheny isn't trying to display his moderation, he's just engaging in some second-rate devil's advocacy.

Render unto Caesar what is his, I believe?
That was clearly not the verse he was talking about. Incidentally, the verse he was talking about doesn't quite say what he claims it does.

That was clearly not the verse he was talking about. Incidentally, the verse he was talking about doesn't quite say what he claims it does.
No, I meant was it the one you were referring to.

It's clear to me that Allagheny isn't trying to display his moderation, he's just engaging in some second-rate devil's advocacy.

:D

Actually....one can say that the Constitution gives us the Authority to decide what is and is not just.

I thought it was a living document? Why are you trying to murder it?

No, I meant was it the one you were referring to.
You misunderstand. I guessed which verse he was getting at (Romans 13:1-5), which tells us to submit to the government, but that many people mistake for 'obey'.

:D
Now I've got you, Mr. Bond!

Now I've got you, Mr. Bond!

WAAAAAA!!!!!!! *tries to run and hide*

I like to be obtuse and mess with people's minds :D

Is that not called baiting and or trolling ?

Is that not called baiting and or trolling ?
He's treading a fine line, but I suppose he just wants to practice his skills (and he really needs it).

Is that not called baiting and or trolling ?

In this case, not really as I'm not baiting anyone.

In this case, not really as I'm not baiting anyone.
:p
Not baiting, not flaiming, and nothing against the rules saying you can't argue a point for the sake of arguing.

I was wondering about you... first you say you would be willing to be persecuted, then you turn around and say you don't wanna go to court... ;)

:p
Not baiting, not flaiming, and nothing against the rules saying you can't argue a point for the sake of arguing.

I was wondering about you... first you say you would be willing to be persecuted, then you turn around and say you don't wanna go to court... ;)

I do like messing with people's heads. Its more fun with professors though and not the internet.

Bullshit.

Sitting in a cell waiting to be killed, watching the hours ticking away usually for a period of years constantly aware that you're going to be murdered.

If that isn't psychological torture I don't know what is.

Psychological torture? If that's what it is, then even better. However, if you read my post, you would realize that I was referring to the execution aspect of the death penalty. But you're right, I said "death penalty," since the term will be read according to people's preconceptions, when I should have written "execution."

Well, he was currently on parole for arson during the heist of more than $70,000......Do the crime, do the time...I have no sympathy for a thief. Besides that article only gives one side of the story.

......Do the crime, do the time...

Well, it rhymes so it must be true.
"Do the crime, spend the rest of your life in jail" doesn't have such a ring to it, after all.

"Couldn't help but make me feel ashamed, to live in a land, where justice is a game."- Bob Dylan

"Couldn't help but make me feel ashamed, to live in a land, where justice is a game."- Bob Dylan

Aww, man! A conflicting rhyme! Who should I believe?