No More Jail For Marine Who Killed Iraqi

Discussion in 'Military' started by Gunny, Dec 14, 2007.

  1. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Wow. I totally disagree with the sentence. If he is guilty of murder, he should be doing some time.
     
  2. AllieBaba
    Offline

    AllieBaba BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    33,778
    Thanks Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +3,650
    Negligent homicide..that essentially means it was an accident. A stupid accident, but still an accident. No point in sending him to prison for all eternity, no purpose is served.
     
  3. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260
    I had a similar arguement on my other board about this. Murder is murder.
     
  4. AllieBaba
    Offline

    AllieBaba BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    33,778
    Thanks Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +3,650
    Negligent homicide isn't murder. It's accidentally killing somebody. Murder is intentionally killing somebody.

    Negligent homicide is acting like a jerk and not paying attention and backing over your buddy. Murder is getting him in the headlights and intentionally running him down.
     
  5. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    From the article...

    Some accident. And by the way negligent homicide isn't just an accident, its an accident where you fucked up bigtime. That is, you didn't want to kill him, but its pretty much all your fault.
     
  6. Diuretic
    Offline

    Diuretic Permanently confused

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    12,653
    Thanks Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    South Australia est 1836
    Ratings:
    +1,397
    Just as well he wasn't a teenage boy in Ga getting head from a teen girl, he'd be in BIG trouble. He only killed an Iraqi so he can walk. No biggie eh?
     
  7. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Explain please how one "accidentally" stabs someone 17 times?
     
  8. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Wrong. He took the life of another human being, and IMO, unjustifiably so.

    The Iraqi WAS violating light discipline. Smash his phone and knock his cigarette out. Rat on his ass. Tie him up. Get him off the line.

    But stab him 17 times with a bayonet? I don't see it.
     
  9. mattskramer
    Offline

    mattskramer Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,852
    Thanks Received:
    359
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +359
    This is where I’m tough on crime. The killer should be locked up for a long time. If the killing was an accident, then the killer should be kept out of society so that his clumsiness won’t result in another “accident”.

    It reminded me of the fact that there are so many drunk driving “repeat offenders”. I just don’t see how our justice system allows people who have been convicted time and time again to drive. It even allows people who have committed serious accidents to be back on the road after a fine and perhaps a brief time in jail. Anyway, this is probably a different rant suitable for a different thread.
     
  10. Larkinn
    Offline

    Larkinn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,598
    Thanks Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +175
    The thing about accidents (not really applicable in this case...perhaps a little bit) is that oftentimes the person failed under pressure. That is, they should have acted differently but the events that put them into that position weren't really that fault. Its hard to justify punishing someone if they find themselves in a situation which is extremely unpleasant which they then make the wrong choice about.

    If you are tailgating someone and they stop suddenly because a child is in front of them, and you rear end them and kill them, it IS an accident. Were you acting stupidly? Yes. Is it reasonable to think that it would end in death? Probably not.

    The thing about drunk driving is that we are essentially punishing people for a crime they *might* commit. We don't really care about them driving drunk, we care about the increased risk of killing someone when driving drunk. So we are basically saying "its illegal to do something which might injure someone"...that is punishing them for what could have happened, but didn't.
     

Share This Page