Poll Question on Danziger Bridge Massacre

[geauxtohell]

Why don't people want the law applied? Under "Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law", Officer A and Sergeant are liable for the death penalty, why does no one want it applied? Because they are cops and cops are above the law?

I am anti-death penalty so I voted against that.

I want to see justice done.

As I said before, you can't argue for justice when you have already reached a verdict in your mind.

 

[geauxtohell]

If you had actually graduated high school you'd know the three fold purpose of the criminal justice system - retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

Revenge and retribution are listed as synonyms in any thesaurus you pick up.

Are either of the anonymous officers currently charged with any crimes by the state or federal government?

Or is it just Hunter so far?

 

[DiamondDave]

Are you denying that part of the purpose of the death penalty is revenge?




Congratulations, you're an idiot. One of the main purposes of the penal justice system is to exact a price in exchange for crimes. That is revenge. Its not done merely as a deterrent to others - it is done to "get back" at the criminal.



What would you decide if you were on a jury and you were convinced that the facts laid out in the bill of information were true?

Wow...sounds like you must have had a few bad run in's with the police!!! Are you a felon? Revenge, a total disregard for our system of justice....

In case you were raised in Mexico...let me clue you in...there is a difference between justice and revenge.

If you had actually graduated high school you'd know the three fold purpose of the criminal justice system - retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

Revenge and retribution are listed as synonyms in any thesaurus you pick up.

So are attack and fight... but do not mean remotely the same thing... nice try

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Are you denying that part of the purpose of the death penalty is revenge?




Congratulations, you're an idiot. One of the main purposes of the penal justice system is to exact a price in exchange for crimes. That is revenge. Its not done merely as a deterrent to others - it is done to "get back" at the criminal.



What would you decide if you were on a jury and you were convinced that the facts laid out in the bill of information were true?

Wow...sounds like you must have had a few bad run in's with the police!!! Are you a felon? Revenge, a total disregard for our system of justice....

In case you were raised in Mexico...let me clue you in...there is a difference between justice and revenge.

If you had actually graduated high school you'd know the three fold purpose of the criminal justice system - retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

Revenge and retribution are listed as synonyms in any thesaurus you pick up.

and if you weren't a psychotic inbred from the swamps of Louisiana you would know that any appearance of impropriety in our system of justice would cause the breakdown of our society as we know it. Revenge has no place in our justice system.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Why don't people want the law applied? Under "Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law", Officer A and Sergeant are liable for the death penalty, why does no one want it applied? Because they are cops and cops are above the law?

I am anti-death penalty so I voted against that.

I want to see justice done.

As I said before, you can't argue for justice when you have already reached a verdict in your mind.

Its a question about two hypothetical people, "Officer A" and "Sergeant A", and the question assumes the facts presented about them are true.

So given those facts, and given what the federal statute say - do you think they deserve the death penalty? That's the question.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

If you had actually graduated high school you'd know the three fold purpose of the criminal justice system - retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

Revenge and retribution are listed as synonyms in any thesaurus you pick up.

Are either of the anonymous officers currently charged with any crimes by the state or federal government?

Or is it just Hunter so far?

Hunter is the 4th NOPD officer to be charged, and the 2nd involved directly in the shooting. Which leaves 5 cops who participated in the shooting and who have not been charged yet.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Wow...sounds like you must have had a few bad run in's with the police!!! Are you a felon? Revenge, a total disregard for our system of justice....

In case you were raised in Mexico...let me clue you in...there is a difference between justice and revenge.

If you had actually graduated high school you'd know the three fold purpose of the criminal justice system - retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

Revenge and retribution are listed as synonyms in any thesaurus you pick up.

So are attack and fight... but do not mean remotely the same thing... nice try

Uhhh, no, not in this thesaurus:

advance, aggress, ambush, assail, assault, bash, bat, bean, beat, beset, besiege, biff, blast, blister, boff, bombard, boot, bop, brain*, bust, charge, chop down, clip, clock, club, combat, cook*, harm, hit, hurt, infiltrate, invade, jump, kick, knock block off, knock cold, knock for a loop, larrup, lay siege to, light into, molest, mug, overwhelm, pounce upon, punch, raid, rush, set upon, slog, soak, stab, storm, strike, take the offensive, turn on, wallop, whop

I don't see the word "fight" in that list. Which Thesaurus are you using? http://thesaurus.com/browse/attack


Though they are not listed as synonyms, your suggestion that two words can be synonyms yet "not mean remotely the same thing" is clear evidence of your mental incapacitation. Do you seriously not know what the word "synonym" means? Look it up. I guarantee it doesn't say "One of two or more words that do not remotely have the same meaning"

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Wow...sounds like you must have had a few bad run in's with the police!!! Are you a felon? Revenge, a total disregard for our system of justice....

In case you were raised in Mexico...let me clue you in...there is a difference between justice and revenge.

If you had actually graduated high school you'd know the three fold purpose of the criminal justice system - retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation.

Revenge and retribution are listed as synonyms in any thesaurus you pick up.

and if you weren't a psychotic inbred from the swamps of Louisiana you would know that any appearance of impropriety in our system of justice would cause the breakdown of our society as we know it. Revenge has no place in our justice system.

You're babbling again.

You're essentially stating that retributive justice has no place in our system of justice - which means you do not believe that punishment for a crime is morally justified so long as the punishment is in proportion to the crime.

So which theory of justice do you prescribe to? Transformative justice? Restorative justice? Its odd to me, you being a rightwinger, that you would believe in liberal hogwash such as that, but if you don't believe in retributive justice, what's left?

Why do you not believe criminals should be punished?

 

[JWBooth]

NOTA

Its for a Louisiana jury to decide, not the idle musings of basement dwellers on a message board.

 

[Nonelitist]

NOTA

Its for a Louisiana jury to decide, not the idle musings of basement dwellers on a message board.

Good point. Not much else to talk about.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

NOTA

Its for a Louisiana jury to decide, not the idle musings of basement dwellers on a message board.

I'm not sure how a Louisiana jury would get to decide the fate of two hypothetical people that exist solely in a hypothetical question involving Officers A and Sergeants A - maybe you can explain - or maybe you just don't understand the fucking question.

The question was-
assuming the facts laid out about Sergeans A and Officer A are true, do they deserve the death penalty?

The question was NOT-
Who gets to decide the fate of Officer A and Sergeant A?


Maybe you didn't get that, chickenshit in your eyes?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

nota

its for a louisiana jury to decide, not the idle musings of basement dwellers on a message board.

good point. Not much else to talk about.

then why do you insist on continuing to post in this thread?

 

[JWBooth]

NOTA

Its for a Louisiana jury to decide, not the idle musings of basement dwellers on a message board.

I'm not sure how a Louisiana jury would get to decide the fate of two hypothetical people that exist solely in a hypothetical question involving Officers A and Sergeants A - maybe you can explain - or maybe you just don't understand the fucking question.

The question was-
assuming the facts laid out about Sergeans A and Officer A are true, do they deserve the death penalty?

The question was NOT-
Who gets to decide the fate of Officer A and Sergeant A?


Maybe you didn't get that, chickenshit in your eyes?

Hypotheticals dont die at the hands of the state when a death penalty is handed down. Since you don't fucking understand fucking logic, when the assumed hypothetical goes to trial get back to us.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Hypotheticals dont die at the hands of the state when a death penalty is handed down.

Yeah, I know, isn't that great? It means we can discuss this issue without harming ANYONE! Amazing, isn't it?

Since you don't fucking understand fucking logic, when the assumed hypothetical goes to trial get back to us.

fucking understand fucking logic ? What is that ?

If you don't want to answer the hypothetical, no one is forcing you to. But why is it you are being such a huge asshole? Why don't you just, go away, to another thread, with a topic you'd actually like to discuss? Or did you not come here for discussion?

 

[Meister]

Hypotheticals dont die at the hands of the state when a death penalty is handed down.

Yeah, I know, isn't that great? It means we can discuss this issue without harming ANYONE! Amazing, isn't it?

Since you don't fucking understand fucking logic, when the assumed hypothetical goes to trial get back to us.

fucking understand fucking logic ? What is that ?

If you don't want to answer the hypothetical, no one is forcing you to. But why is it you are being such a huge asshole? Why don't you just, go away, to another thread, with a topic you'd actually like to discuss? Or did you not come here for discussion?

Geeze grow up Spider.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Wow, so far only one other person thinks that a cop who shoots an unarmed mentally handicapped civilian in the back from a moving vehicle, killing him, should actually have to pay for his crime with his life.



My question for the others is - if I were to shoot an unarmed mentally handicapped man in the back from a moving vehicle, and then have one of my buddies come over and jump up and down on his body as he lay bleeding to death - would I deserve the death penalty?

 

[Nonelitist]

Wow, so far only one other person thinks that a cop who shoots an unarmed mentally handicapped civilian in the back from a moving vehicle, killing him, should actually have to pay for his crime with his life.



My question for the others is - if I were to shoot an unarmed mentally handicapped man in the back from a moving vehicle, and then have one of my buddies come over and jump up and down on his body as he lay bleeding to death - would I deserve the death penalty?

For murder? Possibly

For civil rights violation... no

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Wow, so far only one other person thinks that a cop who shoots an unarmed mentally handicapped civilian in the back from a moving vehicle, killing him, should actually have to pay for his crime with his life.



My question for the others is - if I were to shoot an unarmed mentally handicapped man in the back from a moving vehicle, and then have one of my buddies come over and jump up and down on his body as he lay bleeding to death - would I deserve the death penalty?

For murder? Possibly

For civil rights violation... no

Why are you against the Congress enforcing Section 1 of the 14th amendment through the powers granted it in Section 5 of the same amendment?

Are you against the Constitution? Or do you just not think Congress should enforce it? Or do you just not think LIFE is a right?

 

[manu1959]

Why don't people want the law applied? Under "Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law", Officer A and Sergeant are liable for the death penalty, why does no one want it applied? Because they are cops and cops are above the law?

have they been convicted yet?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Why don't people want the law applied? Under "Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law", Officer A and Sergeant are liable for the death penalty, why does no one want it applied? Because they are cops and cops are above the law?

have they been convicted yet?

"They" will never be convicted because "they" are two hypothetical officers, "Officer A" and "Sergeant A", and in this discussion, the facts of the case as laid out in the bill of information are assumed true.

If you don't want to participate in a discussion of hypotheticals, that's fine, you just have to leave this thread.