Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They were convicted for the burn, not anything else and as such the rest is irrelevant to the discussion of punishment times.
I'm not going to defend sentencing laws, some of them are just completely out of whack- but where's your outrage over the insane federal mandatory minimums for drug convictions? 10 Most Outrageous Mandatory Minimum - Business Insider Some of those sentences make 5 years look like a walk in the park.
I'm not going to defend sentencing laws, some of them are just completely out of whack- but where's your outrage over the insane federal mandatory minimums for drug convictions? 10 Most Outrageous Mandatory Minimum - Business Insider Some of those sentences make 5 years look like a walk in the park.
I have lots of outrage for the war on drugs, but that is obviously not the topic at hand. I suggest assuming less.
Nobody seems to be defending them in their totality. I, however, do find it strange that the government has had them re-arrested and re-sentenced to more time after they had been released from prison. It seems like the government wants to wave red flags in front of anti government wackos.
The inherent problem with mandatory minimums is illustrated here, there is no ability for a judge to use 'common sense' or to consider the circumstances of a particular case. Congress loves to pass laws with mandatory minimums, it's a typical knee jerk reaction intended to prove to constituents how "tough on crime" they are. What should happen is that congress should pass a law making mandatory minimums illegal.
He was tried and found guilty of arson by jury of his peers, and this is not his first offense. Why would he not deserve jail time? Hammond has also publicly stated that he intends to go to report to the authorities and that he doesn't want Bundy and his ilk there. My feeling is that this is a pretense for Bundy and his merry band of whackjobs to take a stand against the government, regardless of what the locals and ranchers actually want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3~Shepherds
Why is the government interested in putting a man in prison for what was most likely a bunch of dirt on fire. Burns, Oregon is nothing but sand and dirt, nothing to destroy.......yet, the government will not except this was possibly an accident. What does putting a 73 yr old man in prison do, possibly this is why Bundy is there.
Could not the government of proscecuted them on charges not related to terrorism? In this case, the motives to their crime appears to have been:
- Cover up of a previous crime (poaching) or
- Economic (destruction of property- invasive trees that were perceived to be an economic threat to their ranch).
Yet, the government went for terrorism charges despite the fact that the particular charge in this case seems contrived. Please note that I am not a Bundy sympathizer. rather, I just want to know why the government seems to be forcing confrontations when they dont need to. Sometimes, the government needs to fight to prevent the "give an inch, take a mile" concept.
This does not seem to be one of them. They could have petitoned the court to void the terrorism conviction as not applicable. Thus, there would be no need to appeal the sentence.
Let them be. Don't imagine we would have heard about this except for the Press looking for a story. Sounds kinda out of the way.
I can see you have no problem with "vanilla-ISIS." But when Tamir Rice was playing with a legal toy gun law enforcement did not leave him alone.
Quote:
Indeed, the white skin of the armed men and women who’ve taken over the federal property serves as a powerful force field protecting them from the shoot-first, ask-questions-later style of law enforcement that permeates communities of color every day.
Sensing a victory of sorts, Ammon Bundy, the leader of the takeover, announced he wants armed recruits from across the country to join him. Can we just pause right there for a second?
Do you know what our government calls groups of heavily armed black or Latino men? Gangs.
Do you know what our government calls heavily armed Muslims? Terrorists.
Words are important here because this classification of “militia” that is being used to describe the armed group that has taken over federal buildings and land would never be given to anyone other than white folk.
Well I SAID this was going to happen and I got censored by CityData. I don't want to hear anymore about how "Somebody should have said something, If you see something say something."
Could not the government of proscecuted them on charges not related to terrorism? In this case, the motives to their crime appears to have been: - Cover up of a previous crime (poaching) or - Economic (destruction of property- invasive trees that were perceived to be an economic threat to their ranch). Yet, the government went for terrorism charges despite the fact that the particular charge in this case seems contrived. Please note that I am not a Bundy sympathizer. Rather, I just want to know why the government seems to be forcing confrontations when they dont need to. Sometimes, the government needs to fight. This does not seem to be one of them.
Forcing confrontations? It is the job of the prosecutor to impose the most serious charges that the evidence supports. They can't decide to charge a lesser crime because someone is basically "a nice guy". It's the same in State Courts, you might have a really, really nice guy who has been a wonderful citizen and has never been arrested, but if he gets drunk and runs into someone and kills them he is charged with felony DUI and vehicular manslaughter same as the guy with an awful criminal record who is not nice at all. That's how the law works.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
