Another Victory in the War on Drugs

[Martlet]

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
When the discussion degrades to the infintile level of namecalling the discussion ends..
have a good day

I'm surprised you didn't say that after your klingon comment.

Hypocrite.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Martlet
They were within the guidelines.  What part of that don't you understand?  HE BROKE THE LAW.  If he couldn't survive 10 days in jail, then he shouldn't have broken the law.  If you don't want quads in jail, then change the guidelines to forbid quads from doing jail time.

It's obvious YOU really ARE that stupid.  THE JUDGE DID NOTHING WRONG.

Crying about it over and over doesn't change that.

 

Of course you don't think your argument is flawed.  That doesn't change the fact that it is.

Enlighten me then.  What do you do to change the laws you don't agree with?

Of course I'm right.  She did do nothing wrong.  Why are you still arguing it then?

No .... there's no "Of course I'm right" to it. That's just you stubbornly sticking to your guns in your corner because you're too proud to admit you had a brain fart.

The judge did do something wrong and it cost a man his life.

Here .. test the theory (keep it to yourself because you don't wanna embarr-ass yourself in public):

1: What could the JUDGE have done to prevent this tragedy?

(Take a fifteen minute break to rest. Go get a drink of water to replenish fluids lost from sweat and urination)

2: Could the options you've outlined in question one been easily accomplished?

(Take an hour meal break then a walk around the block to mentally get back into the right frame of mind)

3: Was the punitive measure taken neccessary? What did it accomplish?

(You may have to sleep on this one)

4: Does the system already allow a more suitable option? If so, was it within the power of the judge to explore and use them?

(Hint - you can possibly copy what you wrote for your first answer - that being the case you may then proceed directly to question 5)

5: If you were the judge in this case, would you have done anything differetly and if so how?

(Just skip to 6)

6: If you chose not to do things differently, how do you think this may affect your future as a judge? How do you think it should?

(Just make something up)

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by Martlet
I'm surprised you didn't say that after your klingon comment.

Hypocrite.

Not hardly
you might wanna check back on that,
I didnt CALL you anything
I said your mindset reminded me of

[Martlet]

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Not hardly
you might wanna check back on that,
I didnt CALL you anything
I said your mindset reminded me of

And I didn't CALL YOU anything.

What are you whining about?  If you've realized you can't defend your position and want to bail, go for it.  Don't make up fake reasons, though.

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Arlo
No .... there's no "Of course I'm right" to it. That's just you stubbornly sticking to your guns in your corner because you're too proud to admit you had a brain fart.

The judge did do something wrong and it cost a man his life.

Here .. test the theory (keep it to yourself because you don't wanna embarr-ass yourself in public):

1: What could the JUDGE have done to prevent this tragedy?

(Take a fifteen minute break to rest. Go get a drink of water to replenish fluids lost from sweat and urination)

2: Could the options you've outlined in question one been easily accomplished?

(Take an hour meal break then a walk around the block to mentally get back into the right frame of mind)

3: Was the punitive measure taken neccessary? What did it accomplish?

(You may have to sleep on this one)

4: Does the system already allow a more suitable option? If so, was it within the power of the judge to explore and use them?

(Hint - you can possibly copy what you wrote for your first answer - that being the case you may then proceed directly to question 5)

5: If you were the judge in this case, would you have done anything differetly and if so how?

(Just skip to 6)

6: If you chose not to do things differently, how do you think this may affect your future as a judge? How do you think it should?

(Just make something up)

What an asinine argument.  Let's blame the judge.  Here's a better idea.  What could the quad have done to prevent this tragedy?

Oh yeah.

NOT BREAK THE LAW.

[vorticon]

Originally posted by Martlet
What an asinine argument.  Let's blame the judge.  Here's a better idea.  What could the quad have done to prevent this tragedy?

Oh yeah.

NOT BREAK THE LAW.

of course, not answering his questions makes your argument soo much better.

hmm...

a while back, someone on this boards kid stole a candy bar. the kid broke the law.
do you feel that the child should have gone to jail?

and yes it WAS the judges fault. why?

the judges position was similar to that of someone standing 3 feet behind a bank robber with a tazer in one hand and a gun in the other, that person obviously has a choice, he can either fatally shoot the robber or merely disable him, or do nothing

1st option the guy is at best gonna get a manslaughter charge, probably more because HE HAD THE OPTION TO USE NONLETHAL FORCE

2nd option, the cops show up the robber gets arrested, everyones happy.

3rd option and the guy is an accessory to the crime.

[SOB]

A candy bar?!  Send that little bastard to Gitmo!

[Martlet]

Originally posted by vorticon
of course, not answering his questions makes your argument soo much better.

hmm...

a while back, someone on this boards kid stole a candy bar. the kid broke the law.
do you feel that the child should have gone to jail?

and yes it WAS the judges fault. why?

the judges position was similar to that of someone standing 3 feet behind a bank robber with a tazer in one hand and a gun in the other, that person obviously has a choice, he can either fatally shoot the robber or merely disable him, or do nothing

1st option the guy is at best gonna get a manslaughter charge, probably more because HE HAD THE OPTION TO USE NONLETHAL FORCE

2nd option, the cops show up the robber gets arrested, everyones happy.

3rd option and the guy is an accessory to the crime.

Do I feel he should  have gone to jail?  No.  Could  he have gone to jail?  I don't know.  I'm unsure what the sentencing guidelines are for theft of a 50 cent item.  Do you?

What kind of an example is that?    You give 3 options.  The first and third you say are crimes.

What crime did the judge commit?  NONE.  The judge passed sentencing in accordance with the sentencing guidelines.  HOW DIFFICULT IS THAT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND?

The stretches you guys are making now are laughable.

[vorticon]

Originally posted by Martlet

What crime did the judge commit?  NONE.  The judge passed sentencing in accordance with the sentencing guidelines.  HOW DIFFICULT IS THAT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND?

i understand it perfectly. the judges decision diretly led to a persons death, that IMO IS A CRIME. I FIND IT DIFFICULT TO BELEIVE THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES INCLUDED PROVISIONS FOR A QUAD. AND THE JUDGE CLEARLY DID NOT TAKE THAT FACT INTO CONSIDERATION, HOW DIFFICULT IS IT FOR THAT TO UNDERSTAND.

[Martlet]

Originally posted by vorticon
i understand it perfectly. the judges decision diretly led to a persons death, that IMO IS A CRIME. I FIND IT DIFFICULT TO BELEIVE THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES INCLUDED PROVISIONS FOR A QUAD. AND THE JUDGE CLEARLY DID NOT TAKE THAT FACT INTO CONSIDERATION, HOW DIFFICULT IS IT FOR THAT TO UNDERSTAND.

Um, no.  the criminal's decision to break the law led INDIRECTLY to his death.  The judge followed the law, as a judge is required to do.  The criminal did not.

You have a child with epilepsy.  You chose to send that child to school.  The child has a seizure at school and dies.  Should you be jailed because you sent your child to school, as the law requires?

[Curval]

Originally posted by Martlet
You aren't confused, you just can't read.

I said I support the LEGALIZATION of marijuana.  I obviously don't support it's use while it is illegal.

lol...I can read just fine thanks.

Way to stick your neck out in support of a cause there Marlet.

I said I support the LEGALIZATION of marijuana.

Flip

I obviously don't support it's use while it is illegal.

Flop.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Martlet
What an asinine argument.  Let's blame the judge.  Here's a better idea.  What could the quad have done to prevent this tragedy?

Oh yeah.

NOT BREAK THE LAW.

Don't worry. Take your time. Like I said ... you can even keep the answers you don't really want to give to yourself if it'll make you think your little corner is really prime real estate.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Martlet
Um, no.  the criminal's decision to break the law led INDIRECTLY to his death.  The judge followed the law, as a judge is required to do.  The criminal did not.

You have a child with epilepsy.  You chose to send that child to school.  The child has a seizure at school and dies.  Should you be jailed because you sent your child to school, as the law requires?

Yeah ... let's play stupid correlation vs. sensible one.

You have a child that has epilepsy. You can either send him to a school that is equipped and prepared to handle his special needs or you can send him to military school. You really really want to send him to military school. You call the military school and ask them if they'll accept children with epilepsy and can they handle their needs. The voice on the other end of the line says, "Uh ... yeah." You send him off. He has a seizure and dies. Do you have any business being a parent?

There ya go, Jethro.

[Martlet]

Originally posted by Curval
lol...I can read just fine thanks.

Way to stick your neck out in support of a cause there Marlet.

I said I support the LEGALIZATION of marijuana.

Flip

I obviously don't support it's use while it is illegal.

Flop.

Come back and post again when you've come down off your high.  You stopped making sense.  I don't support breaking laws.  I do support changing the ones I don't agree with.  I'm sorry it's above your intellect to understand that.

Originally posted by Arlo
Don't worry. Take your time. Like I said ... you can even keep the answers you don't really want to give to yourself if it'll make you think your little corner is really prime real estate.

So, you've finally stopped trying to defend your asinine and indefensible argument and just moved right on to blabbering.

Originally posted by Arlo
Yeah ... let's play stupid correlation vs. sensible one.

You have a child that has epilepsy. You can either send him to a school that is equipped and prepared to handle his special needs or you can send him to military school. You really really want to send him to military school. You call the military school and ask them if they'll accept children with epilepsy and can they handle their needs. The voice on the other end of the line says, "Uh ... yeah." You send him off. He has a seizure and dies. Do you have any business being a parent?

There ya go, Jethro.

Fun game.  I'll stick with my sensible correlation, though.  You can keep your stupid one.

[Martlet]

Wait, why was he in jail again?  

Oh yeah.

HE BROKE THE LAW.