Reply With Quote
it does seem excessive. Interesting that they both waived their right to appeal.
any more details as to what they did?
http://www.tylerpaper.com/article/20...97/0/FRONTPAGE
Excessive if you ask me. No one was even hurt.
it does seem excessive. Interesting that they both waived their right to appeal.
any more details as to what they did?
Tyler is very constipated, uptight Bible-belt country.
Don't mess with their churches, or whatever the fashionable name is.
So what do you feel the penalty for burning down 5 churches should be [with a failed attempt on 2 others]?
That sucks.
i thought the church teaches ppl to forgive and forget
so what happen here?
Your entrapment sarcasm aside... I'm sure many of the people in the affected congregations have forgiven the arsonists... even despite the fact that this brand of arson borders as a hate-crime.
Nevertheless, the arsonists are at the mercy of the law, and Justice has been served. They may have obtained clemency from some of the people, but not from the law.
That all depends on whether anybody was hurt or not. Church or not is irrelevant.
What do you feel the penalty for burning down 5 empty gas stations should be (with a failed attempt on 2 others)?
I don't know... depends on the property losses...
As an aside; gas stations are a poor analogy. Unless it's a mom&pop store handed down from generation to generation. Most corner gas stations these days are franchise owned and operated. They are replaceable and covered by insurance... [premiums which would then be passed on to the rest of us].
But let me ask you this; how would you feel if someone willfully and maliciously burned down your house, along with the houses of those closest to you? Even if none of your loved ones were hurt; wouldn't you want justiced served? Sure, material things can be replaced but many of our belongings such as fotos, artwork, musical instruments, etc... are priceless sentimental objects that are by all intents and purposes irreplaceable. You would feel angered to say the least.
The fact that it's a church is highly relevant. Of course, given your world-view perspective and the context provided by most of your post history you wouldn't understand why that would be the case. Your nonchalant approach (bolded in your quote) is proof of that.
Last edited by Phenomanul; 01-11-2011 at 03:33 PM.
Entirely excessive. So they are getting pretty much the same sentence they would have gotten had they killed someone, right? I mean, its hard to top life in prison other than maybe the death penalty.
All because they burned down 5 churches? don't get me wrong, what they did is de able, but life in prison? really?
what exactly in these churches were irreplaceable?
Just for the record, 10 years is what I would have given them (IMO)... seeing how no one harmed.
10 years sounds reasonable, maybe even a little more. They shouldn't get a slap on the wrist, after all, someone COULD have gotten hurt or killed.
Church or not is incredibly relevant. That's why there are laws on the books allowing church arson to be classified as hate crimes and no such provisions exist for burning down empty gas stations. Whether that legally should be the case or not depends on your view of hate crime legislation in general.
Even if you are someone who is opposed to differentiating similar criminal acts via the whole hate crime concept, it's still pretty ridiculous to suggest that burning down a structure viewed by hundreds if not thousands of people to be a vital part of their lives to be equal to burning down an abandoned structure not being used by anyone.
Afterall, if the cir stances around the criminal act didn't matter, and in arson cases those cir stances including the use and perceived loss to society of the structure that had been destroyed, then there would be no need to have sentencing guidelines spanning vastly different lengths of time. Just say one count of arson gets you 5 years and be done. Whether it's an abandoned gas station serving no one, a church of 100 people, or a hospital serving thousands is irrelevant. Right?
what do you feel the penalty should be for burning down 5 mom and pop gas stations [with a failed attempt at 2 others] should be if no one gets harmed?
What's that have to do with keeping very harmful people locked up because they're a danger to society? Forgiveness doesn't play a factor when peoples safety is a concern
is that why you keep yourself locked up in the closet? afraid of aids?
Religion.
15 years, max. Life in prison for something that didn't involve murder, rape (in its many forms) and/or kidnapping is excessive in my opinion.
Life may be a bit much, but 15 years for seven separate acts of arson seems light to me. You do something like that seven times, you've made a habit out of it and deserve to go away for a very long time. JMO.....
15 years isn't exactly short timing it in the county jail. You're spending more than a decade behind bars. That's an entire decade of your life (20's, 30's, 40's, etc) and more in the clink. If the average life expectancy is roughly 75 years for men, that's 1/5th of that lifetime locked up.
Just sayin'.
The fact that they were Churches is relevantBut this... and that... snicker
The fact that they were Churches is relevant
You don't hide your personal grudges very well.
Generally, rape is a mental game changer for the victim. And I'm not talking about banging an intoxicated, non roofied chick or talking someone into it who was nervous of apprehensive at first. I'm talking about forcing someone who clearly doesn't want it or someone who is so incapacitated (a roofied chick) that they can't possibly consent. Their life is altered forever. Some rape victims lives are completely destroyed because of it. For that blatant disregard of someone's life, you've sacrificed any consideration for your own life, in my opinion.
You don't hide your butthurt at all.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
