Awesome punishment for flag burning

[wtfd661]

Now, the manner to which the owner of said flag acted is another manner all together (battery and kidnapping, anyone?).

-J-

Not when the TURD AGREED to have it done to him.

 

[spartan933]

Technically speaking, the flag was located on private property. I think then that it becomes vandalism and does not fall under a type of protest. Also, the (insert expletive) that did it was given the option of being arrested. However, likely wishing to avoid a criminal record, he chose the Third Option. A beating would have been appropriate and legal being that he was vandalizing group-owned private property.

 

[nighthawk80]

I see no wrong doing here. A crime was commited and Justice was served.
Plus, it was totaly awesome!!!



(the punishment, not the crime)

 

[JetGirl]

try those actions at my house

Dibs on front row center if it happens.

 

[Jay]

Dibs on front row center if it happens.

Bah, what in the world could an old timer like me do in a situation like that ?

 

[JetGirl]

Bah, what in the world could an old timer like me do in a situation like that ?

Let me watch! Geez, weren't ya listening??

 

[Jay]

well, if watchin' is yer thing, I s'pose it's ok with me......

 

[Joe Williams]

Let me watch! Geez, weren't ya listening??

You like to watch?

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

I don't like what he did , but I don't like the public doling out justice as they see fit either .

Granted they acted with some restraint this time , but whats' to say the next time some schmo does this they think his crime is worthy of a noose ?

 

[Bill of Rights]

Bah, what in the world could an old timer like me do in a situation like that ?

Why does the phrase, "copulate someone in a positive vertical direction" come to mind?

 

[JetGirl]

well, if watchin' is yer thing, I s'pose it's ok with me......

You like to watch?

Why does the phrase, "copulate someone in a positive vertical direction" come to mind?

Everybody's gotta have a hobby...right?

 

[Jay]

If enough of these "schmos" get their snot lockers bashed, other potential vandals might just reconsider what their actions against the property of others might generate.

I think the schmo got off much lighter than he deserved.

kinda like one of

life's little character building events

 

[Bill of Rights]

I don't like what he did , but I don't like the public doling out justice as they see fit either .

Granted they acted with some restraint this time , but whats' to say the next time some schmo does this they think his crime is worthy of a noose ?

They gave the criminal vandal a choice. He could be arrested, get his butt kicked, or do what he did.

If the intended victims of his crime caught him and offered him a choice between arrest or a noose, I'd suppose he'd probably choose arrest, and as long as that option is available, I don't see the problem. He made the choice. He avoided a criminal record or possibly avoided making his record longer. As long as the choice to have his day in court is available, I don't see that this is vigilantism.

Of course, if you think that government handles things better than any individual, I suppose I can see the "public doling out justice" argument.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Jay]

Everybody's gotta have a hobby...right?

Since you brought it up........ heh , heh..... are you ready ?

 

[JetGirl]

Since you brought it up........ heh , heh..... are you ready ?

Like I haven't before?
Seems to me that somewhere in the Midwest, there's a mouthy holster salesman walking around with a Rubbermaid tub full of holsters up his butt.
That sound slightly familiar to you?

 

[Jay]

That sound slightly familiar to you?

Well, that guy just didn't want to listen. It's beginning to sound like you have a selective memory........

 

[JetGirl]

Well, that guy just didn't want to listen. It's beginning to sound like you have a selective memory........

I don't recall saying that he didn't have it coming.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

Of course, if you think that government handles things better than any individual, I suppose I can see the "public doling out justice" argument.

Blessings,
Bill

All things , no . Law and punishment , for the most part , yes .

In my mind , it's not too much of a leap that it could get out of hand if it becomes common place .

IMO , if their sense of morality or civic duty compelled them to do anything at all , it should have been to turn him over to the police .

Admittedly , I'm not any sort of constitutional scholar .

I can't recall ever hearing of any provision that allows average citizens to decide for themselves what sort of punishment fits a given crime . And certainly not how a punishment is to be administered .

 

[Bill of Rights]

All things , no . Law and punishment , for the most part , yes .

In my mind , it's not too much of a leap that it could get out of hand if it becomes common place .

IMO , if their sense of morality or civic duty compelled them to do anything at all , it should have been to turn him over to the police .

Admittedly , I'm not any sort of constitutional scholar .

I can't recall ever hearing of any provision that allows average citizens to decide for themselves what sort of punishment fits a given crime . And certainly not how a punishment is to be administered .

The person you seem to think is the victim (you know, the criminal) had a choice. Actually, he had several. He could have chosen to not go there in the first place. He could have chosen to go elsewhere rather than wait. He could have chosen to voice his displeasure quietly and maturely. He could have chosen to not be destructive of others' property. He could have chosen to man up, pay for the damage he caused, and settled with those who owned the property. He could have chosen a fight. He could have chosen police involvement and subsequent trial.

He chose the punishment he took.

When I was in middle school, the standard administrative response to more severe misbehavior (i.e. fighting) was "3, 3, or 5", that being five days of washing dishes at lunch, three days of on-campus suspension, or three smacks on the backside with a paddle. Very few students chose either of the latter options. Parents understood this and while some didn't much like it, they had the option of refusing to allow the corporal punishment on their kid. That said, given the choice, the kids usually chose the paddle. It hurt, but once done, it was done. The point is that the kid made the choices that got him (or her) into the office in the first place. What happened after that was hardly the fault of the school administration.

This guy had the choice of "3, 3, or 5", too. He could have chosen a fight; painful, but short duration. He could have chosen court; less severe but a longer term. Instead, he chose the middle ground of "not as painful as a fight but not as long-term as the trial sentence."

The difference is that it wasn't a school administration but rather a property owner, and he still had the option.

I really don't see why you seem to miss this. Is it that you worry that someday, someone might not give the court system as an option?

That's where I draw the line, too. As long as that option is on the table, I have no problem with this punishment.

ETA: Oh, as for your last... that right is one of those included in the 9A... for the criminal, in this case.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[MoparMan]