Rioters sentanced

[B. Max]

Just like a liberal, try and save a drug house by putting out the fire.

Just like a right winger. Kill the innocent while trying to do the right thing.

Not trying, succeeding.

[jdobbin]

Not trying, succeeding.

True. Killing the innocent seems to be a right wing trait in the pursuit of justice.

[Black Dog]

I'm so glad I found a "get out of public disapprobation free" card. Commit a crime? Just say your victim was a drug dealer and you are immediately exonerate din the court of conservative opinion. "Oh sure I kicked the crap out of the guy and nicked his car, but he was a crack dealer. I was helping the community. What? Evidence? I don't have any and I don't need any: everyone knows it's true. The cops? Oh they just wouldn't do anything about it."

[Argus]

The law has hanged plenty of innocent people, too.

What about the danger to people of unrestrainted drug sales and violence?

The people responsible for the hanging should the face the same punishment.

Keeping going up the food chain until you do get the right authorities to act.

Just because someone doesn't like abortion doesn't mean they should find a doctor who does them and act as judge, jury and executioner. Or is that okay too? What type of vigilanteeism is okay and what is not?

As far as I'm concerned, when you act as a vigilante you're assuming all the risks of being wrong. If what you do produces justice I support it. If it doesn't, you're on the hook for the appropriate punishment.

[Argus]

I'm so glad I found a "get out of public disapprobation free" card. Commit a crime? Just say your victim was a drug dealer and you are immediately exonerate din the court of conservative opinion. "Oh sure I kicked the crap out of the guy and nicked his car, but he was a crack dealer. I was helping the community. What? Evidence? I don't have any and I don't need any: everyone knows it's true. The cops? Oh they just wouldn't do anything about it."

Actually, there seems to be a whole pile of evidence that they were crack dealers.

But I think the comparison you're searching for in the law is husband killing, which is legal so long as you "claim" that you were battered, or at least, threatened, or at least, had a decent grudge agaisnt the hubby. No evidence is requred that you were ever actually harmed.

[B. Max]

Not trying, succeeding.

True. Killing the innocent seems to be a right wing trait in the pursuit of justice.

Sounds like something that should posted over the doors of the liberal abortion mills. With some removed.

Killing the innocent in the pursuit of justice.

[jdobbin]

As far as I'm concerned, when you act as a vigilante you're assuming all the risks of being wrong. If what you do produces justice I support it. If it doesn't, you're on the hook for the appropriate punishment.

Everyone usually says that they don't like the discretion a judge has in sentencing. Well, in this case, the judge didn't have much discretion in sentencing. Even if these guys did what they was right, it had to view it from the thought of "what if it went wrong?"

It is too bad the police and authorities didn't act. The judge acted accordingly.

The federal government can still intervene if they feel the persons involved deserve mercy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon#Pardon...mency_in_Canada

[Hydraboss]

I'm so glad I found a "get out of public disapprobation free" card. Commit a crime? Just say your victim was a drug dealer and you are immediately exonerate din the court of conservative opinion. "Oh sure I kicked the crap out of the guy and nicked his car, but he was a crack dealer. I was helping the community. What? Evidence? I don't have any and I don't need any: everyone knows it's true. The cops? Oh they just wouldn't do anything about it."

What does this "crack dealer" comment have to do with anything? If these guys had openly beat the church-going house owner to death with, oh I don't know, a baseball bat and an aluminum hockey stick, etc, they still would have received house arrest. Did you forget that this is the Canadian Injustice System?

Our system is based on rehabilitation not punishment. The fact that this guy was/is a drug dealer has no bearing on what these guys did. PEOPLE DON'T GET PUNISHED IN THIS COUNTRY.

[jdobbin]

Sounds like something that should posted over the doors of the liberal abortion mills. With some removed.

Killing the innocent in the pursuit of justice.

Ah yes, the abortion mills. Doctors, nurses and women all out murdering the innocent. I guess you'll be getting right on that.

[blueblood]

As far as I'm concerned, when you act as a vigilante you're assuming all the risks of being wrong. If what you do produces justice I support it. If it doesn't, you're on the hook for the appropriate punishment.

Everyone usually says that they don't like the discretion a judge has in sentencing. Well, in this case, the judge didn't have much discretion in sentencing. Even if these guys did what they was right, it had to view it from the thought of "what if it went wrong?"

It is too bad the police and authorities didn't act. The judge acted accordingly.

The federal government can still intervene if they feel the persons involved deserve mercy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon#Pardon...mency_in_Canada

In the crack house case, the vigilantes had an air tight case, they acted, and solved a problem that was the scourge of their community, this thing could not have went wrong. The judge shouldn't act on the if something goes wrong, he should act on when something went wrong, and in this case it didn't. The police and authorities couldn't act due to a left winged justice system that has them jumping through hoops to get the job done, it's like you'd rather see 20 mass murderers go free than see a person who didn't necessarily commit mass muder go to jail, it is with that thinking that is a major part of why we have a crime problem

[jdobbin]

In the crack house case, the vigilantes had an air tight case, they acted, and solved a problem that was the scourge of their community, this thing could not have went wrong. The judge shouldn't act on the if something goes wrong, he should act on when something went wrong, and in this case it didn't. The police and authorities couldn't act due to a left winged justice system that has them jumping through hoops to get the job done, it's like you'd rather see 20 mass murderers go free than see a person who didn't necessarily commit mass muder go to jail, it is with that thinking that is a major part of why we have a crime problem

His discretion on this was very limited. Apparently, that's how the right wing wants their judges to act.