Skip to main content

View Diary: Roeder Trial: Witness for the Defense Under Investigation for Ethics Violations (102 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  According to this Judge -- yes. (3+ / 0-)

    Or, more specifically -- the Judge believes you should be allowed to ARGUE that you were "trying to save lives" when you assasinated that soldier, or general, or politician.

    Or, what if someone takes Rep. Grayson's argument that lack of health care kills people? Then use it to "justify" killing Joe LIeberman or Olympia Snowe?

    This dumbfuck Judge is basically saying that its OK to let teh Defendant argue he was trying to save lives by killing them.

    •  This is not entirely the judge's fault (3+ / 0-)

      it's more the fault of a stupid law.  See my post below.  

    •  Predicting the future (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      renzo capetti

      Oh, you can justify murder because you can predict what the doctor, or soldier, or politician, will do next?

      The defense has dug a hole and may not put down the shovel. What about corporal discipline of kids? Can I get my neighbor locked up because he used a belt on his kid and may do so again? May we keep a convicted criminal in the clink because the recidivism rate is above zero? Does past performance necessarily determine intent?

      This is the logical end of vigilantism, the direction that the wingnuts have been advocating for some time now. They have more in common with Khomenei than with Jefferson and Madison.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site