- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why are they detaining Pelosi attacker without bail
Posted on 11/1/22 at 6:32 am to AggieHank86
Posted on 11/1/22 at 6:32 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Personally, I see absolutely nothing wrong with providing some additional protections to those who are exposed to greater risk.
So you believe some animals are more equal than others.....
2
Posted on 11/1/22 at 6:36 am to Tantal
quote:
All snark aside, the answer is Federal vs State charges. The Feds didn't do away with cash bail and Pelosi's slam piece's bail will be the maximum allowable.
Why is he in on federal charges???
Posted on 11/1/22 at 6:38 am to davyjones
quote:There is probably truth in this assessment.
Yeah in my opinion that aspect is rotten to the core. Not unlike the rest of it. But in this case I believe what they’re doing is leaving a back door open for if and when they have to start sneaking away from the state case, the state can abandon/dismiss its matters and defer to the federal matter, where it can be completely controlled and tight lid kept on it, in addition to the other devious actions they have in their pocket.
I can see them treating him “leniently“ in state court pretrial, so that they can preserve their “ideals,“ while deferring to federal court… where it seems unlikely that he would get a pretrial release based upon the nature of the crime and his apparently rather itinerant lifestyle.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 6:48 am to oogabooga68
quote:Do you want a serious discussion of the merits of this common type of statute, or do you want to hurl perceived zingers?
So you believe some animals are more equal than others.....
If the former, I am willing to try and treat you like an adult because there IS an interesting discussion to be had. If the latter, I will leave you to your antics.
This post was edited on 11/1/22 at 6:50 am
Posted on 11/1/22 at 7:08 am to oogabooga68
quote:
quote:Personally, I see absolutely nothing wrong with providing some additional protections to those who are exposed to greater risk. So you believe some animals are more equal than others.....
This isn’t about some being more equal as it were. Instead, it is the implication that there is an increased risk of politically inspired violence to elected or appointed officials which citizens who are not serving in the government do not have to bear.
That violence is not just a threat to the governmental official or his family but is instead a threat to all of us because it can have a chilling affect on the official doing their job. If people know there are no federal laws protecting them from violence against them or their families for doing their job, then they will be intimidated not to do that job. That’s a breakdown of a functioning government and a loss for all of us.
That’s why this is done and not for simple Animal Farm quote.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 7:10 am to AggieHank86
quote:
I initially did only cursory research
Posted on 11/1/22 at 7:10 am to dafif
quote:I have not reviewed THIS statute, but most jurisdictions combined assault and battery into a single offense … many, many years ago.
Assault on us govt family member is a big stretch. … Why not battery as well?
Posted on 11/1/22 at 7:12 am to LSU2ALA
quote:As I said, there is an interesting discussion to be had. You did a nice job outlining one of the arguments. Kudos.
That’s why this is done and not for simple Animal Farm quote.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 7:13 am to dafif
quote:
quote:DePape is charged with one count of assault of an immediate family member of a United States official So the guy that attacked Ron Paul is serving 40 years?
You left out of your quote the part that says the assault is “with the intent to retaliate against the official on account of the performance of official duties.” The Rand Paul issue had nothing to do with that did it? As I recall, that was a simple neighbor dispute that got way out of hand.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 7:21 am to AggieHank86
quote:
If the former, I am willing to try and treat you like an adult because there IS an interesting discussion to be had. If the latter, I will leave you to your antics.
It's pretty clear I am a burr under your saddle.
I do not give a flying fk about being "treated like an adult" by the almighty self-anointed God-King Hank, your approval means nothing to me as your Narcissism compels me to consider you an inferior being.
The fact that I annoy the single biggest prick on this board is good enough for me.
Lighten up, Hank, this is only Social Media....
Posted on 11/1/22 at 7:26 am to AggieHank86
quote:
As I said, there is an interesting discussion to be had. You did a nice job outlining one of the arguments. Kudos.
Thanks. Here’s another one for you. It’s like hazard pay. We pay people higher wages for taking dangerous jobs. The employer in this situation, the federal government, has chosen to compensate them for this risk through the law. Other employers don’t do this, but other employers don’t exactly have that option as they don’t make law.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 7:26 am to AggieHank86
quote:
or do you want to hurl perceived zingers?
By zinger you mean pointing out staunch Libertarian AggieHank's eleventy-billionth instance of hypocrisy I assume.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 7:31 am to LSU2ALA
The Rand Paul situation seems to have arisen from a years-long dispute about Rand not maintaining his yard in “adequately spiffy” fashion to suit his neighbor.
These statutes typically extend protections to governmental employees and officials who put themselves in harm’s way. First responders. Police officers. Postal workers. Judges. Yes, elected officials.
If a criminal assaults such a person, he is not just assaulting an individual. He is assaulting the institutions that they represent. He is interfering with the orderly operation of our society.
Anarchists will see that as a “good thing.” But the very nature of the crime is different from a simple assault. It is an assault upon society as a whole.
Should these protections extend to family members? That is a valid question to ask. The family members are not exposing themselves to risk, but attacking a family member is certainly a way to influence the behavior of a public official.
No one likes politicians, in a very general sense. It is very easy to frame this discussion in the context and make snarky comments.
Look instead at a cop who is arresting drug dealers. Should a drug gang not face greater penalties for assaulting his wife or child in order to influence his enforcement actions?
These statutes typically extend protections to governmental employees and officials who put themselves in harm’s way. First responders. Police officers. Postal workers. Judges. Yes, elected officials.
If a criminal assaults such a person, he is not just assaulting an individual. He is assaulting the institutions that they represent. He is interfering with the orderly operation of our society.
Anarchists will see that as a “good thing.” But the very nature of the crime is different from a simple assault. It is an assault upon society as a whole.
Should these protections extend to family members? That is a valid question to ask. The family members are not exposing themselves to risk, but attacking a family member is certainly a way to influence the behavior of a public official.
No one likes politicians, in a very general sense. It is very easy to frame this discussion in the context and make snarky comments.
Look instead at a cop who is arresting drug dealers. Should a drug gang not face greater penalties for assaulting his wife or child in order to influence his enforcement actions?
This post was edited on 11/1/22 at 7:39 am
Posted on 11/1/22 at 8:47 am to fwtex
Y’all realize that if Pelosi’s husband is bisexual and likes to sleep with male prostitutes that none of her supporters would care. There is no need for a coverup.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 9:46 am to DaBike
quote:They paid him off and don't want to be outbid.
This has not been the process for Dem and Dem cities for the last few years.
Why are they all of the sudden tough on crime and violent criminals? What is (D)ifferent ?
Posted on 11/1/22 at 9:56 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Personally, I see absolutely nothing wrong with providing some additional protections to those who are exposed to greater risk.
You don't eh? Is the gentleman that assaulted Rand Paul serving out his term? Yard BS. He's still a Federal official the reason matters not.
This post was edited on 11/1/22 at 9:58 am
Posted on 11/1/22 at 10:00 am to SouthernLib
quote:
Y’all realize that if Pelosi’s husband is bisexual and likes to sleep with male prostitutes that none of her supporters would care. There is no need for a coverup.
You’d be lining up to watch the video.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 10:14 am to antibarner
quote:No.
Personally, I see absolutely nothing wrong with providing some additional protections to those who are exposed to greater risk.quote:
You don't eh?
quote:Whatever you say. The Pelosi assailant was charged under Section 115. The Rand Paul assailant MIGHT have been charged under Section 111. Feel free to read the statutes and try to understand the distinctions.
Is the gentleman that assaulted Rand Paul serving out his term? Yard BS. He's still a Federal official the reason matters not.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 3:26 pm to roadGator
You poor little thing. I feel sorry for you if you think that’s insulting.
quote:
You’d be lining up to watch the video.
Posted on 11/1/22 at 3:29 pm to SouthernLib
Insulting?
If I were trying to insult you I would not point out something obvious.
You freaks are so weird.
If I were trying to insult you I would not point out something obvious.
You freaks are so weird.
This post was edited on 11/1/22 at 4:32 pm
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News