Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

a geek named Bob

(2,715 posts)
38. kind of figured that one...
Sat Nov 24, 2012, 07:53 PM
Nov 2012

I gotta say, I'm starting to wonder how many people on DU understand the idea of security, and facing consequences.

It's called "the rule of law" . . . MrModerate Nov 2012 #1
Should their motives be allowed in the defense? The fact that they did it as limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #2
They breached a national security area... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #3
So you support a gag order that forbids them from stating their motives in the crime. limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #4
and thank YOU for putting words in my mouth... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #5
So you support gagging these protesters from raising their MOTIVES as part of their defense. limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #6
What point would voicing their motives serve? a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #7
The motives are part of their defense. limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #8
okay then... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #9
I didn't say any of those things. Only that they should be able to speak in their own defense. limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #10
I understand you have difficulty understanding the law. a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #12
The lawyer sitting next to me PETRUS Nov 2012 #14
Fair point. a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #16
You've made an incorrect assumption. PETRUS Nov 2012 #39
The difference in our worldviews seems to be that I play by the rules... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #41
In what sense am I not playing by the rules? PETRUS Nov 2012 #42
You seem to be willing to allow "noble reasons" to mitigate/abrogate the law. a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #45
You misunderstand me. PETRUS Nov 2012 #46
They broke the law without extenuating circumstances. a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #48
This message was self-deleted by its author PETRUS Nov 2012 #50
If affirmative defense is typically limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #17
maybe the judge doesn't want to say "national security," to avoid a media spectacle... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #23
If the prosecution tried to stop the affirmative defense based on a national security claim, limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #31
limphobbler... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #34
The only thing I'm talking about is whether they should be able to present an affirmative defense. limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #37
kind of figured that one... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #38
You misunderstand the point of civil disobedience. Cal Carpenter Nov 2012 #18
and national security can override that "on the record" a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #22
"National Security" has been used as an excuse for all sorts of Cal Carpenter Nov 2012 #24
Go look up Protect - Vachss, and - separately - the NRA a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #25
You're not even trying Cal Carpenter Nov 2012 #26
right... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #27
Nukes have fallen under "national security" Confusious Nov 2012 #28
I was throwing his question back at him Cal Carpenter Nov 2012 #30
Cal... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #33
Wow, who needs courts at all then? Cal Carpenter Nov 2012 #35
okay...here we go... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #36
Well, you got a little off topic Confusious Nov 2012 #52
Their motives warrant consideration by society as a whole . . . MrModerate Nov 2012 #11
but the article wouldn't rouse the populace (as much) without the "kangaroo" phrase... n/t a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #13
Good point. And civil disobedience doesn't work as well without . . . MrModerate Nov 2012 #19
Tools are most effective, when correctly used... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #21
Or when the social contract is so frayed by official abuse . . . MrModerate Nov 2012 #29
then we get into the issue of just WHAT is in the social contract... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #32
What do you do when society's ostensible leaders are willing to ignore the laws of the land? PETRUS Nov 2012 #40
Nice framing question... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #43
I didn't say they did. PETRUS Nov 2012 #44
Personally, I want to see Elizabeth Warren lead an Untouchables style raid on Wall street... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #47
Tempting idea. PETRUS Nov 2012 #49
mind you... if we really wanted to be mean... a geek named Bob Nov 2012 #51
I'm not a lawyer either. PETRUS Nov 2012 #15
Okey-doke. And what does he say? MrModerate Nov 2012 #20
Their website is transformnowplowshares.wordpress.com bananas Nov 2012 #53
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Kangaroo Court Looming fo...»Reply #38