Boston Bombings

Forums › Off topic › Boston Bombings

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

networkn

Networkn
32350 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#802693 20-Apr-2013 10:31

freitasm: Your tone does indeed makes it very hard to agree with your assertions.

Which as I have said, you have misunderstood.

networkn

Networkn
32350 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#802694 20-Apr-2013 10:33

groynk:
networkn:
groynk:
networkn:

What about 3000 people? 10000, 100,000? Where do you draw the line out of interest?

Sorry edited my previous post there

Someone killing that many people should be convicted

Heh well conviction, wow that makes it ok then. Surely prevention would be better? I am guessing but security concerns DURING the trial, classified nature of the evidence would be another, and the risk to the public if this person gets off on a technicality, especially since the risk isn't to 1-2 people, but likely to a much larger portion of population.

I'm not sure how someone committing mass murder can get off on a technicality?

Prevention is something we can definitely agree on. Methods to do so are something I don't think we can.

The biggest change I would like to see is the U.S. working on the reasons people want to blow them up, they are people, deserving or not.
(Hint: it's not good v evil, and it's not because they are jealous, some of it is arrogance.)

Someone can get off on a technicality due to the evidence being handled incorrectly, arrest and interrogations not being handled properly, or a dozen other ways. Basically the same way that any person accused of a crime cm get off.

networkn

Networkn
32350 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#802697 20-Apr-2013 10:37

freitasm: On thing I don't understand (who understand their minds?)

After doing what they've done, why kill a university police officer, rob a 7 Eleven and carjack a vehicle?

Wouldn't be better, you know, stay low, get out of Mass into another state and keep moving? At some point police would find out their identities and issue a national alert, their lives would be pretty much finished but why waste all in a shoot out?

Depends on your intent, your chances of survival would be low anyways, as criminals who are using explosives are going to be handled with a much more "hands off" or "long distance" approach.

With two of them, there is considerably more "intent" and planning and collusion, they would likely be facing the death penalty, which they would have known and therefore, they would have been intending to just try and take as many out. My guess is they were headed to MIT to finish.

John2010

532 posts

Ultimate Geek

#802704 20-Apr-2013 10:51

networkn: ..With two of them, there is considerably more "intent" and planning and collusion, they would likely be facing the death penalty, which they would have known and therefore, they would have been intending to just try and take as many out. My guess is they were headed to MIT to finish.

Not disagreeing with other things you are saying (or meaning

?), but there is no death penalty in Massachusetts and hasn't been for decades.

networkn

Networkn
32350 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#802730 20-Apr-2013 12:28

John2010:
networkn: ..With two of them, there is considerably more "intent" and planning and collusion, they would likely be facing the death penalty, which they would have known and therefore, they would have been intending to just try and take as many out. My guess is they were headed to MIT to finish.

Not disagreeing with other things you are saying (or meaning ?), but there is no death penalty in Massachusetts and hasn't been for decades.

Ah I wasn't aware of that.

I was under the impression that had they have killed more people, if any of them were from a state that did support the DP, then the prosecutor could apply to have the trial and therefore the punishment administered from that state? I am imagining they thought (and I am somewhat surprised), that they would kill a lot more people ? It's a miracle from my perspective more people aren't dead, though the carnage of a non lethal nature is horrific.

Either way I don't believe these two figured they would survive regardless, and intended to simply take out as many people as possible.

I am of two minds, re the second brother. For the safety of the officers trying to apphrend him, and to save the country a LONG and drawn out trial process, where the entire matter will receive attention and undue publicity, I hope they shoot him through the head from a distance.

On the other hand, a motive (if a sane one exists) would be worth having.

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#802743 20-Apr-2013 12:57

^^^

Latest word is he's been captured alive. I expect he'll spend the rest of his life in a cell.

Whatifthespacekeyhadneverbeeninvented?

networkn

Networkn
32350 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#802752 20-Apr-2013 13:17

Well they have the second suspect in custody.

Here we go with the media circus.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#802755 20-Apr-2013 13:20

networkn: Well they have the second suspect in custody.

Here we go with the media circus.

How long until the movie comes out?

Whatifthespacekeyhadneverbeeninvented?

networkn

Networkn
32350 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#802757 20-Apr-2013 13:24

DarthKermit:
networkn: Well they have the second suspect in custody.

Here we go with the media circus.

How long until the movie comes out?

10-12 years seems to be the acceptable period at this stage, though documentaries will be out in the next 2 years I expect if they can determine a motive.

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#802822 20-Apr-2013 16:24

networkn:
DarthKermit:
networkn: Well they have the second suspect in custody.

Here we go with the media circus.

How long until the movie comes out?

though documentaries will be out in the next 2 years I expect if they can determine a motive.

2 ~ 3 weeks is my bet..

Regards,

Old3eyes

bradstewart

4335 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#802831 20-Apr-2013 17:05

networkn:
John2010:
networkn: ..With two of them, there is considerably more "intent" and planning and collusion, they would likely be facing the death penalty, which they would have known and therefore, they would have been intending to just try and take as many out. My guess is they were headed to MIT to finish.

Not disagreeing with other things you are saying (or meaning ?), but there is no death penalty in Massachusetts and hasn't been for decades.

Ah I wasn't aware of that.

I was under the impression that had they have killed more people, if any of them were from a state that did support the DP, then the prosecutor could apply to have the trial and therefore the punishment administered from that state? I am imagining they thought (and I am somewhat surprised), that they would kill a lot more people ? It's a miracle from my perspective more people aren't dead, though the carnage of a non lethal nature is horrific.

Either way I don't believe these two figured they would survive regardless, and intended to simply take out as many people as possible.

I am of two minds, re the second brother. For the safety of the officers trying to apphrend him, and to save the country a LONG and drawn out trial process, where the entire matter will receive attention and undue publicity, I hope they shoot him through the head from a distance.

On the other hand, a motive (if a sane one exists) would be worth having.

RE: Death penalty, these guys wouldn't be tried under state law. It will be a federal case and there the death penalty very much applies.

John2010

532 posts

Ultimate Geek

#802975 21-Apr-2013 09:34

bradstewart:
networkn:
John2010:
networkn: ..With two of them, there is considerably more "intent" and planning and collusion, they would likely be facing the death penalty, which they would have known and therefore, they would have been intending to just try and take as many out. My guess is they were headed to MIT to finish.

Not disagreeing with other things you are saying (or meaning ?), but there is no death penalty in Massachusetts and hasn't been for decades.

Ah I wasn't aware of that.

I was under the impression that had they have killed more people, if any of them were from a state that did support the DP, then the prosecutor could apply to have the trial and therefore the punishment administered from that state? I am imagining they thought (and I am somewhat surprised), that they would kill a lot more people ? It's a miracle from my perspective more people aren't dead, though the carnage of a non lethal nature is horrific.

Either way I don't believe these two figured they would survive regardless, and intended to simply take out as many people as possible.

I am of two minds, re the second brother. For the safety of the officers trying to apphrend him, and to save the country a LONG and drawn out trial process, where the entire matter will receive attention and undue publicity, I hope they shoot him through the head from a distance.

On the other hand, a motive (if a sane one exists) would be worth having.

RE: Death penalty, these guys wouldn't be tried under state law. It will be a federal case and there the death penalty very much applies.

.

Yes the death penalty MAY apply if they are charged federally but in recent years the use of that penalty has not been the case.

Also, going back a bit, while I am unsure of any law changes that may have taken place since 1993 (if any I would have thought likely to have become less inclined to the death penalty) none of the 1993 World Trade Centre bombers tried in the USA were given death sentences, they received multiple life sentences. That bombing was far more severe than the Boston one in terms of numbers of killed and injured. Not sure, but if I recall correctly, they were tried by the State of NY which did have the death penalty then (doesn't now) but was not in the habit of using it.

jpoc

1043 posts

Uber Geek

#803056 21-Apr-2013 14:25

John2010:

Also, going back a bit, while I am unsure of any law changes that may have taken place since 1993 (if any I would have thought likely to have become less inclined to the death penalty) none of the 1993 World Trade Centre bombers tried in the USA were given death sentences, they received multiple life sentences. That bombing was far more severe than the Boston one in terms of numbers of killed and injured. Not sure, but if I recall correctly, they were tried by the State of NY which did have the death penalty then (doesn't now) but was not in the habit of using it.

I would have thought that most folks would be aware that many new laws were introduced by the US in the wake of the 9/11 attacks - almost a decade after the 1993 WTC bombings. Chief of these is the patriot act. IANAL but I believe that it opens up federal prosecution and the death penalty to anyone who participates in an act of terrorism that kills people.

John2010

532 posts

Ultimate Geek

#803110 21-Apr-2013 16:24

jpoc:
John2010:

Also, going back a bit, while I am unsure of any law changes that may have taken place since 1993 (if any I would have thought likely to have become less inclined to the death penalty) none of the 1993 World Trade Centre bombers tried in the USA were given death sentences, they received multiple life sentences. That bombing was far more severe than the Boston one in terms of numbers of killed and injured. Not sure, but if I recall correctly, they were tried by the State of NY which did have the death penalty then (doesn't now) but was not in the habit of using it.

I would have thought that most folks would be aware that many new laws were introduced by the US in the wake of the 9/11 attacks - almost a decade after the 1993 WTC bombings. Chief of these is the patriot act. IANAL but I believe that it opens up federal prosecution and the death penalty to anyone who participates in an act of terrorism that kills people.

Well I am aware a number of new laws have been introduced since, so I assume you can include me among the "most folks" that you refer to.

However, the Patriot Act that you refer to is all about surveillance, defining terrorism, border security, etc. and is nothing at all to do with capital punishment.

You may be thinking of the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act but again (despite its name) it did not add the death penalty to any criminal or terrorist action but rather added limits to habeas corpus. This meant that the opportunities for petitioning the court (thus delaying punishment, whether capital or otherwise) for writs of habeas corpus were limited, the intention being that the threat of punishment would be seen to be more likely. However, this Act came about after the 1993 World Trade Centre and 1995 Oklahoma City bombings, not the 2001 World Trade Centre attack.

In the case of the Oklahoma City bomber, he (McVeigh) was executed but it was a Federal Government building he bombed and killed more than 50 times the number than the Boston bombing (he also was not a teenager).

1 | 2 | 3 | 4