Roeder's Justified Murder Defense

[YardleyLabs]

Somehow, your view of this is not surprising to me. You need lots of believers in Christ to pray for your unGodly soul.

It's never hard for an atheist to also fall into the camp that finds in favor for the traitors of this nation. They think they are supporting fairness, and seldom see how unAmerican their views really are.

What you have just implied should be offensive to every citizen in this nation that has worn a uniform to defend what this nation stands for. Unfortunately, that also means we have to defend your right to issue that form of crap...but we don't have to stand by and not refute it.

UB

Due process is not designed to protect the guilty; it is designed to protect all of us. More than anything else it is designed to protect us from the quick judgments of the lynch mob, secure in the knowledge that being accused is the same as being guilty.

In our justice system, we presume innocence. That is not true in most other countries (witness the outrage when an Italian court convicted an American citizen using Italian standards of justice). We also allow a variety of defenses against charges of murder even when it is clear that the individual involved actually committed the act for which he is accused. Thus, Roeder -- a terrorist nutjob -- could have entered a plea of not guilty by reason if insanity rather than justified homicide. I suspect that a similar claim of reduced responsibility could apply in the case of some small children that could be used as walking bombs by terrorist groups.

For what it's worth, trying a person in a military tribunal does not change the standards of due process, only the procedures in use. Similarly, holding the trial outside of the country but under American control also does not reduce the rights of defendants and was decided by the courts over the objections of the Bush administration.

[YardleyLabs]

I'm wondering what kind of mind it takes to even remotely compare the two first of all since there is no comparison.
second of all, I've never heard anyone but loons say that what roeder did was ok.

Is the difference defined by the number of people killed, or by the insane justification used?

Would you feel better if I referenced Jim David Adkisson, who decided to shoot people randomly during a youth performance at a Unitarian church in Knoxville TN because of his desire to kill Democrats and liberals? Multiple people were wounded and two killed before members of the church wrestled him to the ground. "During the [police] interview Adkisson stated that he had targeted the church because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country's hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of major media outlets." When does murder or attempted murder become terror?

[DSemple]

With all the complaints about the possibility of terrorists being allowed to proclaim their ideology if given the platform of a trial, why are the same complainers saying nothing about Scott Roeder being permitted to argue that the murder of Dr. George Tiller was justified to prevent Tiller from performing additional legal abortions? If it is appropriate to permit Roeder to present this argument, isn't it equally appropriate for terrorists to present a defense arguing that their actions are justified?

Roeder will be locked up for the rest of his life like he should be.

But, Tiller was a scum bag that had been manipulating the laws governing late term abortions, with Democratic support from the likes of Kathleen Sebelius and others here in Kansas for over a decade. He was certainly no innocent victim of terrorism.

[achiro]

Is the difference defined by the number of people killed, or by the insane justification used?

Would you feel better if I referenced Jim David Adkisson, who decided to shoot people randomly during a youth performance at a Unitarian church in Knoxville TN because of his desire to kill Democrats and liberals? Multiple people were wounded and two killed before members of the church wrestled him to the ground. "During the [police] interview Adkisson stated that he had targeted the church because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country's hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of major media outlets." When does murder or attempted murder become terror?

I can NOT believe I am actually responding to this stupidity but here I go. Comparing one loon or even a couple of loons(the DC snipers) to a taliban member or a member of any other terrorist group is just ridiculous. Had Adkisson been a member of a militia that trained him to do that sort of thing and helped him pick a target we would be talking apples to apples but he wasn't so we are not.
Both should be sentenced to death, the sooner the better.

BTW, you REALLY do need to find a hobby, like maybe training dogs? The constant banter that you engage in on this site can't be healthy for anyone. I know for a fact that it makes me sick.

[YardleyLabs]

Roeder will be locked up for the rest of his life like he should be.

But, Tiller was a scum bag that had been manipulating the laws governing late term abortions, with Democratic support from the likes of Kathleen Sebelius and others here in Kansas for over a decade. He was certainly no innocent victim of terrorism.

Actually, repeated investigations of Tiller's clinic failed to find evidence that he was operating in a manner inconsistent with the law.

However, one of the tenets of our justice process is that the victim is not on trial. Just as it is illegal to rape a promiscuous person, it is illegal to murder a person you believe is bad. The dictionary defines terrorism as the systematic use of terror to coerce behavior. Thus, killing legal abortionists to convince them to stop operating is terrorism. Killing liberals and democrats to send a message is terrorism. Why should Roeder be treated any differently from Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab?

[road kill]

Uhh, where were the terrorists taken into custody and by who?
Where was Roeder taken into custody and by who?

And, am I to understand that pro-life in your mind is the same as jihad?
(not justifying the taking of a life by either!!!)

I see, they are identical situations, aren't they???




rk

Is this an inconvenient question??



rk

[BonMallari]

Jeff, I see your point but respectfully disagree but would you care if someone shanked Charles Manson in jail, or how about O.J., Mark David Chapman

[YardleyLabs]

Uhh, where were the terrorists taken into custody and by who?
Where was Roeder taken into custody and by who?

And, am I to understand that pro-life in your mind is the same as jihad?
(not justifying the taking of a life by either!!!)

I see, they are identical situations, aren't they???




rk

Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab initiated his attempted bombing on an airplane as it was approaching Detroit MI. He was subdued by passengers and taken into custody at the Detroit airport. Scott Roeder was arrested in Topeka the day following Tiller's murder in Wichita. Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab was possibly never a member of al Qaeda although he appears to have received his bomb from a Yemen contact that also supplies al Qaeda. He does not appear to have had any prior terrorist training or involvement but was identified by his father as a risk. Scott Roeder was a former member of a group known as the Freemen, a radical group declaring itself exempt from all government control. He was arrested in 1996 for possession of bomb components including blasting caps, gunpowder and fuses. Roeder was arrested by state and city police following a auto chase. Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab was detained by airport officers wen the plane landed and taken to the hospital in Detroit under guard for emergency treatment of his burns.

I'm not sure that any of this has anything to do with "pro-life" or "jihad". Both are beliefs and completely legal. In both cases, the arrests involve murder or attempted murder as a terrorist political act.

[YardleyLabs]

Jeff, I see your point but respectfully disagree but would you care if someone shanked Charles Manson in jail, or how about O.J., Mark David Chapman

I'm not sure what Manson, et al have to do with it. They were all murderers, but not terrorists in the political sense (although a case might be made for Manson). I actually shed few tears when violent criminals are killed "in action". However, that is not "justice" within the legal system. However, I go not trust governments in general and believe that view was shared by our founding fathers. That was the reason for defining rights in our Constitution as protections against government abuse.

The problems with lynch mods is that they want exceptions to be made in those cases where they just know they are right. Today we want to exempt those nasty Islamic radicals from protection because they are so clearly bad. I remember the 60's when a lot of powerful people wanted the same types of "exemptions" for anti-war protesters. Maybe tomorrow the government will go after the Lutherans or the atheists. Who knows. I'm not saying there are never exceptions, but I believe that the slippery slope on dur process is even more dangerous than the slippery slope on guns. I do not trust government and I especially do not trust mob logic.

[road kill]

Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab initiated his attempted bombing on an airplane as it was approaching Detroit MI. He was subdued by passengers and taken into custody at the Detroit airport. Scott Roeder was arrested in Topeka the day following Tiller's murder in Wichita. Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab was possibly never a member of al Qaeda although he appears to have received his bomb from a Yemen contact that also supplies al Qaeda. He does not appear to have had any prior terrorist training or involvement but was identified by his father as a risk. Scott Roeder was a former member of a group known as the Freemen, a radical group declaring itself exempt from all government control. He was arrested in 1996 for possession of bomb components including blasting caps, gunpowder and fuses. Roeder was arrested by state and city police following a auto chase. Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab was detained by airport officers wen the plane landed and taken to the hospital in Detroit under guard for emergency treatment of his burns.

I'm not sure that any of this has anything to do with "pro-life" or "jihad". Both are beliefs and completely legal. In both cases, the arrests involve murder or attempted murder as a terrorist political act.

In my opinion, Roeder should be executed, as he murdered Dr. Tiller.
Mutallab should be imprisoned for life for the attempted murders of the passengers.

You can "think" whaever you want, but when you act its a game changer.
Motivation is irrelevant to me.

I know that is not how the justice system works, just my opinion.




rk