Sorry Mr. Bush, You’ll Have To Obey The Constitution This Time

And that could apply to a lot of people (that includes you Bill, and Utah’s own Orrin “rule of law” Hatch, of course), Bush just happens to be the one currently wielding the axe. Really, I think there are a lot of politicians (from any party) who claim to uphold the “law” yet try to change it when it is inconvenient. I was happy to read this article today. A federal appeals court ruled that a citizen cannot be detained as an enemy combatant indefinitely, and must be tried in court. WOW! Right to a trial in court. Now that’s special. We all should be so lucky.


About shenpa warrior

"Patience is not learned in safety." View all posts by shenpa warrior

5 responses to “Sorry Mr. Bush, You’ll Have To Obey The Constitution This Time

  • Steve

    I agree, I was also pleased to hear this. 4 years in prison without being charged is pretty bad.

    Now I would like to see the same due process for the two border guards serving 10+ year sentences for shooting (non-lethally) a drug smuggler attempting to cross the border when it appeared he was going to shoot them first.

  • Adam

    They haven’t been charged? I guess I don’t know enough about that incident to have an opinion. Do you have a link to a story about it? I’m curious.

  • Adam

    I just read a few things about it. A lot of it seems pretty shady. I don’t think that 10+ sentence law should have been applied to them in this case. There are also questions about why they supposedly fired 14 times, and why they supposedly tried to cover it up. They may have messed up, but that doesn’t deserve 10 years, IMO. Also, why in the heck did they give the smuggler immunity? That was lame. I don’t think, however, that the two should just be pardoned. As much as I like Batman, I don’t believe in vigilantes, or even close to vigilantes. Yes, the world would arguably be better off with two more good border agents and one less drug smuggler, but obviously “due process” is important. We have to fight by the rules. Even when it’s not as easy. All that said, the case still seems shady, and that sentence was too severe.

  • Steve

    No, they have been charged and tried, so in that sense due-process was followed. Due-process was the wrong word on my part. I don’t know enough of the prosecutor’s story to say if they should be pardoned or not either. If they didn’t follow the rules, they didn’t follow the rules. But like you said, it’s shady. Glenn Beck did an interview with the chief prosecutor, which I believe is still available on his web page (for free). The prosecutor really sounds like there’s something fishy going on. Whenever he is asked why the border guards should have been required to notify their supervisors when the supervisors were picking up the shells with them, he dodged. Yes that is what convicted them.

    I worry about the message it sends to other law enforcement agents: If you shoot a criminal and do your job, you go to jail?

  • Steve

    Pardon my typos… that wasn’t a great post. Hopefully you still get what I was trying to say. 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: