1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Supreme Court Idiots

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by JBrooks, Apr 29, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    Justices Beyers and Stevens are far past their "sell by" dates. I am not sure how far out of touch you have be with reality to end up like them, but, even for a liberal, this is pretty far out.

    Wednesday, April 29, 2009


    "AP WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court says accidentally shooting a gun during the commission of a crime should bring the same penalties as intentionally using a firearm.

    This came as the high court on Wednesday upheld the conviction and sentence of Christopher Michael Dean, who was arrested for trying to rob a bank in Rome, Ga., in 2004.

    A gun went off accidentally during the attempted robbery when Dean tried to switch the weapon from one hand to the other.

    The discharge brought an automatic 10-year sentence for firing a weapon during a crime. Dean appealed, saying the automatic sentence shouldn't count since the firing of the gun was accidental.

    Federal prosecutors said the law doesn't care why the gun went off, and the high court agreed.

    Chief Justice John Roberts, who called it "the case of the bungling bank robber" in his bench statement, said the law "does not require that the discharge be done knowingly or intentionally."

    If criminals want to avoid the penalty for accidental gunfire, they can "lock or unload the firearm, handle it with care during the underlying violent or drug trafficking crime, leave the gun at home or — best yet — avoid committing the felony in the first place," Roberts said.

    Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer dissented, saying Congress intended the automatic sentence to only apply to intentional discharges of weapons.

    "Accidents happen, but they seldom give rise to criminal liability," Stevens said. "Indeed, if they cause no harm, they seldom give rise to any liability. The court today nevertheless holds that petitioner is subject to a mandatory additional sentence — a species of criminal liability — for an accident that caused no harm."

    Roberts replied in his opinion that the accidental gunfire did cause harm. "By pure luck, no one was killed or wounded," he said. "But the gunshot plainly added to the trauma experienced by those held during the armed robbery.""
     
  2. PAR8HED

    PAR8HED Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    Messages:
    424
    What is shocking is that Ginsberg was in the majority.
     
  3. blizzard

    blizzard Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,583
    I disagree brooks. The dumbass gets what the law says he deserves. Just because we are pro second amendment does not mean that we should protect a criminal that illegally uses a firearm, especially during the commission of a crime.
     
  4. Jeff P

    Jeff P Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,689
    I disagree too!!!!

    Obviously, no one should be committing felonies in the first place. but I'm pretty sure the laws WE HAVE NOW (the ones we're always begging them to enforce, rather than give us NEW ones) require that the "use of a firearm during a felony carries XXX penalty"

    Well, hell...he was using it. He was waving it around like an idiot. That's USING IT - if only because someone tried to rob a bank without a weapon he'd only get his ass kicked.

    What's stupid about the whole thing is that it had to go to the supreme court. I don't see any denial that it was him who did it - only legal wrangling on a minute scale, trying to reduce his sentence. Were I a justice, I would have sent him and his lawyer packing.

    The NRA should SUPPORT this verdict, publicly, if only to show that they can be reasonable about the issues.
     
  5. hoggy

    hoggy TS Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    1,261
    He was in the commission of a crime. What's the question again? He should suffer all consequenses which intentional or accidental. Ever just consider the bast---ds lying about it being an accident anyway. No wonder these people want to ban our guns. They're all morons.
     
  6. sallyjane

    sallyjane TS Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    50
    If you've got a firearm on you, even if you don't show it during the commission of a crime you should be off to the joint for 20 years. Maybe that would make some of the idiots think, but I doubt it. We are always crying "enforce the laws we have and make them strict for crimes committed with a firearm", well let's stick to it.
     
  7. H82MIS

    H82MIS TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,052
    Are these the same Supreme Court Idiots that refuse to hear the case of O'numbnuts eligibility to be president??????,,,I thought so,,,what a bunch of traders,,,all scared to death of someone or something,,,
     
  8. timb99

    timb99 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,334
    Location:
    Shawnee, Kansas, USA
    Guys,

    Read it again!

    JBrooks was chastizing Stevens and Breyer for being on the "oops, it was just an accident and we should let the perp slide" side of the opinion.
     
  9. Jeff P

    Jeff P Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,689
    Wow. Thanks Timb.

    I'll admit, I didn't get that at all the first time I read that.

    I'm usually right on board with JBrooks' thoughts, too. I was suprised I differed with him.

    Whew.
     
  10. letts

    letts TS Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2006
    Messages:
    308
    Jail time, lots of it, what could be better. Thats my veiw point.


    Letts
     
  11. Tdog

    Tdog TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    282
    Who said the discharge was unintentional? The perp? He would. The prosecutor probably wet himself when the idiot perp got on the stand then proceeded to admit to the discharge. "Ya I did but I didn't mean to..." Kind of like "But I didn't inhale.." I don't understand why the Supreme Court would even agree to hear it.
     
  12. BigM-Perazzi

    BigM-Perazzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,542
    Location:
    HELL, MICHIGAN
    Geez, some of us need to spend more time reading before reacting!!

    I agree with the decision, and I agree with jbrooks.. (strange bedfellows I'm sure)....

    J C

    Hell, Michigan
     
  13. Mike Michalski

    Mike Michalski Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    637
    Location:
    Troy Michigan
    Blizzard got it right!
     
  14. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    Gee,

    I'm glad some guys read the story. Beyers and Stevens are obviously in Wonderland.
     
  15. BigM-Perazzi

    BigM-Perazzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,542
    Location:
    HELL, MICHIGAN
    [The Supreme Court says accidentally shooting a gun during the commission of a crime should bring the same penalties as intentionally using a firearm.]

    Mike, sounds like your one who needs to re-read what was posted... Your essentially saying you disagree with this?????......
     
  16. Jim Porter

    Jim Porter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,316
    No biggie. Obama will print a couple billion to train would be robbers how to safely handle guns during the comission of unlawful activities. He will do it just as soon as he thinks about it.-----and how to tax the robbers on ill gotten gains!
     
  17. flamborn

    flamborn TS Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    53
    I think if he brandished a water pistol to intimidate someone during the robbery he should get mandatory sentence. I also think the Supreme Court should be elected not apointed forever.
     
  18. Jeff P

    Jeff P Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,689
    Hey, hey, I READ it. I just didn't UNDERSTAND it.

    I admit, I took a total different twist out of it the first time through...

    Ready, fire, aim.

    Come to think of it, I have problems on the 16 yard line for much the same reason, LOL.
     
  19. BigM-Perazzi

    BigM-Perazzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,542
    Location:
    HELL, MICHIGAN
    *click*, damn Rio primers, misfired again... lol
     
  20. Mike Michalski

    Mike Michalski Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    637
    Location:
    Troy Michigan
    BigM-Perazzi, If the question was addressed to me then yes, I agree that penanalties for a crime don't change because of an "accident". As far as I'm concerned, once you begin an illegal act you are responsible for ALL the consequences intended or not. (maybe I did read too fast, eh?)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Search tags for this page

the surpreme court bunch of idiots