| Pages:
1
2 |
Panache
International Hazard
Posts: 1290
Registered: 18-10-2007
Member Is Offline
Mood: Instead of being my deliverance, she had a resemblance to a Kat named Frankenstein
|
|
Ok,
Unionised, I think your point/query is interesting however you likely know the answer....and it’s extremely unsatisfying. The answer is that all
other other things equal the law should provide parity in punishment. The unsatisfying part is it rarely does, especially in the lower courts, and
it’s seems rarely to aspire to it.
The law is not science, conclusions change as society changes, hence the prevelance of precedent. (‘There’s no precedent council for what you
propose ‘, ‘and there never will be your honour if you rely on precedent for all your decisions!).
It is my experience that all magistrates, judges and justices spend most of their time in clear circumstances, and when unclear circumstances arise
they are often like deers in headlights, incapable of using their intellects, oscillating between the fear of looking incapable by making a decision
that will be later struck out and laziness, as making good decisions takes a lot of reading and a workload that’s ridiculous.
That said the judiciary, here in Australia, is the absolute saving grace, leveling a system that abjectly and unrepentantly advantageous to LE (or as
I prefer to refer to them as...never mind).
A honeypot....well that’s in my opinion not debatable, a recent royal commission in the behaviour of state police use of criminal informants here in
Australia used its own honeypot. Labelling, very early on in commissions hearings a novel term of ‘noble corruption’. This appeared to the police
to be the commission creating distinction between good or ok corruption and the regular corruption. It actually angered the fuck out me when it
occurred, but oh my god was I pleased when after handing down its findings it was obvious there was no intention of making distinctions between
different forms of corruption, it being only intended to put the police at ease .....hahaha!
Point being without the airing of all the evidence (which even if a contested trial occurs is not all the evidence, indeed even the brief of evidence
is rarely all the evidence albeit in theory it should be) what has to be expected is immediate prejudice and bias, we cannot help it. In cases where
there’s a plea bargain...like this one...ffs we have no idea about what actually occurred.
I don’t think LE and the legal officers prosecuting their arrests are any more or less evil than a cross section of society. What I rile against is
this assumption in society that imbues them with virtue simply because of their employment status and the fact more often than not they are able to
act with an impunity not available to ordinary citizens. I don’t care what organisation one refers to...it is a fact that ‘internal mechanisms’
for self correction can only ever fix so much. I think corruption enquires, independent of the organisation should not need to have some smoking gun
in order for them to be instigated. They are just necessary.
God I could write on this for chapters...I used to have faith in the good of others, especially those employed to involved with truth...ffs there’s
nothing more dangerous than a combination of a limited intellect, sworn state given powers and a penchant for self interest. Omg that’s every single
police department in the world.....
|
|
|
Fyndium
International Hazard
Posts: 1192
Registered: 12-7-2020
Location: Not in USA
Member Is Offline
|
|
I would say that 99% of the general public considers cyanide (sodium or whatever form) an extremely toxic murder poison that absolutely must not be
sold to any individual with no exceptions. At least here it is so rare that when about a decade ago one woman committed suicide with it, it hit the
national headlines and was up for huge investigation.
On the other hand, when I was working in a truck company that hauled all kinds of stuff, I once drove multiple pallets of sodium cyanide barrels 50kg
each to a factory. As ADR tags are needed, and cops always pull you over when you got them, in all of the times it happened to me too. They were like
doing a normal check that everything was ok, and when I handled them the papers, they noted about the ton of cyanide and just quickly checked into the
cargo hold and said have a nice day. "All kinds of stuff they haul on these roads." they said. They use that stuff by the ton to heat treat metal
parts.
Circumstantial evidence is something that usually locks people up anyway. It's not the knife, it's the intent, messages, witnesses and other that
makes the story. A friend of mine raised interest when he ordered nitrates from overseas and got raided. He eventually got charged for very minor
energetics stuff, and after the cops noted that the guy was not into bringing down buildings, but just experimenting with stuff as many young people
do, they said that yeah, they get these investigations now and then, and it's illegal, but somewhat harmless in that context and people usually do it
for a year or two and then move on with their lives.
[Edited on 19-4-2021 by Fyndium]
|
|
|
Fantasma4500
International Hazard
Posts: 1681
Registered: 12-12-2012
Location: Dysrope (aka europe)
Member Is Offline
Mood: dangerously practical
|
|
chemical weapons, kinda funny. tear gas and pepper spray is considered chemical weapons, but theyre used against civilians
last i checked the definition they both ranked as chemical weapons as they interact with your body in a chemical way causing distress
organic mercury is very scary stuff, truly nightmarish. overdosing on autism.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
