Fire in upper NW?

[Anonymous]

PP here: Just to clarify, the death penalty is appropriate for the current crime. The past behavior is confirmation that the sentence would be just.

[Anonymous]

Why is this thread no longer showing up in hottest topics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is this thread no longer showing up in hottest topics?

Maybe Hillbillies aren't Hot. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Wint was roaming free on the streets of America after being convicted of multiple violent crimes including 3 stabbings documented in the ABC news story should be a massive scandal. Our criminal justice system needs to be much tougher on crime. If more prisons need to be built, so be it. The judge who gave him 89 days after his second-offense stabbing should be publicly exposes and disciplined for incompetence.

You should be careful what you say about judges. Specifically by name. And members of the bar. You should just be very careful. Of course you can disagree with rulings, etc., but when you start to attack someone's competence--you should really stop altogether. Especially in a federal case, you could have your IP address subpoenaed.

Biggest bunch of BS I've heard yet.

You mean 3 months for a second-offense stabbing? Many of us would agree.

So you think you have the right to threaten a judge or a lawyer because you don't like what they've done in their official capacities, i.e. sentencing or prosecution--specifically a federal judge or federal prosecutor?

Threatening a judge?! How could you possibly take that position based on my post. I never threatened anyone; I do happen to think it's an absurdly lenient sentence for the crime. Daron Wint should not have been walking around free after so many violent episodes over the years.

'Exposing and disciplining' a judge sounds like veiled threat. Assuming you are not in official position to legitimately do any of this--I just wonder how you would propose to 'discipline' a judge for executing a legal sentence. Go ahead, the Justice Department would love to hear it.

DOJ would not waste their time with such trivia. It's laughable.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/reason-the-libertarian-mag-target-of-federal-subpoena/
Reason, the popular libertarian magazine, has been touched by the long arm of the law. The Department of Justice wants Reason to turn over information on the identities of six users who posted certain comments online.

They'll find the resources if you say the wrong thing. It was just a warning-you were working yourself up into a froth just as you have so many times before on this thread. I was just trying to ratchet down the venom--which really doesn't further the discussion--but nothing I or anyone has probably ever said to you could convince you of anything reasonable, I suspect.

[Anonymous]

Can we get back to the topic of this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is this thread no longer showing up in hottest topics?

It's been 30 days since the thread started. At least I think that's why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Wint was roaming free on the streets of America after being convicted of multiple violent crimes including 3 stabbings documented in the ABC news story should be a massive scandal. Our criminal justice system needs to be much tougher on crime. If more prisons need to be built, so be it. The judge who gave him 89 days after his second-offense stabbing should be publicly exposes and disciplined for incompetence.

You should be careful what you say about judges. Specifically by name. And members of the bar. You should just be very careful. Of course you can disagree with rulings, etc., but when you start to attack someone's competence--you should really stop altogether. Especially in a federal case, you could have your IP address subpoenaed.

Biggest bunch of BS I've heard yet.

You mean 3 months for a second-offense stabbing? Many of us would agree.

So you think you have the right to threaten a judge or a lawyer because you don't like what they've done in their official capacities, i.e. sentencing or prosecution--specifically a federal judge or federal prosecutor?

Threatening a judge?! How could you possibly take that position based on my post. I never threatened anyone; I do happen to think it's an absurdly lenient sentence for the crime. Daron Wint should not have been walking around free after so many violent episodes over the years.

'Exposing and disciplining' a judge sounds like veiled threat. Assuming you are not in official position to legitimately do any of this--I just wonder how you would propose to 'discipline' a judge for executing a legal sentence. Go ahead, the Justice Department would love to hear it.

DOJ would not waste their time with such trivia. It's laughable.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/reason-the-libertarian-mag-target-of-federal-subpoena/
Reason, the popular libertarian magazine, has been touched by the long arm of the law. The Department of Justice wants Reason to turn over information on the identities of six users who posted certain comments online.

They'll find the resources if you say the wrong thing. It was just a warning-you were working yourself up into a froth just as you have so many times before on this thread. I was just trying to ratchet down the venom--which really doesn't further the discussion--but nothing I or anyone has probably ever said to you could convince you of anything reasonable, I suspect.

I don't even agree with the sentiments of the poster in question, but expressing an opinion that a judge should be "publicly exposed and disciplined" is just a tad different than saying one should be "taken out back and shot", as the Reason online commentators did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Wint was roaming free on the streets of America after being convicted of multiple violent crimes including 3 stabbings documented in the ABC news story should be a massive scandal. Our criminal justice system needs to be much tougher on crime. If more prisons need to be built, so be it. The judge who gave him 89 days after his second-offense stabbing should be publicly exposes and disciplined for incompetence.

You should be careful what you say about judges. Specifically by name. And members of the bar. You should just be very careful. Of course you can disagree with rulings, etc., but when you start to attack someone's competence--you should really stop altogether. Especially in a federal case, you could have your IP address subpoenaed.

Biggest bunch of BS I've heard yet.

You mean 3 months for a second-offense stabbing? Many of us would agree.

So you think you have the right to threaten a judge or a lawyer because you don't like what they've done in their official capacities, i.e. sentencing or prosecution--specifically a federal judge or federal prosecutor?

Threatening a judge?! How could you possibly take that position based on my post. I never threatened anyone; I do happen to think it's an absurdly lenient sentence for the crime. Daron Wint should not have been walking around free after so many violent episodes over the years.

'Exposing and disciplining' a judge sounds like veiled threat. Assuming you are not in official position to legitimately do any of this--I just wonder how you would propose to 'discipline' a judge for executing a legal sentence. Go ahead, the Justice Department would love to hear it.

DOJ would not waste their time with such trivia. It's laughable.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/reason-the-libertarian-mag-target-of-federal-subpoena/
Reason, the popular libertarian magazine, has been touched by the long arm of the law. The Department of Justice wants Reason to turn over information on the identities of six users who posted certain comments online.

They'll find the resources if you say the wrong thing. It was just a warning-you were working yourself up into a froth just as you have so many times before on this thread. I was just trying to ratchet down the venom--which really doesn't further the discussion--but nothing I or anyone has probably ever said to you could convince you of anything reasonable, I suspect.

I don't even agree with the sentiments of the poster in question, but expressing an opinion that a judge should be "publicly exposed and disciplined" is just a tad different than saying one should be "taken out back and shot", as the Reason online commentators did.

+1

Let's drop this subject. All well meaning but IMO, I think it's been fully explored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Wint was roaming free on the streets of America after being convicted of multiple violent crimes including 3 stabbings documented in the ABC news story should be a massive scandal. Our criminal justice system needs to be much tougher on crime. If more prisons need to be built, so be it. The judge who gave him 89 days after his second-offense stabbing should be publicly exposes and disciplined for incompetence.

You should be careful what you say about judges. Specifically by name. And members of the bar. You should just be very careful. Of course you can disagree with rulings, etc., but when you start to attack someone's competence--you should really stop altogether. Especially in a federal case, you could have your IP address subpoenaed.

Biggest bunch of BS I've heard yet.

You mean 3 months for a second-offense stabbing? Many of us would agree.

So you think you have the right to threaten a judge or a lawyer because you don't like what they've done in their official capacities, i.e. sentencing or prosecution--specifically a federal judge or federal prosecutor?

Threatening a judge?! How could you possibly take that position based on my post. I never threatened anyone; I do happen to think it's an absurdly lenient sentence for the crime. Daron Wint should not have been walking around free after so many violent episodes over the years.

'Exposing and disciplining' a judge sounds like veiled threat. Assuming you are not in official position to legitimately do any of this--I just wonder how you would propose to 'discipline' a judge for executing a legal sentence. Go ahead, the Justice Department would love to hear it.

DOJ would not waste their time with such trivia. It's laughable.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/reason-the-libertarian-mag-target-of-federal-subpoena/
Reason, the popular libertarian magazine, has been touched by the long arm of the law. The Department of Justice wants Reason to turn over information on the identities of six users who posted certain comments online.

They'll find the resources if you say the wrong thing. It was just a warning-you were working yourself up into a froth just as you have so many times before on this thread. I was just trying to ratchet down the venom--which really doesn't further the discussion--but nothing I or anyone has probably ever said to you could convince you of anything reasonable, I suspect.

The comments in Libertarian mag were a far cry from innocent outrage expressed by the poster on this site. A DCUM poster suggesting discipline for a case of judicial incompetence is an expression of opinion. The comments in Libertariian were a threat to cause harm to a judge. Not even close. We all have freedon of speech but respect for the original poster is in order. Peace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Wint was roaming free on the streets of America after being convicted of multiple violent crimes including 3 stabbings documented in the ABC news story should be a massive scandal. Our criminal justice system needs to be much tougher on crime. If more prisons need to be built, so be it. The judge who gave him 89 days after his second-offense stabbing should be publicly exposes and disciplined for incompetence.

You should be careful what you say about judges. Specifically by name. And members of the bar. You should just be very careful. Of course you can disagree with rulings, etc., but when you start to attack someone's competence--you should really stop altogether. Especially in a federal case, you could have your IP address subpoenaed.

Biggest bunch of BS I've heard yet.

You mean 3 months for a second-offense stabbing? Many of us would agree.

So you think you have the right to threaten a judge or a lawyer because you don't like what they've done in their official capacities, i.e. sentencing or prosecution--specifically a federal judge or federal prosecutor?

Threatening a judge?! How could you possibly take that position based on my post. I never threatened anyone; I do happen to think it's an absurdly lenient sentence for the crime. Daron Wint should not have been walking around free after so many violent episodes over the years.

'Exposing and disciplining' a judge sounds like veiled threat. Assuming you are not in official position to legitimately do any of this--I just wonder how you would propose to 'discipline' a judge for executing a legal sentence. Go ahead, the Justice Department would love to hear it.

DOJ would not waste their time with such trivia. It's laughable.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/reason-the-libertarian-mag-target-of-federal-subpoena/
Reason, the popular libertarian magazine, has been touched by the long arm of the law. The Department of Justice wants Reason to turn over information on the identities of six users who posted certain comments online.

They'll find the resources if you say the wrong thing. It was just a warning-you were working yourself up into a froth just as you have so many times before on this thread. I was just trying to ratchet down the venom--which really doesn't further the discussion--but nothing I or anyone has probably ever said to you could convince you of anything reasonable, I suspect.

The comments in Libertarian mag were a far cry from innocent outrage expressed by the poster on this site. A DCUM poster suggesting discipline for a case of judicial incompetence is an expression of opinion. The comments in Libertariian were a threat to cause harm to a judge. Not even close. We all have freedon of speech but respect for the original poster is in order. Peace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Wint was roaming free on the streets of America after being convicted of multiple violent crimes including 3 stabbings documented in the ABC news story should be a massive scandal. Our criminal justice system needs to be much tougher on crime. If more prisons need to be built, so be it. The judge who gave him 89 days after his second-offense stabbing should be publicly exposes and disciplined for incompetence.

You should be careful what you say about judges. Specifically by name. And members of the bar. You should just be very careful. Of course you can disagree with rulings, etc., but when you start to attack someone's competence--you should really stop altogether. Especially in a federal case, you could have your IP address subpoenaed.

Biggest bunch of BS I've heard yet.

You mean 3 months for a second-offense stabbing? Many of us would agree.

So you think you have the right to threaten a judge or a lawyer because you don't like what they've done in their official capacities, i.e. sentencing or prosecution--specifically a federal judge or federal prosecutor?

Threatening a judge?! How could you possibly take that position based on my post. I never threatened anyone; I do happen to think it's an absurdly lenient sentence for the crime. Daron Wint should not have been walking around free after so many violent episodes over the years.

'Exposing and disciplining' a judge sounds like veiled threat. Assuming you are not in official position to legitimately do any of this--I just wonder how you would propose to 'discipline' a judge for executing a legal sentence. Go ahead, the Justice Department would love to hear it.

DOJ would not waste their time with such trivia. It's laughable.

http://www.wnyc.org/story/reason-the-libertarian-mag-target-of-federal-subpoena/
Reason, the popular libertarian magazine, has been touched by the long arm of the law. The Department of Justice wants Reason to turn over information on the identities of six users who posted certain comments online.

They'll find the resources if you say the wrong thing. It was just a warning-you were working yourself up into a froth just as you have so many times before on this thread. I was just trying to ratchet down the venom--which really doesn't further the discussion--but nothing I or anyone has probably ever said to you could convince you of anything reasonable, I suspect.

I don't even agree with the sentiments of the poster in question, but expressing an opinion that a judge should be "publicly exposed and disciplined" is just a tad different than saying one should be "taken out back and shot", as the Reason online commentators did.

Maybe I'm not understanding your post...do you mean that you think the 89 day sentence was appropriate?

[Anonymous]

Today marks one month.

My thoughts and prayers are with the family, especially the daughters, and all of you who were their friends. Take gentle care of each other and yourselves.

Let's hope we begin to learn more from LE soon.

Sending love and blessings to all of you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that Wint was roaming free on the streets of America after being convicted of multiple violent crimes including 3 stabbings documented in the ABC news story should be a massive scandal. Our criminal justice system needs to be much tougher on crime. If more prisons need to be built, so be it. The judge who gave him 89 days after his second-offense stabbing should be publicly exposes and disciplined for incompetence.

You should be careful what you say about judges. Specifically by name. And members of the bar. You should just be very careful. Of course you can disagree with rulings, etc., but when you start to attack someone's competence--you should really stop altogether. Especially in a federal case, you could have your IP address subpoenaed.

Biggest bunch of BS I've heard yet.

You mean 3 months for a second-offense stabbing? Many of us would agree.

So you think you have the right to threaten a judge or a lawyer because you don't like what they've done in their official capacities, i.e. sentencing or prosecution--specifically a federal judge or federal prosecutor?

Threatening a judge?! How could you possibly take that position based on my post. I never threatened anyone; I do happen to think it's an absurdly lenient sentence for the crime. Daron Wint should not have been walking around free after so many violent episodes over the years.

'Exposing and disciplining' a judge sounds like veiled threat. Assuming you are not in official position to legitimately do any of this--I just wonder how you would propose to 'discipline' a judge for executing a legal sentence. Go ahead, the Justice Department would love to hear it.

Np here.

Previous poster you are a bully and you are the only one threatening anything on this post. As a whistle blower, I resent your attempt to stifle the previous poster. Your attempt to shut down criticism of authority figures with invalid threats is out of line. Who the hell are you? The previous poster didn't threaten anyone other than with what I assume is public exposure. Whether it be bad cops, bad judges, bad lawyers, whatever the truth is everyone has a camera and many people in this country are in a mood to reveal these people to public shame. This judge, and others, should be shamed for the piss poor decisions when they're made.

My guess it is the pp who hates hillbillies. He is like a dog who attempts to mark their territory. The person needs to seek treatment from a mental health provider. I am baffled by the pp's claim the person was threatening the judge. I am hoping when this case goes to trial the various news outlets raise and discuss why DW had not already been deported.

[Anonymous]

Let's not allow one contrary zealot spoil the free range of expression. It's easier to ignore the poster than to feed him/her. Just my opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Today marks one month.

My thoughts and prayers are with the family, especially the daughters, and all of you who were their friends. Take gentle care of each other and yourselves.

Let's hope we begin to learn more from LE soon.

Sending love and blessings to all of you.




[/quot

t1