Perhaps it's important to dust off your copy of The Bill of Rights and re-read the 5th amendment which explicitly states that: "No person shall be nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..." See: <http://www.nara.gov/exhall/charters/billrights/billrights.html>
However, this means that IF you have due process, then a person CAN be compelled to be a witness against himself, and be deprived of life, liberty and property. Hence using truth drugs or torture would be perfectly constitutional if due process is used, according to the Fifth Amendment. As a supporter of the Constitution you are now obligated to defend to the death those who would torture prisoners, as long as they first get a judge's approval.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Nomen Nescio wrote:
However, this means that IF you have due process, then a person CAN be compelled to be a witness against himself, and be deprived of life, liberty and property. Hence using truth drugs or torture would be perfectly constitutional if due process is used, according to the Fifth Amendment. As a supporter of the Constitution you are now obligated to defend to the death those who would torture prisoners, as long as they first get a judge's approval.
You ignoramus....'cruel and unusual punishment'. -- ____________________________________________________________________ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, Jim Choate wrote:
You ignoramus....'cruel and unusual punishment'.
And that's the sticking point, isn't it? Who decides what is "cruel and unusual"? Are "truth drugs" cruel and unusual? Is torture cruel and unusual? What kinds of torture? Is Old Sparky cruel and unusual? Jim, there's a difference between "how it works" and "how it's supposed to work." -MW-
On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
Jim, there's a difference between "how it works" and "how it's supposed to work."
No shit, what was your first clue Sherlock? There is a long and strong history as to what is considered 'cruel and unusual', torture and that sort of crap was ruled unavailable long, long, ago. However, if you think about it a moment while positing that such behaviour is found to be allowable then the quesion of the 'United States' becomes moot. You do the math, if you can stop thinking like a victim. -- ____________________________________________________________________ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 05:05:03PM -0800, Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
Who decides what is "cruel and unusual"?
Well, hell, who decides what "speech" is, or "religion," or a firearm? (Is Politech speech, is Scientology a religion, is a stun gun a firearm?) The answer, of course, is that the courts decide, influenced to some extent by popular opinion and appointments to the federal bench. But arguing that torture (or, perhaps, truth drugs) is not somehow cruel doesn't get you all that far, at least not without the context of what courts have said in the past, if you intend your post to be predictive at all. -Declan
An even more basic point is "punishment" - for what? These people are SUSPECTS, against whom no criminal act has yet been proven in open court. They are not yet eligible for punishment in any form. Marc de Piolenc Meyer Wolfsheim wrote:
On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, Jim Choate wrote:
You ignoramus....'cruel and unusual punishment'.
And that's the sticking point, isn't it?
Quoting Jim Choate (ravage@ssz.com):
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Nomen Nescio wrote:
However, this means that IF you have due process, then a person CAN be compelled to be a witness against himself, and be deprived of life, liberty and property. Hence using truth drugs or torture would be perfectly constitutional if due process is used, according to the Fifth Amendment. As a supporter of the Constitution you are now obligated to defend to the death those who would torture prisoners, as long as they first get a judge's approval.
You ignoramus....'cruel and unusual punishment'.
No problem. Wouldn't a judge be the one who decides what cruel and unusual punishment would be? And once there's a precedent... Well, it's easy to decide someone else's fate, eh? Regards, Steve -- Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Ingsoc.
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Steve Thompson wrote:
No problem. Wouldn't a judge be the one who decides what cruel and unusual punishment would be? And once there's a precedent... Well, it's easy to decide someone else's fate, eh?
But you miss the point as to the meaning of such a decision... I'll give you a hint...'oath to protect and uphold'...'providing aid and comfort to the enemy'... -- ____________________________________________________________________ Day by day the Penguins are making me lose my mind. Bumper Sticker The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Quoting Jim Choate (ravage@ssz.com):
On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Steve Thompson wrote:
No problem. Wouldn't a judge be the one who decides what cruel and unusual punishment would be? And once there's a precedent... Well, it's easy to decide someone else's fate, eh?
But you miss the point as to the meaning of such a decision...
I'll give you a hint...'oath to protect and uphold'...'providing aid and comfort to the enemy'...
Since I'm ignorant of the finer points of American Law, you'll have to be less vague if you wish me to see the point which you're presenting. Regards, Steve -- Oldthinkers unbellyfeel Ingsoc.
participants (7)
-
Declan McCullagh -
F. Marc de Piolenc -
Jim Choate -
Jim Choate -
Meyer Wolfsheim -
Nomen Nescio -
Steve Thompson