Law

On machine guns and pistols

In which Sig follows Heller with great interest.

Mistrial in the Watada case

Per the AP on King 5 news, the presiding judge has declared a mistrial in the case of 1LT Ehren Watada, who refused to deploy to Iraq with his soldiers.

. . .

A retrial may or may not occur, pending a debate between Marjorie Cohn and my Law & Order DVDs.

Footprints in the ether

In any case, frequent writing on whatever strikes my fancy helps ensure that at no time in my life will I be tempted into a life of crime and/or politics. It would be too easy to find lame-brained things that I've written and put them together in a commercial.

Give him due process, and then execute him.

From this article: (emphasis added)

But even if a military death sentence clears all the appeals, it then must go to the president.

Scott Silliman, a former Air Force lawyer and director of Duke's Center on Law, Ethics, and National Security, said there appears to be strong pressure for presidents not to approve military executions.

''The president, regardless of his political party, senses that to approve the execution of a member of the military is almost to make a political statement," Silliman said.

''There is more benefit than risk in not approving it."

Absolutely right, it's a political statement. Here, I'll spell it out for you: We as a society have entrusted to our military personnel an extraordinary responsibility, and as such we hold them to the highest accountability for their misdeeds, because too much depends on them for it to be otherwise. If you do the crime for which we determine that you should die, then we'll flip the switch.

What kind of political statement are the "experts" thinking of, here? I don't know a single person in the military--whose thoughts on this guy I have heard--that does not want full accountability for his actions. And right now everybody I know is in the military.

Why is this even an issue?

Sig

Syndicate content