Sweden's Law debate

Construct · Post by **Construct** » 2005-07-03 02:45pm

Glocksman wrote:sentenced to death by an Iraqi tribunal?

<sarcasm>Nice to hear the new Iraq will be a progressive country with close ties to Europe (European Convention on Human Rights...) and a good foundation on values of democracy and human rights...</sarcasm>

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2005-07-03 02:50pm

Construct wrote:
Glocksman wrote:sentenced to death by an Iraqi tribunal?
<sarcasm>Nice to hear the new Iraq will be a progressive country with close ties to Europe (European Convention on Human Rights...) and a good foundation on values of democracy and human rights...</sarcasm>

You are aware that having a death penalty does not preclude a country from being a democracy?
Or are the US and Japan merely disguised dictatorships?

Construct · Post by **Construct** » 2005-07-03 03:00pm

I didn't say that but it is not compatible with the Declaration of Human Rights. I am glad some parts of the world has abolished this arcane and cruel so called "punishment". Even a politically antique country like Turkey had to abolish it in order to start negotiating for an EU membership.

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2005-07-03 03:05pm

The reservations I have about capital punishment are solely confined to the issue of guilt or innocence of the offender.

In cases like the one here in Indiana where it took the state over 20 years to get a decidely guilty Donald Ray Wallace put to a well deserved death, I have no problems with it whatsoever.

Construct · Post by **Construct** » 2005-07-03 04:20pm

Well, I think that's just vicious and cruel.

Julhelm · Post by **Julhelm** » 2005-07-03 05:57pm

Kudos to him. Playing Mr. Nice Guy doesn't always cut it you know.

Swedish law can go fuck itself, for all I care. If someone tries to break into my house, but he slips and hurts himself on my stair, I have to pay damages to him

Construct · Post by **Construct** » 2005-07-03 06:03pm

Well, better to reasoning first and fight later.

Never heard of that. Not here. But you would be in trouble if you killed him or shot at him while fleeing.

Darth Yoshi · Post by **Darth Yoshi** » 2005-07-03 09:48pm

Julhelm wrote:Kudos to him. Playing Mr. Nice Guy doesn't always cut it you know.

Swedish law can go fuck itself, for all I care. If someone tries to break into my house, but he slips and hurts himself on my stair, I have to pay damages to him

That's fucking retarded.

Kudos to the Swede, I guess.

The death penalty may be cruel, but there are people in the world who deserve it. The question is whether or not the person sentenced actually deserves it.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2005-07-04 02:01am

Construct wrote:I think it's a recipe for disaster to allow people to operate outside the law no matter their intentions. Police officers have a job, let them handle it. Only case it would be justifiable is if the cops are crooks themselves, other cops can't handle it and you're dealing with serious corruption.

Interesting. Heres a wee senario for you.
What if the Police cannot do their job?

Construct · Post by **Construct** » 2005-07-04 06:51am

Actually, I don't trust the police, some of them are rotten, brutal morons as we saw in Gothenburg but the majority are okay.
We need more funding for the police, granted, but that doesn't mean it's right to act outside the law. It's truly faulty reasoning believing that.
The only case when it could be justified is when the system is corrupt but that is not the case here.

Julhelm · Post by **Julhelm** » 2005-07-04 07:12am

Construct wrote:Actually, I don't trust the police, some of them are rotten, brutal morons as we saw in Gothenburg but the majority are okay.

This quote alone shows you're a fucking retard:

So we have tens of thousands of so-called "protesters" running rampage throughout the city, burning cars and destroying property, all while exposing the police to a barrage of stones. Then, when an officer is down and about to be stomped by rioters, his buddies fire a few rounds hitting the assailant, who is about to throw, guess what? A fucking cobblestone.

And that makes those policemen "rotten, brutal morons"?

We need more funding for the police, granted, but that doesn't mean it's right to act outside the law. It's truly faulty reasoning believing that.

But it is IS right to act outside the law, at least as long as you're an attorney who buys sexual services from male students, or do you not pick up the legal precedents from the media? Talk about turning a blind eye here.

The only case when it could be justified is when the system is corrupt but that is not the case here.

Do you NOT read the newspapers? The system is totally clearly fucking corrupt when a goddamn attorney can get away clean while admitting to breaking the same fucking law about buying sexual services that was passed just the other year which HE HIMSELF has used to have people put away. Jesus Fucking Christ.

If such behavior, along with all the antics our lovely politicians get away with, isn't indicative of a corrupt system, then what is?

Spoonist · Post by **Spoonist** » 2005-07-04 07:18am

->Julhelm & Construct
Gothenburg riots is a seperate topic guys, take it outside...

-> On topic
Personally I think that it is not immoral to take the law into your own hands IF you take the consequences for your actions.

Construct · Post by **Construct** » 2005-07-04 07:28am

Julhem, apparently you don't bother to read what I say but put words in my mouth instead. I never said anything about the rotten attorney, so where the fuck did you the idea that I would support that kind of behavior? No one is above the law. That's my view. Get it?

Especially not police officers who believe that police brutality can be justifed. Who fire at unarmed protesters, break all regulations and protocols regarding handling their firearm, and who later do whatever they can to disturb the legal process. I don't want people like that in our police force.

Your mind is clearly not sane.

Julhelm · Post by **Julhelm** » 2005-07-04 08:07am

Construct wrote:Julhem, apparently you don't bother to read what I say but put words in my mouth instead.

False claims.

I never said anything about the rotten attorney, so where the fuck did you the idea that I would support that kind of behavior? No one is above the law. That's my view. Get it?

No you just said the system is clearly not corrupt, while ignoring a blatant real life precedent to prove the contrary. If you don't want to acknowledge reality, you shouldn't discuss reality.

Especially not police officers who believe that police brutality can be justifed. Who fire at unarmed protesters, break all regulations and protocols regarding handling their firearm, and who later do whatever they can to disturb the legal process. I don't want people like that in our police force.

But he wasn't unarmed, he had a cobblestone ready for the throw. At least in my book a cobblestone counts as a lethal weapon. I also wasn't aware said officers "broke all regulations and protocols" when firing, nor that they "did whatever they could" to disturb the legal process. The protester was a rioting punk about to attack the police, and he got burned. Get over it.

Your mind is clearly not sane.

Bring me some of that you're smoking and it will be.

Construct · Post by **Construct** » 2005-07-04 09:01am

We can take that discussion elsewhere.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2005-07-04 10:02am

And lo- you now have
Topic split from the Bounty Hunter thread.

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2005-07-04 10:32am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Construct wrote:I think it's a recipe for disaster to allow people to operate outside the law no matter their intentions. Police officers have a job, let them handle it. Only case it would be justifiable is if the cops are crooks themselves, other cops can't handle it and you're dealing with serious corruption.
Interesting. Heres a wee senario for you.
What if the Police cannot do their job?

Then you have absolute anarchy and not just a reason but a duty for the citizenry to engage in armed revolution until the situation is rectified. If the government is broken, it needs to be replaced.

SecondStorm · Post by **SecondStorm** » 2005-07-04 07:03pm

Julhelm wrote:
Construct wrote:Julhem, apparently you don't bother to read what I say but put words in my mouth instead.
False claims.

I never said anything about the rotten attorney, so where the fuck did you the idea that I would support that kind of behavior? No one is above the law. That's my view. Get it?
No you just said the system is clearly not corrupt, while ignoring a blatant real life precedent to prove the contrary. If you don't want to acknowledge reality, you shouldn't discuss reality.

Especially not police officers who believe that police brutality can be justifed. Who fire at unarmed protesters, break all regulations and protocols regarding handling their firearm, and who later do whatever they can to disturb the legal process. I don't want people like that in our police force.
But he wasn't unarmed, he had a cobblestone ready for the throw. At least in my book a cobblestone counts as a lethal weapon. I also wasn't aware said officers "broke all regulations and protocols" when firing, nor that they "did whatever they could" to disturb the legal process. The protester was a rioting punk about to attack the police, and he got burned. Get over it.

Your mind is clearly not sane.
Bring me some of that you're smoking and it will be.

Could you guys give a brief overview of what happened ? (this is gonna be good

)

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2005-07-05 10:01am

SecondStorm wrote:Could you guys give a brief overview of what happened ? (this is gonna be good )

Well, Construct thought that it was not okay to act outside the law, unless the system was corrupt and could not be trusted. He used the Gothenburg riots as an example of a bad police force who shot unarmed people. However it is debatable wether someone throwing cobblestones at policemen trying to protect an injured colleague could be considered unarmed or not. Construct also pointed out that most police officers were not like that and the system is not corrupt.

Julhelm claimed that Construct was of less intelligence because of his views on the riots and said the system is clearly corrupt when an attorney can get away clean with buying sexual services from a male 20-year-old. However it must be pointed out that the attorney in question did not get away clean - he got $5200 fines. Outrageous according to the media, which wanted him hanged as always, I suppose..

Construct then was of the opinion that Julhelm had put words in his mouth about the whole attorney thing and went on to declare him insane. Julhelm suggested that perhaps that which Construct was smoking would help clear his own mind.

And that's it, as far as I know.

And just to clear the stuff about breaking into someone's house and get paid damages; that never happened. As far as I can remember, someone had broken in and hurt himself somehow, and then sued the house-owner. But he lost the case and got sentenced for trespassing. Or it might just be an urban legend.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2005-07-06 04:09am

Oh that fucker in the gothenburg riots who got shot, bunch of violent anarchist scum who got what they deserved.

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2005-07-06 07:56am

His Divine Shadow wrote:Oh that fucker in the gothenburg riots who got shot, bunch of violent anarchist scum who got what they deserved.

Yes I agree. When you're throwing cobblestones at an officer who's already down on the ground, you deserve to get shot. What the Hell was he thinking? "Oooh, those cops can't do anything to me so I might just as well throw some rocks at them! OMFGWTF?! Why did they shoot me, I'm totally innocent, even though it is on tape that I'm trying to hit them with cobblestones!"

However, to make sure this will never happen again, the police is not allowed to carry shields anymore, because that could be seen as provocative. They might be prohibitited to wear helmets and guns too, for the same reason, but I'm not entirely sure about that. I wonder if they really think that those guys went around with masks throwing stones, trashing stores and burning stuff because the police had shields. Or maybe they think if they get a few policemen killed, they might get sympathy enough to get some real riot-suppressing weapons...

CJvR · Post by **CJvR** » 2005-07-06 12:44pm

I think they should go back to the old fasion sabres, at least for the riot gear.

Also if you are moronic enough to throw rocks at the Police after they have fired warning shots you are absolutely Darwin award material, anyone that stupid have to be prevented from breeding.

Necroid · Post by **Necroid** » 2005-07-06 01:10pm

Dooey Jo wrote:
However, to make sure this will never happen again, the police is not allowed to carry shields anymore, because that could be seen as provocative. They might be prohibitited to wear helmets and guns too, for the same reason, but I'm not entirely sure about that. I wonder if they really think that those guys went around with masks throwing stones, trashing stores and burning stuff because the police had shields. Or maybe they think if they get a few policemen killed, they might get sympathy enough to get some real riot-suppressing weapons...

WTF?
Please tell me that you're joking.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2005-07-06 04:41pm

Construct wrote:Well, I think that's just vicious and cruel.

Ah, yes, "I don't like it, and I can back it up by appealing to authority." Brilliant!

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2005-07-07 07:43am

Neocron wrote:
Dooey Jo wrote:
However, to make sure this will never happen again, the police is not allowed to carry shields anymore, because that could be seen as provocative. They might be prohibitited to wear helmets and guns too, for the same reason, but I'm not entirely sure about that. I wonder if they really think that those guys went around with masks throwing stones, trashing stores and burning stuff because the police had shields. Or maybe they think if they get a few policemen killed, they might get sympathy enough to get some real riot-suppressing weapons...
WTF?
Please tell me that you're joking.

No no, it's quite true (the shields at least, I can't tell you what their motivations are, other than the "less provocative" thing). It's apparently the Danish model.