|
Post by Mira on Mar 5, 2009 7:08:22 GMT -5
www.kgw.com/video/index.html?nvid=338258Matthew Hastings was sentenced 120 years in prison for four counts of attempted murder and two of second-degree assault. Personally, I think the defendant is an asshole and deserved much more than the little outburst he got. Hopefully he will realize he is an idiot eventually in prison.
|
|
Pookie
Junior Member
Posts: 55
|
Post by Pookie on Mar 5, 2009 8:29:21 GMT -5
If there's anything I know about idiots, it's that they rarely (if ever) realize they are idiots, because most idiots are 100% secure in the assumption that they are geniuses and everyone else is a dumbass. In fact, the more idiotic they are, the less likely they are to have said revelation.
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Mar 5, 2009 10:10:13 GMT -5
Sadly, I can see a lawyer trying to file a suit on behalf of the convicted because the judge told him to shut up.
It probably won't go through, but I can see someone trying.
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Mar 5, 2009 10:18:52 GMT -5
Sadly, I can see a lawyer trying to file a suit on behalf of the convicted because the judge told him to shut up. It probably won't go through, but I can see someone trying. It won't happen, he was clearly disrespectful and in contempt, any lawyer that would try to bring that up is as dumb as the defendant and will be shot down like a japanese zero in the Coral Sea On a seperate note, I wished the judge would have had him gaged just to show him who's in charge
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 5, 2009 12:09:54 GMT -5
I mean, when you're going up for 120 years, it's hard to argue that you're going to make matters worse. But that in mind, did he think he was clever or something?
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Mar 5, 2009 14:39:41 GMT -5
When the judge tells you to shut up...SHUT UP!
Ironbite-why do people always try to argue with god in his own courtroom?
|
|
|
Post by headache on Mar 5, 2009 16:13:13 GMT -5
I don't know what's more ridiculous, the defendant or the 120 year sentence.
Another one who will ensure that the private prison business will not have any problems for the next century and does nothing to help society against crimes. It's the worst bullshit I have seen in a long time.
|
|
|
Post by Booley on Mar 5, 2009 19:52:12 GMT -5
... most idiots are 100% secure in the assumption that they are geniuses and everyone else is a dumbass. What if you think you do dumb things but not as dumb as most of the people around you? Is that ok? In any event there is actual scientific confirmation to what you say. Incompetent people apparently are incompetent because they are incapable of understanding how incompetent they are. Hence Shrub being unable to think of what mistakes he made suddenly makes a lot more sense.
|
|
|
Post by The Watcher on Mar 5, 2009 20:21:34 GMT -5
I don't know what's more ridiculous, the defendant or the 120 year sentence. Another one who will ensure that the private prison business will not have any problems for the next century and does nothing to help society against crimes. It's the worst bullshit I have seen in a long time. I'm not really clear on what your problem is with any of these proceedings. A 120 year sentence sounds silly, because obviously no one is going to live for 120 more years, but it's simply a series of max sentences added on to one another. Do you want them to just say "life" and be done with it? Where would your cutoff be? If it were 50 years? If it were 50 years only if the person in prison is 25 or under? Why can't we just say "Whatever we add up the sentences to come to, that's the sentence." I also don't see any reason to think he's going to a private prison. Nor am I clear on how you're failing to see that putting a quadruple murderer in jail is a bad thing, or why you don't believe that doing so will stop crime. It may not have any general deterrent effect, but it sure will stop this guy. What would you have done with him?
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on Mar 5, 2009 21:29:36 GMT -5
What would you have done with him? The Ludovico Technique.
|
|
|
Post by headache on Mar 6, 2009 13:12:09 GMT -5
I don't know what's more ridiculous, the defendant or the 120 year sentence. Another one who will ensure that the private prison business will not have any problems for the next century and does nothing to help society against crimes. It's the worst bullshit I have seen in a long time. I'm not really clear on what your problem is with any of these proceedings. A 120 year sentence sounds silly, because obviously no one is going to live for 120 more years, but it's simply a series of max sentences added on to one another. It may just be that I come from a first world country which do not have the death penalty, neither the active nor the passive death penalty USA has. 21 years is the maximum sentence you can get for first degree murder and sentences are not served serially Do you want them to just say "life" and be done with it? Where would your cutoff be? If it were 50 years? If it were 50 years only if the person in prison is 25 or under? Why can't we just say "Whatever we add up the sentences to come to, that's the sentence." I don't support the death penalty in any form. USA has two forms of death penalty: 1. Active death penalty Not every state has the active form where the state will kill you 2. Passive death penalty This is what people call life without the possibility of parole or when the total amount of time to be served is far beyond any possible life expectancy. In this passive form of death penalty, you are locked up in a cage until you either die a natural death or someone kills you or you commit suicide. The only way out of the prison, is in a coffin, so it clearly is a death penalty. Since USA has 25% of the worlds prison population it is obvious that none of the sentencing methods applied here is actually working. I also don't see any reason to think he's going to a private prison. Nor am I clear on how you're failing to see that putting a quadruple murderer in jail is a bad thing, or why you don't believe that doing so will stop crime. It may not have any general deterrent effect, but it sure will stop this guy. What would you have done with him? Most prisons in USA are privately run, you do know that, don't you? What I would want to happen, is for USA to revise it's politicized medieval barbaric justice system and move it into the 21st century rather than leave it on the early 19th century level it currently is on.
|
|
|
Post by ausador on Mar 6, 2009 13:33:00 GMT -5
Most prisons in USA are privately run, you do know that, don't you? That is not even remotely close to being true, do some research, most states still have their own department of corrections service. Some states utilize both public and private prisons like the state of Alaska that sends 'overflow' inmates to private facillities in Arizona. Stick to the facts and don't let your obvious disgust for all things dealing with the American 'justice' system distort your reasoning. ausador
|
|
|
Post by The Watcher on Mar 8, 2009 2:15:38 GMT -5
It may just be that I come from a first world country which do not have the death penalty, neither the active nor the passive death penalty USA has. 21 years is the maximum sentence you can get for first degree murder and sentences are not served serially So you're from Norway then. While I commend you on having the low crime rate and high standard of living that you do, I doubt that commuting the sentences of all US prisoners to 21 years will have any effect other than having a bunch of potential repeat murderers wandering around free in 21 years. I don't KNOW why you have a low recidivism rate. I'm aware that you have it, but I don't know why. I can state with fairly reasonable certainty that it wouldn't work the same for us as it would work for you. Well, whatever. I don't really see that as a "death" sentence so much as the natural consequence of living in prison till you die. Nobody's cutting your life short, so it can't legitimately be called a "death penalty." You can live as long as you ordinarily would (or probably longer, considering the quality of life of your average inmate when they were on the outside). But call it what you want, releasing prisoners all of a sudden and for no reason is a plan which I don't expect to yield good results. It's not a sentencing problem so much as it is a "why we lock people up" problem. The New York Times explains:Criminologists and legal experts here and abroad point to a tangle of factors to explain America’s extraordinary incarceration rate: higher levels of violent crime, harsher sentencing laws, a legacy of racial turmoil, a special fervor in combating illegal drugs, the American temperament, and the lack of a social safety net. Even democracy plays a role, as judges — many of whom are elected, another American anomaly — yield to populist demands for tough justice. No, I don't "know that" because I don't "know" things that aren't true. And this isn't, regardless of how emphatically (or condescendingly) you stomp your foot and insist that it is. I'm going to need a little more than rhetoric if you want me to respond.
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Mar 8, 2009 2:59:40 GMT -5
I'm not really clear on what your problem is with any of these proceedings. A 120 year sentence sounds silly, because obviously no one is going to live for 120 more years, but it's simply a series of max sentences added on to one another. It may just be that I come from a first world country which do not have the death penalty, neither the active nor the passive death penalty USA has. 21 years is the maximum sentence you can get for first degree murder and sentences are not served serially I don't support the death penalty in any form. USA has two forms of death penalty: 1. Active death penalty Not every state has the active form where the state will kill you 2. Passive death penalty This is what people call life without the possibility of parole or when the total amount of time to be served is far beyond any possible life expectancy. In this passive form of death penalty, you are locked up in a cage until you either die a natural death or someone kills you or you commit suicide. The only way out of the prison, is in a coffin, so it clearly is a death penalty. Since USA has 25% of the worlds prison population it is obvious that none of the sentencing methods applied here is actually working. I also don't see any reason to think he's going to a private prison. Nor am I clear on how you're failing to see that putting a quadruple murderer in jail is a bad thing, or why you don't believe that doing so will stop crime. It may not have any general deterrent effect, but it sure will stop this guy. What would you have done with him? Most prisons in USA are privately run, you do know that, don't you? What I would want to happen, is for USA to revise it's politicized medieval barbaric justice system and move it into the 21st century rather than leave it on the early 19th century level it currently is on. Well, one of the reasons we have such a high prison rates is because many are results of drug related issues. we don't have liberal drug laws that allow you to use it but not too much, we have the old draconian 'use it, you're as guilty as the child raping serial killer in the cell with you' laws As far as private prisons go, state prison guards would like a word with you
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 8, 2009 11:21:20 GMT -5
Well, one of the reasons we have such a high prison rates is because many are results of drug related issues. we don't have liberal drug laws that allow you to use it but not too much, we have the old draconian 'use it, you're as guilty as the child raping serial killer in the cell with you' laws As far as private prisons go, state prison guards would like a word with you Worse, thanks to mandatory sentencing, it's possible to do more time for a first offense smoking pot than that child raping serial killer does.
|
|