gut;1433635 wrote:He can still be tried, just not as a citizen.

What's the difference, he would have exactly the same rights under the law, correct?

queencitybuckeye;1433638 wrote:What's the difference, he would have exactly the same rights under the law, correct?

I don't know. I would think not because he has no constitutional rights as a citizen. For example, perhaps he would not be protected from unreasonable search & seizure because he doesn't have that constitutional protection.

Now to give him the death penalty, I think to be tried as a terrorist he'd have to face tribunal. The whole hiccup here is that MA doesn't have the death penalty.

To me it seems a contradiction to defend his rights as a citizen and not defend the integrity of the process/application and the oath he took as a citizen. He obtained his citizenship fraudulently, and that's not supposed to matter?

gut;1433646 wrote:I don't know. I would think not because he has no constitutional rights as a citizen. For example, perhaps he would not be protected from unreasonable search & seizure because he doesn't have that constitutional protection.

Now to give him the death penalty, I think to be tried as a terrorist he'd have to face tribunal. The whole hiccup here is that MA doesn't have the death penalty.

To me it seems a contradiction to defend his rights as a citizen and not defend the integrity of the process/application and the oath he took as a citizen. He obtained his citizenship fraudulently, and that's not supposed to matter?

Visitors to this country are protected by the bill of rights.

He's a garden-variety murderer to me, nothing more. Give him a trial, convict him, strap him to a table, and give him a goodbye shot.

queencitybuckeye;1433648 wrote: He's a garden-variety murderer to me, nothing more. Give him a trial, convict him, strap him to a table, and give him a goodbye shot.

That sounds like an argument for a state trial. MA does not have the death penalty.

And I don't disagree that these guys were more sociopath than wannabe terrorist. I wonder if that could potentially cause problems. Fortunately if the US fails in the federal terrorist trial MA could try him on a host of other charges - i.e. he could get life in MA for being an accomplice to a cop killing. But I haven't read what all the federal charge covers.

gut;1433655 wrote:That sounds like an argument for a state trial. MA does not have the death penalty.

Well, not officially. I'd give him three years tops.

queencitybuckeye;1433713 wrote:Well, not officially. I'd give him three years tops.

LOL, don't disagree. But is gen pop an appropriate punishment? There's actually a bigger issue with recruitment and teaching guys how to do this stuff. That's why I'd keep him in isolation.

Why are the victim having to pay for their own medical treatment while the FPOS gets his treatment on our dollar?

Typical.

Apparently Russia may have known more about these guys and their mother according to some recent reports.

At any rate, not to hijack the thread but how do these people get in to the U.S.? My wife and I have immigrated into two foreign countries and with perfect background checks and credit it is a complete PITA to even get a cell phone, a bank account or lease property - and even then we might have to wait a month or two to complete our applications. Why is the U.S. so lax in controlling its borders? The U.S. has to be the worst first world country in this regard.

Votes, plain and simple. Cracking down on the border would be seen as racist.

Shit like this, too. Unbelievable. They break our laws but have a "civil" right to become citizens.

http://nation.foxnews.com/amnesty/2013/04/26/holder-calls-amnesty-civil-right

<a href="http://nation.foxnews.com/amnesty/2013/04/26/holder-calls-amnesty-civil-right" target="_blank">[video=youtube;7NXj0hl5T3o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NXj0hl5T3o&amp;feature=player_embedded[/video]

tk421;1435100 wrote:Shit like this, too. Unbelievable. They break our laws but have a "civil" right to become Democratic voters.

fixed

yep

tk421;1435096 wrote:Votes, plain and simple. Cracking down on the border would be seen as racist.

This.

Where does this defendant get the money to pay for his high-priced attorneys? I understand he must be represented if he can't afford one, however this one is in-addition-to his court appointed team. Does our system allow for however many lawyers the defendant deems necessary?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/30/boston-suspect-defense-team-gets-major-boost-with-lawyer-who-defended-unabomber/

Your tax dollars at work: http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2013/04/tsarnaev_family_received_100g_in_benefits