11-24-2010, 08:52 PM
Hi,
I pretty much agree with all this. Justice should be unbiased. And, I don't think that justice and political agenda should be mixed.
Having said that, it is the idea of having sympathy for him that bothers me. I regret the existence of the situation that led to this issue. Just as I regret the conditions in the inner cities that have led to gang activity. But, in neither case do I feel any empathy for those who embraced those paths, through youthful ignorance or not. If the ends were inescapable, we'd have hundreds, even thousands, in his situation. That we don't indicates, to me, that the majority have resisted the same influences to become relatively normal people.
And, going back to the original post for a minute, I still maintain that a person's putative character is not a valid issue at a trial not even in the sentencing phase. We are not (or, at least, should not) be trying a person's soul. We should be trying the facts and events, determining guilt or innocent, and punishing the guilty without consideration of whether they're saints or sinners.
--Pete
(11-24-2010, 12:34 PM)ShadowHM Wrote: He is, as far as I understand, absolutely guilty of killing at least one American soldier.
I strongly believe that all mitigating circumstances should be taken into consideration when sentencing anyone. ... Age is, in my opinion, certainly a mitigating factor.
This particular child soldier has spent eight years in Gitmo. ... But, my opinion is that justice for Omar would be served at this point by sentencing him to time served.
I see no easy or completely right answer to your question.
I pretty much agree with all this. Justice should be unbiased. And, I don't think that justice and political agenda should be mixed.
Having said that, it is the idea of having sympathy for him that bothers me. I regret the existence of the situation that led to this issue. Just as I regret the conditions in the inner cities that have led to gang activity. But, in neither case do I feel any empathy for those who embraced those paths, through youthful ignorance or not. If the ends were inescapable, we'd have hundreds, even thousands, in his situation. That we don't indicates, to me, that the majority have resisted the same influences to become relatively normal people.
And, going back to the original post for a minute, I still maintain that a person's putative character is not a valid issue at a trial not even in the sentencing phase. We are not (or, at least, should not) be trying a person's soul. We should be trying the facts and events, determining guilt or innocent, and punishing the guilty without consideration of whether they're saints or sinners.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?