US senator Gabrielle Giffords shot in arizona shooting - six others killed.

[Solus]

Was I the only one not surprised that there's a special law about trying to kill a member of Congress?

All men are created equal, just some more equal than others.

Well, that law doesn't make it any more illegal to kill a member of Congress or one of the other 6 that were killed that day.

Not sure why the law is needed, unless, for some reason, it imposes stiffer sentences.

Ahh...it could be that as a Federal Law, it would immediately involve Federal agencies in the case, where the killing of another citizen would be covered by state law and would not be a federal offense?

 

[JC5123]

Was I the only one not surprised that there's a special law about trying to kill a member of Congress?

All men are created equal, just some more equal than others.

This is the part about our justice system that I have never understood. Why is it that we do not punish bases solely on the crime committed? Why does it matter who the victim is, or what the motives are? You committed X crime against Y victim(s) you get Z sentence. Period, no judicial "disgression". No harsher penalty because it came out during the trial that the victim was gay/black/green/catholic/illegal.

[billt]

This is the part about our justice system that I have never understood. Why is it that we do not punish bases solely on the crime committed?

Someone should tell that to Peter King. Typical New York City grandstander. God, I'm getting tired of these guys!   Bill T.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/gop-rep-will-introduce-gun-control-legislation/

[MikeBjerum]

M58, I think they were BSing you. I had surgeries twice since July and wasn't asked anything like that, in fact I had weapons in my possession the whole time.

I don't know what the reasoning is, but it is on the forms at Mayo (formerly Rochester, now world wide) and Sanford (South Dakota).  Both places gave me the same line with minimal differences.

[MikeBjerum]

This is the part about our justice system that I have never understood. Why is it that we do not punish bases solely on the crime committed? Why does it matter who the victim is, or what the motives are? You committed X crime against Y victim(s) you get Z sentence. Period, no judicial "disgression". No harsher penalty because it came out during the trial that the victim was gay/black/green/catholic/illegal.

+1 and as many zeros as you want to add!

[Sponsor]

[Timothy]

Well, that law doesn't make it any more illegal to kill a member of Congress or one of the other 6 that were killed that day.

Ahh...it could be that as a Federal Law, it would immediately involve Federal agencies in the case, where the killing of another citizen would be covered by state law and would not be a federal offense?

Because this loon killed a Federal Judge in addition to five others and the numerous wounded, the Feds get first crack at the guy for the indictment.  It also brings in the death penalty regardless of the state that the crime was committed.  Once the Feds get done with the guy, the State of Arizona can go after him in criminal court.  Arizona is a death penalty state I presume?

[TAB]

Because this loon killed a Federal Judge in addition to five others and the numerous wounded, the Feds get first crack at the guy for the indictment.  It also brings in the death penalty regardless of the state that the crime was committed.  Once the Feds get done with the guy, the State of Arizona can go after him in criminal court.  Arizona is a death penalty state I presume?

I really don't think this will end up being a capitol case.  If even 10% of the stuff the media has reported to be true he has a very good chance he will be commited to a mental hospital for the rest of his life.

So rather its the feds or AZ that gets crack at him, once one court says he is nuts, he is nuts in the eyes of the other court.

[tombogan03884]

I really don't think this will end up being a capitol case.  If even 10% of the stuff the media has reported to be true he has a very good chance he will be commited to a mental hospital for the rest of his life.

So rather its the feds or AZ that gets crack at him, once one court says he is nuts, he is nuts in the eyes of the other court.

All the more reason to put a needle in his arm.
They still shoot mad dogs don't they ?

[TAB]

You know  it does not work that way tom.


This guy may very well be treatable.  That does not mean he should be held accountable for his crimes.  He is in the age group where Schizophrenia can manfest itself fully in some one.

I'm not saying thats the case here. Just its a "maybe"

I'm sure over the next 6-12 months we will keep hearing about this, so I'm sure we will get more details.

[MikeBjerum]

You know  it does not work that way tom.


This guy may very well be treatable.  That does not mean he should be held accountable for his crimes.  He is in the age group where Schizophrenia can manfest itself fully in some one.

I'm not saying thats the case here. Just its a "maybe"

I'm sure over the next 6-12 months we will keep hearing about this, so I'm sure we will get more details.

In light of your phrase in blue, I'm hoping you left a word out of the phrase in red.

I don't care what the cause, mental illness, drugs or alcohol, people ARE responsible for their actions!  Maybe we adjust the penalty slightly, but not drastically.