Wait, He has rights as an American (read before posting about the arrest of "Suspect #2:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mick-Boy

Hound - Sorry but no. 19 is not a kid. Immature. Probably. But as Jim noted, he can drive a car, enlist in the military and voice how the country is run. He get's no slack for age. He made his choices and now he gets to reap the consequences.

---

I am not making any excuses for him or thinking he should get leniancy. What I am saying is that every single person on the forum with any age under their belt can remember being around 19 and making mistakes that they look back on with dread. Just because you are 16 and can legally drive does not mean you 'know' how to drive, you're still learning. You also still get the speeding ticket(s). Personally, I am lucky I am alive several times over. I know many people that did not make it past this period in life. Yes, he should pay, and the full price, for his decisions but he is still just a kid. He is a kid who had his whole life in front of him and then he killed. Now his life is over like the 8yr old it looks like he killed. It's just such a waste all around.

At 19 I had been a Marine for two years and a fire team leader for one, with deployments to Kosovo and the Horn of Africa. This kid gets no slack from me.

100 years ago, a 19-year-old man was most likely the head of his household. 16 year olds were the bulk of Pony Express riders. It figures the same liberal media and big government types that want to dismiss college antics as "maturation" or "high jinks" yet want to give sex education to kids in elementary school would refer to him as a "boy" or say he was "misled" by his elder brother.

If an American citizen performs this type of crime, all rights should be forfeited. You viloate the rights of fellow citizens, your rights are gone. End of story.

For that matter, there should be a judicial review of his naturalization. In my opinion, any naturalized citizen conducting an attack against the country like this has already forfeited that citizenship. You have to establish guilt in the attack before revocation but we shouldn't have any reservations about treating him as a hostile foreigner once he's convicted.

The part of me that hates his guts wants to say no...

...but my head says yes. If he weren't a citizen, absolutely make him an enemy combatant...but he is a citizen, so he must be fairly tried.

That said, my understanding, as has been pointed out, is that Mirandizing someone is only necessary to use their statements as evidence. He could say (well, write) "Yes I did it," but it wouldn't be admissible. If they have enough other evidence, I don't see this as a huge deal. But if they want to use it as evidence, yes Mirandize him.

After all, even John Adams defended British soldiers after the Boston Massacre (interesting coincidence here), feeling that the rule of law was paramount.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter

For that matter, there should be a judicial review of his naturalization. In my opinion, any naturalized citizen conducting an attack against the country like this has already forfeited that citizenship. You have to establish guilt in the attack before revocation but we shouldn't have any reservations about treating him as a hostile foreigner once he's convicted.

---

Yep. As part of his naturalization he took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic.

They just announced they are going after the Death Penalty. I think that is a good call. Now if he just does not get to plea it down and/or prolong it to eternity.

Too late for [Pop]????