Cruel and Unusual Punishment?

[eyer]

17-year old was drunk driving a truck when he crashed and a passenger was killed...

...he was charged with DUI Manslaughter.

A district judge in Oklahoma has now handed down his verdict:

10 years of church attendance, finish high school, and complete wielding school.

The ACLU, of course, is protesting the judge's "unconstitutional" sentence...

...meanwhile, both the defendant's lawyer and the victim's family accept the judgement.

The kid's butthole is said to be vastly relieved...

...but unavailable for comment.

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=23047435&ni...o-10-years-of-church-attendance&s_cid=queue-5

 

[Tryharder62]

You know I can't figure out how the drunk driver always survives. Is it because they are pickled or something.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

finish high school, and complete wielding school.

What do they teach there? How to carry stuff?

 

[eyer]

What do they teach there? How to carry stuff?

No...

...how to brandish "stuff", obviously.

 

[SeaDaddy1]

You know I can't figure out how the drunk driver always survives. Is it because they are pickled or something.

God works in mysterious ways. Not always kind in the immediate time, but a domino's effect to the right being.

 

[imalickin]

The ACLU should feel lucky, the kid was saved a life changing event, prison ain't no fun.

He actually got off pretty easy for his crime.

He still has his liberty, why is the ACLU involved? Would they have anything to do with this case if the judge sentenced him to 10 year in prison?

 

[knot_sweet]

You know I can't figure out how the drunk driver always survives. Is it because they are pickled or something.

The drunk person is less tense on impact. Going floppy means they aren't trying to fight and suffer less damage.

As far as the sentence goes...he got off way too light. That said, I strongly object to any person in a position of authority using it to impose religion on others. That's an abuse of power and an affront to the legal system in a country where church and state are supposed to be separate entities.

 

[neci]

separation of church and state. it's not too hard. he could have been given 10 years community service - cleaning highways, parks, serving food to the homeless. he would give more back to society, but the judge chose to violate the constitution.

 

[SeaDaddy1]

separation of church and state. it's not too hard. he could have been given 10 years community service - cleaning highways, parks, serving food to the homeless. he would give more back to society, but the judge chose to violate the constitution.

Elaborate please.

 

[neci]

Elaborate please.

which part? the first amendment to the constitution? according to the article, the judge doesn't even think what he did was legal, yet he continues to sentence people to church. people should have the right to worship or not worship without interference from the state. even criminals. society would have better served if the judge made him do something constructive with his time, like helping out the community. depending on your definition of church, he could serve his sentence attending weekly online services while getting drunk.

 

[eyer]

separation of church and state...

...the judge chose to violate the constitution.

The Constitution only prohibits Congress - the Legislative branch of federal government - from making any law respecting the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof...

...the Constitution does not concern itself with a State district judge sentencing a 17-year old convicted of DUI Manslaughter to attend church and finish high school.

The convicted has no problem with the State judge's verdict, nor does the victim's family...

...thus, since the Constitution does not address the situation, and since no individual rights have been violated, your political premise is invalid.

Sorry to pop your socialist bubble...

 

[neci]

The Constitution only prohibits Congress - the Legislative branch of federal government - from making any law respecting the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof...

...the Constitution does not concern itself with a State district judge sentencing a 17-year old convicted of DUI Manslaughter to attend church and finish high school.

The convicted has no problem with the State judge's verdict, nor does the victim's family...

...thus, since the Constitution does not address the situation, and since no individual rights have been violated, your political premise is invalid.

Sorry to pop your socialist bubble...

the due process clause extended the majority of the bill of rights over to the states.

 

[blobfish]

the due process clause extended the majority of the bill of rights over to the states.

Even so, this is the wrong branch of government for that to apply.

 

[neci]

Even so, this is the wrong branch of government for that to apply.

the judiciary branch doesn't have to uphold the constitution?

 

[blobfish]

the judiciary branch doesn't have to uphold the constitution?

They interperate the Constitution.

 

[sigh]

everybody knows that church goers never get drunk

 

[neci]

They interperate the Constitution.

There have been other cases where judges have ordered people to attend church as a part of their sentencing, and they have been reprimanded for violating the constitution. The church has no business in the courtroom.

 

[blobfish]

I spell "interpret" wrong every time.

 

[blobfish]

There have been other cases where judges have ordered people to attend church as a part of their sentencing, and they have been reprimanded for violating the constitution. The church has no business in the courtroom.

I don't agree with it, but it doesn't appear to be illegal. If the Supreme Court makes a ruling against it, then the lower courts would have to abide by it.

 

[eyer]

the due process clause extended the majority of the bill of rights over to the states.

Now you're asserting the defendant was unconstitutionally deprived of his due process rights?

 

[eyer]

The church has no business in the courtroom.

You better get the Supremes right on that...

 

[blobfish]

You better get the Supremes right on that...

Are you suggesting that a Biblically-themed architectural adornment is an endorsement of Christianity?

 

[neci]

I don't agree with it, but it doesn't appear to be illegal. If the Supreme Court makes a ruling against it, then the lower courts would have to abide by it.

if he violates his probation by not attending church, he could go to jail.

how is that constitutional?

 

[CandiCame]

The ACLU should feel lucky, the kid was saved a life changing event, prison ain't no fun.

He actually got off pretty easy for his crime.

He still has his liberty, why is the ACLU involved? Would they have anything to do with this case if the judge sentenced him to 10 year in prison?

1: This guy killed somebody, this sentence is too light.

2: You can't order somebody to go to church. It's a violation of civil rights. He shouldn't be in church, he should be in jail. I'm sure he is happy about it. He'd rather be in church then jail. The criminal's happiness is not the goal of the law.

 

[blobfish]

if he violates his probation by not attending church, he could go to jail.

how is that constitutional?

Because he's being punished for a crime. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable search and seizure (though the Patriot Act fucked that right up the ass), but people in prison can be searched at any time for any reason.