alan
August 17, 2003, 06:14 PM
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34069
perhaps convenient for EU bureaucrats, but what of U.S. Citizens??
If you enjoyed reading about "perhaps convenient for EU bureaucrats, but what of U.S. Citizens??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Parker Dean
August 17, 2003, 09:18 PM
American bounty hunter Duane Lee "Dog" Chapman found himself behind bars in a Mexican prison in Puerto Vallarta in late June. Though widely hailed at home as a hero for running to ground the convicted serial rapist Andrew Luster, a Max Factor heir, Chapman quickly was arrested by Mexican officials for committing what is considered kidnapping under Mexican law when he captured the fugitive.
If convicted, the bounty hunter could have spent as many as eight years in prison. Fortunately for Chapman he was released on bail by Judge Jose de Jesus Pineda, escaped to the United States and then failed to appear for trial.
Italics mine.
While this isn't the thrust of the article, does anyone else find this a bit hypocritical?
If convicted, the bounty hunter could have spent as many as eight years in prison. Fortunately for Chapman he was released on bail by Judge Jose de Jesus Pineda, escaped to the United States and then failed to appear for trial.
Italics mine.
While this isn't the thrust of the article, does anyone else find this a bit hypocritical?
alan
August 17, 2003, 11:22 PM
Parker Dean:
Yes, There is an element of hypocracy in the article, re the business of the American bounty hunter, as you noted. That matter, I believe, was also a side issue, somewhat removed from the main point of the article.
Yes, There is an element of hypocracy in the article, re the business of the American bounty hunter, as you noted. That matter, I believe, was also a side issue, somewhat removed from the main point of the article.
agricola
August 18, 2003, 02:45 AM
alan,
at least in the UK, opposition to abortion along religious or any other grounds is not "hate speech" and never has been. If it was, then the Catholic Church would have been outlawed.
the entire article was shot through with hypocrisy and outrage of the who-do-they-think-they-are kind. hopefully mexico can retain some other bounty hunters who will go after Chapman and return him to justice.
at least in the UK, opposition to abortion along religious or any other grounds is not "hate speech" and never has been. If it was, then the Catholic Church would have been outlawed.
the entire article was shot through with hypocrisy and outrage of the who-do-they-think-they-are kind. hopefully mexico can retain some other bounty hunters who will go after Chapman and return him to justice.
HBK
August 18, 2003, 03:39 AM
I think we are missing the whole good vs evil thing here. The Max Factor heir/rapist=evil. The Bounty Hunter who went and got him=good. You guys gray that stuff up too much. The guy's rights ended when he skipped the country. Fugitives from justice, do they have rights? Try to think in terms of good and evil...not that hard.
agricola
August 18, 2003, 04:07 AM
HBK,
ordinarily id agree with you, but on this occasion the bounty hunter was also someone who skipped justice, to say nothing of breaking Mexican law. as a result, he should be arrested and extradited for that, or at the very least have any reward that he recieved for Luster confiscated and awarded to the Mexicans.
ordinarily id agree with you, but on this occasion the bounty hunter was also someone who skipped justice, to say nothing of breaking Mexican law. as a result, he should be arrested and extradited for that, or at the very least have any reward that he recieved for Luster confiscated and awarded to the Mexicans.
WonderNine
August 18, 2003, 04:15 AM
Parker Dean:
Yes, There is an element of hypocracy in the article, re the business of the American bounty hunter, as you noted. That matter, I believe, was also a side issue, somewhat removed from the main point of the article.
I couldn't have said it better myself!
Yes, There is an element of hypocracy in the article, re the business of the American bounty hunter, as you noted. That matter, I believe, was also a side issue, somewhat removed from the main point of the article.
I couldn't have said it better myself!
WonderNine
August 18, 2003, 04:18 AM
The Bounty Hunter who is famous in the news for quite some time deserves at the very least the reimbursement of his expenses and at least a reasonable reward somewhere to the tune of 100,000 to 200,000 of the reward money at the least.
c_yeager
August 18, 2003, 06:01 AM
There is a very big difference between JUSTICE and law. He may have fled the LAW in mexico. But, JUSTICE had nothing to do with a man arrested for apprehending a criminal this dispicable.
alan
August 18, 2003, 04:29 PM
Agricola wrote:
"at least in the UK, opposition to abortion along religious or any other grounds is not "hate speech" and never has been. If it was, then the Catholic Church would have been outlawed".
the entire article was shot through with hypocrisy and outrage of the who-do-they-think-they-are kind. hopefully mexico can retain some other bounty hunters who will go after Chapman and return him to justice.
I didn't know that opposition to abortion based on religious conviction or other factors constituted "hate speech" in the U.S. As for "outlawing the Catholic Church", and mind I'm not anti-catholic, that might not be all that bad an idea. As to abortion, I do not believe that such matters are suitable subjects for government to meddle with. Regarding "bounty hiunters" and their antics, there have been some serious problems with such in the U.S. Unfortunately, they are a genre that seemingly is not adequately supervised by the law.
Once again, it struck me that while this bounty hunting business was certainly mentioned, that it did not constitute the major thrust of the piece.
"at least in the UK, opposition to abortion along religious or any other grounds is not "hate speech" and never has been. If it was, then the Catholic Church would have been outlawed".
the entire article was shot through with hypocrisy and outrage of the who-do-they-think-they-are kind. hopefully mexico can retain some other bounty hunters who will go after Chapman and return him to justice.
I didn't know that opposition to abortion based on religious conviction or other factors constituted "hate speech" in the U.S. As for "outlawing the Catholic Church", and mind I'm not anti-catholic, that might not be all that bad an idea. As to abortion, I do not believe that such matters are suitable subjects for government to meddle with. Regarding "bounty hiunters" and their antics, there have been some serious problems with such in the U.S. Unfortunately, they are a genre that seemingly is not adequately supervised by the law.
Once again, it struck me that while this bounty hunting business was certainly mentioned, that it did not constitute the major thrust of the piece.
igor
August 18, 2003, 06:01 PM
The article once again succeeds in lumping all of Europe in as some kind of a totally homogenous entity with "European Hate Speech Law" :confused: :scrutiny: ***? We had no Federal European Government passing any "laws" last time I checked. Nor will we have, if my vote still counts.
There is no such thing as "hate speech" that would be prohibited in Finland. The only thing our law recognizes is called "agitation against a group of people" that most certainly requires much more than public words to fulfill its definition... go to, say, Germany, and you'll have plenty of symbols, flags, songs and "speech" that are prohibited. Not that I'd especially like that stuff they take the effort to forbid there, but we won't take that. Speech is speech and action is action.
There is no such thing as "hate speech" that would be prohibited in Finland. The only thing our law recognizes is called "agitation against a group of people" that most certainly requires much more than public words to fulfill its definition... go to, say, Germany, and you'll have plenty of symbols, flags, songs and "speech" that are prohibited. Not that I'd especially like that stuff they take the effort to forbid there, but we won't take that. Speech is speech and action is action.
HBK
August 18, 2003, 06:17 PM
Mexican law. You can't be serious. If it is illegal in Mexico for a bounty hunter to come drag a scum back to prison, there's something wrong with the law and it doesn't apply.
HankB
August 18, 2003, 07:04 PM
. . . Mexican law . . . A contradiction in terms.
TexasVet
August 19, 2003, 01:51 AM
to think that someone could believe this:
he should be arrested and extradited for that : should happen for a misdemeanor, which is what the BH was charged with. :barf:
he should be arrested and extradited for that : should happen for a misdemeanor, which is what the BH was charged with. :barf:
Keith
August 19, 2003, 12:24 PM
he should be arrested and extradited for that, or at the very least have any reward that he recieved for Luster confiscated and awarded to the Mexicans.
Do you not comprehend the law as explained in the article? What Luster did was perfectly legal under US law, so he can not be extradited to Mexico because of the dual-illegality clause.
Any US citizen can arrest and hold a lawbreaker. This is based on the simple notion that free men should be able to act for the public good - and if somebody is willing to pay for the service, so much the better.
We don't need no steenking badges!
Keith
Do you not comprehend the law as explained in the article? What Luster did was perfectly legal under US law, so he can not be extradited to Mexico because of the dual-illegality clause.
Any US citizen can arrest and hold a lawbreaker. This is based on the simple notion that free men should be able to act for the public good - and if somebody is willing to pay for the service, so much the better.
We don't need no steenking badges!
Keith
BamBam
August 19, 2003, 02:27 PM
Fortunately for Chapman he was released on bail by Judge Jose de Jesus Pineda, escaped to the United States and then failed to appear for trial.
The guy probably disguised himself as a Mexican.........it's the easiest way to get into the US.
The guy probably disguised himself as a Mexican.........it's the easiest way to get into the US.
Alan Smithiee
August 19, 2003, 07:09 PM
ok, so American Law should apply EVERYWHERE??
he broke Mexican Law. but it's only Mexico so it's not like it's REAL law like ours.
hmm, arn't a lot of you the same ones who scream when the UN wants to ban all firearms in the US?
I think some people need to read the definition of hypocracy and then look in a mirror...
after all, it's only US Law.....
he broke Mexican Law. but it's only Mexico so it's not like it's REAL law like ours.
hmm, arn't a lot of you the same ones who scream when the UN wants to ban all firearms in the US?
I think some people need to read the definition of hypocracy and then look in a mirror...
after all, it's only US Law.....
TexasVet
August 20, 2003, 01:57 AM
ok, so American Law should apply EVERYWHERE?? he broke Mexican Law. but it's only Mexico so it's not like it's REAL law like ours.
He committed a crime in Mexico, yes, certainly. The charges were downgraded to misdemeanor, and bail approved. He then failed to show up at court. That is not extraditable under EITHER Mexican or US law. That is the legal equivelent of not showing up for a traffic ticket. Think you, or anyone should be extradited for that level of offense?:banghead:
He committed a crime in Mexico, yes, certainly. The charges were downgraded to misdemeanor, and bail approved. He then failed to show up at court. That is not extraditable under EITHER Mexican or US law. That is the legal equivelent of not showing up for a traffic ticket. Think you, or anyone should be extradited for that level of offense?:banghead:
tiberius
August 20, 2003, 02:19 AM
The guy probably disguised himself as a Mexican.........it's the easiest way to get into the US.
:D ROTFLMAO:D
:D ROTFLMAO:D
Art Eatman
August 20, 2003, 11:01 AM
Extradition of a US citizen to Mexico? Well, quid pro quo. Mexico has never, ever, allowed extradition of a Mexican citizen to the U.S. Once a Mexican citizen escapes to Mexico after a murder in the U.S., he's home free. It is also difficult to get Mexico to allow extradition of a U.S. citizen back to the U.S. for a felony, so long as they have not violated Mexican law.
The U.S. has allowed extradition of U.S. citizens to Mexico for felonies commited in Mexico.
In the U.S., a bounty hunters' "collection" of an escapee is not kidnapping. "Bounty hunting" by licensed/registered people (commonly, bail bondsmen) is a legal occupation.
Art
The U.S. has allowed extradition of U.S. citizens to Mexico for felonies commited in Mexico.
In the U.S., a bounty hunters' "collection" of an escapee is not kidnapping. "Bounty hunting" by licensed/registered people (commonly, bail bondsmen) is a legal occupation.
Art
Alan Smithiee
August 20, 2003, 11:57 AM
I'm not talking about Law.. I'm talking about Attatudes...
TexasVet
August 21, 2003, 12:45 AM
I'm not talking about Law.. I'm talking about Attatudes...
Really?
ok, so American Law should apply EVERYWHERE??
he broke Mexican Law. but it's only Mexico so it's not like it's REAL law like ours.
hmm, arn't a lot of you the same ones who scream when the UN wants to ban all firearms in the US?
I think some people need to read the definition of hypocracy and then look in a mirror...
after all, it's only US Law.....
I see "LAW" four times but "Attatudes" (sic) nowhere.
Really?
ok, so American Law should apply EVERYWHERE??
he broke Mexican Law. but it's only Mexico so it's not like it's REAL law like ours.
hmm, arn't a lot of you the same ones who scream when the UN wants to ban all firearms in the US?
I think some people need to read the definition of hypocracy and then look in a mirror...
after all, it's only US Law.....
I see "LAW" four times but "Attatudes" (sic) nowhere.
Alan Smithiee
August 21, 2003, 11:51 AM
sign, again, there are none so blind as those who will not see.
I'm outta this thread.
I'm outta this thread.
Mute
August 21, 2003, 12:58 PM
hopefully mexico can retain some other bounty hunters who will go after Chapman and return him to justice.
So they can commit the same kind of hypocrisy of which you accused the author of displaying in that article?
So they can commit the same kind of hypocrisy of which you accused the author of displaying in that article?
HBK
August 21, 2003, 04:21 PM
We should shoot people trying to illegaly enter the US. If that offends people, sorry, but it's the most cost/effective way of stopping it. Arresting them does no good, plus if they kill someone and slip back across the border they are home free. If people want to come here, they should do it legally. All the laws in some states where illegal aliens are given services just BAFFLE me. What part of deportation do they not understand.
If you enjoyed reading about "perhaps convenient for EU bureaucrats, but what of U.S. Citizens??" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.