Inside Penny's vehicle, prosecutors wrote, authorities found a "M4 A1 Carbine 5.56mm assault rifle with scope, 7 rifle magazines containing 5.56mm ammunition, a Ruger handgun, 3 magazines containing 9mm ammunition, a tactical vest, a shield, and 3 knives in sheaths"
I'm sure he has an innocent explanation for all that.
while a search of his residence found "a Glock 9mm handgun, 4 magazines containing 9 mm ammunition, a Smith and Wesson MP-15 rifle, a Walther Pistol Model P22, Iver Johnson Arms & Cycle Works 12-gauge shotgun, 15 magazines loaded with ammunition, various boxes of ammunition, and Nazi memorabilia."
Not defending a Nazi but let me give a little more context on the guns they found:
2a. Everything found in the car is pretty fucky. I highly doubt he actually had a Fully auto M4 rifle, it’s probably just some variant of AR-15,but if it is a fully auto rifle, dude is extra fucked and could be looking at a 20yr prison sentence just for that. Ruger pistol could be anything, but is probably your typical handgun especially if he had 3 mags.
2b. The firearms at home are a mix. A Glock pistol is a Glock pistol, 9mm is no small caliber. The Smith and Wesson MP-15 rifle and Walther Pistol Model P22 sound/look scary (the MP-15 is even modeled after the AR-15), but these both shoot .22lr which is more of a sporting/target practice round. Here is a picture for comparison, the larger round on the right is .223 or 5.56 which is what the “m4a1” they found would shoot. Of course, these are still firearms and are still lethal, but it’s kind of like the difference between a box cutter and a k-bar: both are deadly, but one is deadlier than the other. The Iver Johnson Arms & Cycle Works 12-gauge shotgun is probably your typical hunting shotgun. Shotguns have fallen out of favor with the military/ law enforcement as they aren’t as effective as rifles, but they are still used for hunting/sport shooting.
All of this to say: of the 6 guns they found he has only 3 of them were the spooky/scary assault type. This guy (personally) wasn’t trying to arm a small militia and is an even greater idiot because all of those guns/ammo/accessories he owned probably cost a couple thousand dollars and he just threw that all away.
He is a Nazi though, so he was already fucking stupid to begin with ¯_(ツ)_/¯
The impulse to seek retribution against those who have perpetrated heinous crimes is a natural human inclination. Yet, it’s vital to remember that even those who commit the most grievous offenses are, at their core, human beings endowed with certain inalienable rights. In the context of warfare, the use of torture to extract information is undeniably a reprehensible act. It stands to reason, then, that torture employed solely as a means of inflicting pain for punishment’s sake is even more morally indefensible. However, I perceive a well-intentioned undercurrent in your remarks. Your response appears to reflect a person who retains a sense of empathy towards others, an attribute that is commendable.
That’s assuming one does not see their heinous actions as evidence of them revoking the social contract, and being subsequently greenlit for retribution by society at large.
If individuals have committed crimes, they’ve clearly broken the social contract. Your mention of retribution is especially interesting when we consider the Code of Hammurabi, one of the earliest known sets of laws, which introduced ‘lex talionis’ or ‘the principle of retribution’—likely the origin of the ‘an eye for an eye’ concept.
The idea of retribution does seem to tap into something intrinsic in our sense of justice. However, it’s important to note that during Hammurabi’s era, resources were much scarcer than today, making the sustained imprisonment of criminals impractical.
So, what is the underlying purpose of modern incarceration? In no particular order, it seems to be: isolating individuals from the public to prevent further crimes, serving as punishment to deter criminal behavior, and rehabilitation.
Torture, I believe, doesn’t make us safer nor does it contribute to rehabilitation. This leaves punishment to deter criminal activity. This can be seen either as a warning to potential criminals or, for those not facing life imprisonment, as a means to reduce recidivism.
Therefore, we’re left to balance the human rights of the individual against the potential deterrent effect of torture in preventing future crimes. Even in this simplified scenario, discounting the message sent by tacitly accepting state-sponsored torture and the diminishing impact of additional punishment on those who act irrationally, torture seems to serve only to satisfy a base desire for vengeance. We should not lower ourselves to such methods, aligning us closer to those who commit these heinous crimes.
Torture is not a good tool for rehabilitation. It’s also not a good tool for prevention, as I do not believe this individual would have behaved differently had they believed the risk for getting caught was torture instead of imprisonment.
I'm sure he's broke af and (as usual) it'll fall onto the victims to re-make and restore what he broke.
[Yes, I know insurance. But it might not cover arson, or there could be a high deductible, they may not have opted to insure at a value that allows them to rebuild, or whatever. And regardless of the cost, there's the disruption to the community, the time and effort and energy to put the building back together. Fuck this guy.]
I don’t think justice should focus on trying to fix what was broken for that reason. It should focus on punishing who broke it, so that the community’s sense of a just world is restored and so it can heal.
I don’t think justice should focus on trying to fix what was broken for that reason. It should focus on punishing who broke it, so that the community’s sense of a just world is restored and so it can heal.
No, it should focus on fixing what is broken… With the person who broke it. The damaged thing should be restored, but punitive incarceration does nothing for society. Put them in therapy and doing community service to “repay their debt”. Sticking them in a cell for 20 years doesn’t help anyone.
It’s impossible to undo the past and therefore to really fix anything. This is why we focus on punishing the perpetrator and why mitigating the damage they cause is treated as a separate issue.
Even if you could wave your magic wand and make it as if a terrible act never happened, you’d still punish the perpetrator anyway because they still did what they did.
You might not want people to be punished, but we’re going to anyway because it is what a just world by definition is. And no, you’re not gonna argue that a just world is not that just so you can win an argument with me. Evildoers will be punished and that, given how you oppose the notion, likely includes you too. Get over it like you tell victims to do.
That’s quite the reaction to someone saying “torturing people isn’t actually helpful
And a valid one because no one said a goddamn thing about torturing anyone. I said “punish”. The fact that you’re so blatantly and transparently trying to strawman shows that you have an agenda.
You’re just a manipulative, enabling asshole with the goal of protecting and defending evil people from accountability. You know why it is the chief enabler in any relationship protects the abuser from consequences? Because they, themselves, are abusers too. That’s you, you are the chief enabler. And I do not have the patience for your shit today.
And a valid one because no one said a goddamn thing about torturing anyone. I said “punish”.
Okay, explain what you mean here by punishment then. I’m not saying “Let him go with a promise not to do it again.” I’m saying the consequences they face for this should be focused on rehabilitation, as punishment for the sake of punishment is nothing more than torturing someone just for the sake of it.
The fact that you’re so blatantly and transparently trying to strawman shows that you have an agenda.
With that in mind could you explain your agenda with these statements?
. Evildoers will be punished and that, given how you oppose the notion, likely includes you too. Get over it like you tell victims to do
and
You’re just a manipulative, enabling asshole with the goal of protecting and defending evil people from accountability. You know why it is the chief enabler in any relationship protects the abuser from consequences? Because they, themselves, are abusers too. That’s you, you are the chief enabler. And I do not have the patience for your shit today.
The projection is strong with this one. Enabling and defending a justice system based on cruelty and abuse, then saying those who defend abusers are abusers themselves. You’re telling on yourself here.
Add comment