Actually comparing TMV with a member of an organized group that has to all intents and purposes declared war is like comparing apples and rutabagas.
Well, he was a member of the anti-government militia movement, and though I'm not aware of any specific declarations of war on the part of those movements, I'd wager that many of them would agree that they are willing to commit acts of war on the US government.
it may only be a police action but it seems like a war to me. Well, sorta. I mean, there are certainly a lot of military tactics used in anti-gang enforcement efforts (see SWAT teams, use of intelligence operatives/undercover agents/CIs, etc.) but in the end, drug dealers and gang bangers get trials, with juries, free counsel, and all the rights and privileges of every other US citizen.
I guess my main argument would be that justice and defense are separate, and justice has a value far beyond mere defense. To do justice one must prove for all to see that the accused is guilty, and apply a punishment that represents society's judgment. Sure, the justice system may not be perfect for that goal, but it does it a helluvalot better than a sniper does. The role of defense is to see to it that the nation does not perish. The role of justice is to keep it vital. Now if you really think this guy is an existential threat to the United States, then I'd say sure, take him out. But he's not. He's a cleric, with some awful ideas and an unfortunately receptive audience. Killing him will not save the nation, though it may save some lives. Apprehending and trying him helps to preserve what the nation's about, though. At least in my eyes.
I dunno, call me a doe-eyed idealist, but the justice system has a value beyond mere deterrence and process.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 8/4/10 11:28 (UTC)Well, he was a member of the anti-government militia movement, and though I'm not aware of any specific declarations of war on the part of those movements, I'd wager that many of them would agree that they are willing to commit acts of war on the US government.
it may only be a police action but it seems like a war to me.
Well, sorta. I mean, there are certainly a lot of military tactics used in anti-gang enforcement efforts (see SWAT teams, use of intelligence operatives/undercover agents/CIs, etc.) but in the end, drug dealers and gang bangers get trials, with juries, free counsel, and all the rights and privileges of every other US citizen.
I guess my main argument would be that justice and defense are separate, and justice has a value far beyond mere defense. To do justice one must prove for all to see that the accused is guilty, and apply a punishment that represents society's judgment. Sure, the justice system may not be perfect for that goal, but it does it a helluvalot better than a sniper does. The role of defense is to see to it that the nation does not perish. The role of justice is to keep it vital. Now if you really think this guy is an existential threat to the United States, then I'd say sure, take him out. But he's not. He's a cleric, with some awful ideas and an unfortunately receptive audience. Killing him will not save the nation, though it may save some lives. Apprehending and trying him helps to preserve what the nation's about, though. At least in my eyes.
I dunno, call me a doe-eyed idealist, but the justice system has a value beyond mere deterrence and process.