If he can't come up with his bail then yes, he can be jailed for that long. It also doesn't state it but most likely he's not in a maximum security prison. And he also may be a flight risk. There are a lot of variables not mentioned in the article.
Fat prisoner sues over lack of food
- Thread starter Sirius
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
- Status
If he can't come up with his bail then yes, he can be jailed for that long. It also doesn't state it but most likely he's not in a maximum security prison. And he also may be a flight risk. There are a lot of variables not mentioned in the article.
Faggy Germans constantly whining about the hardships of criminals and terrorists. If that's our new role in the world, I'd rather go back to genocide and trying to conquer the planet. There was a time other nations called us "Huns" and were afraid. Good times.
OMG U CANT BE SIRIUS!
Oh s***, you are!
Wow...just...wow. You actually believe that murderers (you know, people that have little regard for human life) should have the right to sue? Thanks to you and das_ben I am thoroughly convinced that the reason the world is such a shat hole is because of bleeding heart liberals like yourselves. Crime deserves punishment...not coddling. Go hug a tree.
wtf
Inmates do not completely lose all of their rights. We, as a society, don't have the right to treat other human beings as animals, even if they do behave that way. The ability to sue is still there to address potential abuses by the prison system. Unfortunately, many prisoners file frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit. This is one, there's also the semi-famous one from years ago where an inmate sued because the prison only carried creamy peanut butter, and he wanted chunky.
As for only getting as much cold food as every other inmate, that's where I say, "Waah, waah. Stay out of prison, you can eat what you want." Many grossly overweight people say they would kill to lose that much weight. He actually did.
In most cases I'd argue that animals get treated better that humans.
And since this occurs so frequently then the right should be stripped from them. They can't vote but they can sue?
That's what I got from the article. Why is this guy complaining?
Your not going to be in prison for 8 months unless there's pretty good chance the police have enough evidence. The trial is probably just a formality. Hell, he may have even confessed...who knows.He's not a murderer. Yet. Not proven guilty, remember
Last edited:
Go, move to Iraq.
No really, people like you make me question the achievements of civilization. I'm sitting here, simply flabbergasted at what you are spouting, having a hard time believing you're being serious. If someone is in prison long enough he's probably guilty? Why would they even bother with a trial - hey, it's just a formality! Prisoners keep complaining about their treatment? Stop that, right there! How dare they interrupt our process of formality? They should know that committing a crime strips them off all natural human rights - hey you there, you the petty thief - who allowed you to complain about your shackles? Give him hell, wardens!
The irony of your user title. Do you have any idea what William Penn stood for?
No really, people like you make me question the achievements of civilization. I'm sitting here, simply flabbergasted at what you are spouting, having a hard time believing you're being serious. If someone is in prison long enough he's probably guilty? Why would they even bother with a trial - hey, it's just a formality! Prisoners keep complaining about their treatment? Stop that, right there! How dare they interrupt our process of formality? They should know that committing a crime strips them off all natural human rights - hey you there, you the petty thief - who allowed you to complain about your shackles? Give him hell, wardens!
The irony of your user title. Do you have any idea what William Penn stood for?
Boy you sure can't comprehend well can you? Let me help you a little:
Not petty thief. And considering you absolutely NOTHING of the crime this person perpetrated it's amazing how you jump to conclusions yourself. Way to jump off the deep end chief.
I'll tell you what, how about we send all of our criminals over to you so you can give them a nice big hug and all will be right with the world.
Hur, hur. Aren't we funny tonight.
So... where does the lawlessness begin? Somewhere between petty theft and murder an invisible line must be crossed. Have fun deciding on where that line is and coming up with a legitimation. A legitimation that shows a little more substance than "criminals are animals".
So... where does the lawlessness begin? Somewhere between petty theft and murder an invisible line must be crossed. Have fun deciding on where that line is and coming up with a legitimation. A legitimation that shows a little more substance than "criminals are animals".
that fat ass needs to lose several hundred pound for his own good.
He has no case.
Lose weight fat ass!!
He has no case.
Lose weight fat ass!!
Your logic is deeply flawed. Invisible line between petty thief and murder? You don't see the significant difference between the two?
Let's forget about the subject of the original post for a moment. It sounds to me like you suffer from a severe case of paranoia if you think that by punishing criminals we are somehow dehumanizing ourselves. Do you think all criminals can be rehabilitated? Do you think that once they go back into society that the chances of them committing the same acts are zero? I'm just curious.
Alright, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you simply misunderstood me. What I meant was, where do you draw the line of criminals retaining rights and how do you legitimize it? Petty theft, theft, robbery, arson, rape, murder? How do you even want to compare all crimes to each other, by minimum/maximum possible sentence? Why would, say an arsonist lose rights of appeal, a fair trial and humane treatment and why wouldn't a robber (I hope I made myself clear that these are merely examples to get my point across)? In short, once again: where do you draw the line and why? Keep in mind there's a little more to laws than the positivist notion of them "being there", e.g. judicial history and tradition, society values and ethics. Present an argument.
As for your second, well, let's call it a "point": No, I don't think criminals should not be punished. There's a reason for the existence of laws and I understand the need for them, as well as punishment. However, that doesn't mean that punishment has to be dealt in an inhumane manner - once again, society has come a long way since dealing with criminals was just a matter of brute revenge (and has to go a long way still). Furthermore, not all criminals may be rehabilitated, but that doesn't mean that it should not be tried.
Seriously, if you want a debate, go ahead and make your point, but present it accordingly. Don't pick out one sentence and try to be funny about it. Empirical data suggests you're not. In other words: don't bother if you really resent civilization as it is. Then just... I don't know, go wank to Ogrish or something.
As for your second, well, let's call it a "point": No, I don't think criminals should not be punished. There's a reason for the existence of laws and I understand the need for them, as well as punishment. However, that doesn't mean that punishment has to be dealt in an inhumane manner - once again, society has come a long way since dealing with criminals was just a matter of brute revenge (and has to go a long way still). Furthermore, not all criminals may be rehabilitated, but that doesn't mean that it should not be tried.
Seriously, if you want a debate, go ahead and make your point, but present it accordingly. Don't pick out one sentence and try to be funny about it. Empirical data suggests you're not. In other words: don't bother if you really resent civilization as it is. Then just... I don't know, go wank to Ogrish or something.
I'll pick one of your points and not be funny about it.
What is humane about the death sentence, and what is humane about a life sentence?
And then when you are done figuring that out, pick the one that makes you less upset.
What is humane about the death sentence, and what is humane about a life sentence?
And then when you are done figuring that out, pick the one that makes you less upset.
Yes, it was a misunderstanding. And I appreciate you making you points a tad clearer. This is the internet, remember, and things are taken how the are written. A lot is lost in communication. I don't necessarily agree with your far left POV but I can at least try to understand it.
It's a hard one eh? Because they both mean NOTHING TO YOU, right?
That's right.
They both mean nothing to me either.
That's right.
They both mean nothing to me either.
The irony is strong in this one! /Vader voice.
I notice that a thread tag states that "Sirius is a Nazi". Well, you've been accused, therefore, it must be true. No point in arguing your case, hell, you may have even confessed...who knows?
See how stupid that sounds?
If I actually did something that deserved the death penalty, I'd take that over life sharing a tiny cell and constantly watching my back, waiting for old age or a shank to end my pointless existence. A quick, possibly painful death over a long, definitely painful life.
The irony is strong in this one! /Vader voice.
I notice that a thread tag states that "Sirius is a Nazi". Well, you've been accused, therefore, it must be true. No point in arguing your case, hell, you may have even confessed...who knows?
See how stupid that sounds?
About as stupid as your post does.
Read the thread and try to comprehend.
It's about a fat guy in prison suing because he thinks he's not getting enough food. If you think he's justified in doing that then have a great life in Oz.
Last edited:
The right to live is what I'd call... the most basic human right. Thus, the death sentence is a more inhumane sentence than life. Something that you'd have to keep in mind is that being kept in prison breaches some human rights - the rights of free movement and equality come to my mind immediately - but that a lot of rights are still maintained, e.g. the (in that situation) very important judicial process rights. The lawmaker (and later, the judge) has the unfortunate responsibility to weigh the matters of rights of the criminal and giving out punishments to protect the rights of thirds. I wouldn't want to be in the position to have to decide on these final matters.
- Status