Three men convicted of soliciting sex must wear chicken suit

Quote:

Probably a sentence involving being ridiculed in public would qualify.

Wow, we make policy and law on A2K now? We have a Constitutional SCholar amidst. Brandon, wre you aware of the tests for the determination of "Cruel and Uniusual"? and I dont mean any of your guesses, or "probablies" please.

And they should have been. Under our Constitution, a judge doesn't have the right to say that a defendant has a choice between serving ten years in jail, or being tarred and feathered and dragged around behind a car in public, which is the kind of sentence that people once received. You may have no appreciation of the Bill of Rights, but it's there for a reason.

Probably a sentence involving being ridiculed in public would qualify.

Furthermore, I don't need a law degree to have an opinion about my Constitution, nor even to express it. I am one of many, many people to have opined about the Constitution on this forum. So, I guess, according to you, only Constitutional scholars are entitled to talk about their Constitutional rights on A2K, you snob.

SO, this "scholarlyt sounding" opinion

Quote:

And they should have been. Under our Constitution, a judge doesn't have the right to say that a defendant has a choice between serving ten years in jail, or being tarred and feathered and dragged around behind a car in public, which is the kind of sentence that people once received. You may have no appreciation of the Bill of Rights, but it's there for a reason.

and this

Quote:

Probably a sentence involving being ridiculed in public would qualify.

Is just you blowin it out yer A S S. I guess you dont want to look up the definition of "cruel and unusual" punishment, which was your opinion as to what these sentences were.

Thi is a strange juxtaposition, you an arch conservative and me a progressive. You sound like a budding ACLUite

Quote:

Furthermore, I don't need a law degree to have an opinion about my Constitution, nor even to express it. I am one of many, many people to have opined about the Constitution on this forum. So, I guess, according to you, only Constitutional scholars are entitled to talk about their Constitutional rights on A2K, you snob.

Noone said you needed a law degree, but maybe some better information about the phrase "cruel and unusual" . There are a number of tests that are on the web. Im almost certain that the judge didnt exceed any authority by sentencing (in a choice of punishments mind you) these criminals to "hard time" in a chicken suit.
Cmon, stop trying to use these ridiculous comparisons (like comparing the chicken suit with tar and fethering, or using the argument in extreme of trying to pin me down as a snob), your comparisons and assignments are ridiculous and Im not buyin any of em. .

Dont invoke Hawthorne for a definition of "cruel and unsusal". Theres enough precedent to fill a ship re: judges giving all kinds of sentences that we may think are whacky. Whackiness, or shame, doesnt necessarily invoke "C&U".
In a recent decision a recidivist thief got 20 yars for stealing 186 bucks. The punishment ws more for his recidivist actions .

DOES THe PuNISHMENT OVERERACH THE CRIME is one test that Ive heard (I get a lot of what I know about the law from Joe from Chicago and Law and Order). Now if you continue to ignore what is C&U, and post again without lookin it up, I guess someonell have to do it for you.

I don't much care what some self-important person said about it afterwards. The interpretation can only legitimately be based either on the words themselves

Brandon says

Quote:

I don't much care what some self-important person said about it afterwards. The interpretation can only legitimately be based either on the words themselves

Remember this:"The Constitution only says what the judges say it says"
The issues of cruel and unusaul , to include such things as lethal injection or even wearing a chicken suit as an ALTERNATIVE sentence, were not even flagella on the tails of the spermacetii of the founding fathers. We live in 2007, try to recognize that.