It's not about who has what law, it's about the #1 thing that defines a country - sovereignty.

 

Either you believe in popular sovereignty, or you don't. There's no real middle ground. And demanding troops from other countries be tried by anyone other than the appropriate courts where the crime was committed is pretty blatant anti-sovereignty.

Accord, let me put it to you this way.

 

I break into your house, and of course, you're going to blow my head off.

 

I'm an American citizen and I should have the right to a trial by jury for breaking and entering, right?

 

Wrong.

 

I'm in your house, and you make the rules.

Accord, let me put it to you this way.

 

I break into your house, and of course, you're going to blow my head off.

 

I'm an American citizen and I should have the right to a trial by jury for breaking and entering, right?

 

Wrong.

 

I'm in your house, and you make the rules.

Bad example. Under Florida law, if you're in my house I have the right to use lethal force to protect myself, my family, and my home. It's called the Castle Doctrine, and in Florida if you criminally entered my house, my vehicle, or my business the courts automatically assume that the person is there to cause great bodily harm or death and any potential victim is allowed to use any force necessary and is immune to any civil or criminal prosecution. This law has been a huge success in Florida and countless other states are adopting their own Castle Doctrine's modeled after Florida's.

Accord, let me put it to you this way.

 

I break into your house, and of course, you're going to blow my head off.

 

I'm an American citizen and I should have the right to a trial by jury for breaking and entering, right?

 

Wrong.

 

I'm in your house, and you make the rules.

Bad example. Under Florida law, if you're in my house I have the right to use lethal force to protect myself, my family, and my home. It's called the Castle Doctrine, and in Florida if you criminally entered my house, my vehicle, or my business the courts automatically assume that the person is there to cause great bodily harm or death and any potential victim is allowed to use any force necessary. This law has been a huge success in Florida and countless other states are adopting their own Castle Doctrine's modeled after Florida's.

 

It's a great example because that's how it is in your house, just like that's how it is in Muhammad's house.

Accord, let me put it to you this way.

 

I break into your house, and of course, you're going to blow my head off.

 

I'm an American citizen and I should have the right to a trial by jury for breaking and entering, right?

 

Wrong.

 

I'm in your house, and you make the rules.

Bad example. Under Florida law, if you're in my house I have the right to use lethal force to protect myself, my family, and my home. It's called the Castle Doctrine, and in Florida if you criminally entered my house, my vehicle, or my business the courts automatically assume that the person is there to cause great bodily harm or death and any potential victim is allowed to use any force necessary and is immune to any civil or criminal prosecution. This law has been a huge success in Florida and countless other states are adopting their own Castle Doctrine's modeled after Florida's.

 

 

and when in the phillipines off base, you are subject to philipine law and enforcement of said law.

Accord, let me put it to you this way.

 

I break into your house, and of course, you're going to blow my head off.

 

I'm an American citizen and I should have the right to a trial by jury for breaking and entering, right?

 

Wrong.

 

I'm in your house, and you make the rules.

Bad example. Under Florida law, if you're in my house I have the right to use lethal force to protect myself, my family, and my home. It's called the Castle Doctrine, and in Florida if you criminally entered my house, my vehicle, or my business the courts automatically assume that the person is there to cause great bodily harm or death and any potential victim is allowed to use any force necessary. This law has been a huge success in Florida and countless other states are adopting their own Castle Doctrine's modeled after Florida's.

 

It's a great example because that's how it is in your house, just like that's how it is in Muhammad's house.

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

How about a female soldier in Saudi Arabia who is arrested and sentenced to 90 lashes because she was kidnapped and gangraped by Saudi men?

 

Under Saudi law, SHE is the criminal.

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

How about a female soldier in Saudi Arabia (or most other arab countries for that matter) who is arrested and sentenced to 90 lashes because she was kidnapped and gangraped by Saudi men? Under Saudi law, SHE is the criminal.

 

Sovereignity... like Juanky said. Doesn't make any sense in some situations but it's the way it is.

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

How about a female soldier in Saudi Arabia who is arrested and sentenced to 90 lashes because she was kidnapped and gangraped by Saudi men?

 

Under Saudi law, SHE is the criminal.

 

Be realistic. The U.S. would never sit back andn allow that to happen. This hypothetical is comparing apples to oranges.

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

How about a female soldier in Saudi Arabia who is arrested and sentenced to 90 lashes because she was kidnapped and gangraped by Saudi men?

 

Under Saudi law, SHE is the criminal.

 

 

 

and thats an entirely different situation and YOU KNOW IT.

Accord, let me put it to you this way.

 

I break into your house, and of course, you're going to blow my head off.

 

I'm an American citizen and I should have the right to a trial by jury for breaking and entering, right?

 

Wrong.

 

I'm in your house, and you make the rules.

Bad example. Under Florida law, if you're in my house I have the right to use lethal force to protect myself, my family, and my home. It's called the Castle Doctrine, and in Florida if you criminally entered my house, my vehicle, or my business the courts automatically assume that the person is there to cause great bodily harm or death and any potential victim is allowed to use any force necessary and is immune to any civil or criminal prosecution. This law has been a huge success in Florida and countless other states are adopting their own Castle Doctrine's modeled after Florida's.

That's not entirely true. The Castle Doctrine is a self defense measure, not a license to use any force necessary. More leniency is given my the courts, but you don't have free reign to do whatever you want to the trespasser. Obviously if the force is excessive or torturous the Castle Doctrine doesn't offer protection. If the invader is unarmed, retreating towards the door, and you shoot him in the back of the head, you are not legally protected.

 

So Accord, if you see some random old lady in your house clearly unarmed, rummaging through your refrigerator, don't shoot her. You will go to jail.

No, shoot her.

 

We need to keep old people off the streets.

No, shoot her.

 

We need to keep old people off the streets.

"It's past YOUR bedtime!" *BOOM*

 

:thumbup

Accord, let me put it to you this way.

 

I break into your house, and of course, you're going to blow my head off.

 

I'm an American citizen and I should have the right to a trial by jury for breaking and entering, right?

 

Wrong.

 

I'm in your house, and you make the rules.

Bad example. Under Florida law, if you're in my house I have the right to use lethal force to protect myself, my family, and my home. It's called the Castle Doctrine, and in Florida if you criminally entered my house, my vehicle, or my business the courts automatically assume that the person is there to cause great bodily harm or death and any potential victim is allowed to use any force necessary and is immune to any civil or criminal prosecution. This law has been a huge success in Florida and countless other states are adopting their own Castle Doctrine's modeled after Florida's.

That's not entirely true. The Castle Doctrine is a self defense measure, not a license to use any force necessary. More leniency is given my the courts, but you don't have free reign to do whatever you want to the trespasser. Obviously if the force is excessive or torturous the Castle Doctrine doesn't offer protection. If the invader is unarmed, retreating towards the door, and you shoot him in the back of the head, you are not legally protected.

 

So Accord, if you see some random old lady in your house clearly unarmed, rummaging through your refrigerator, don't shoot her. You will go to jail.

The key word is "necessary." Torturing a BG while he lies there in a pool of blood after you shot him is not necessary to stopping the threat.

 

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

How about a female soldier in Saudi Arabia who is arrested and sentenced to 90 lashes because she was kidnapped and gangraped by Saudi men?

 

Under Saudi law, SHE is the criminal.

 

 

 

and thats an entirely different situation and YOU KNOW IT.

Not really.

No, shoot her.

 

We need to keep old people off the streets.

"It's past YOUR bedtime!" *BOOM*

 

:thumbup

 

Well if an old lady is rummaging through your fridge, it's probably because she couldn't remember whose house she was in. May as well put her out of her misery and keep her from endangering countless lives on the road.

 

Could this be considered euthanasia?

 

This opens up a whole new can of worms - Pandora's Box, if you will.

 

Crap. :banghead

That is why I put "obviously".

 

My point is that there is a burden of proof put on the home owner to show that the individual was indeed a threat.

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

How about a female soldier in Saudi Arabia who is arrested and sentenced to 90 lashes because she was kidnapped and gangraped by Saudi men?

 

Under Saudi law, SHE is the criminal.

 

 

 

and thats an entirely different situation and YOU KNOW IT.

Not really.

 

And how is it not entirely different?

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

How about a female soldier in Saudi Arabia who is arrested and sentenced to 90 lashes because she was kidnapped and gangraped by Saudi men?

 

Under Saudi law, SHE is the criminal.

 

 

 

and thats an entirely different situation and YOU KNOW IT.

Not really.

 

And how is it not entirely different?

 

i cant wait to hear this spin.

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

How about a female soldier in Saudi Arabia who is arrested and sentenced to 90 lashes because she was kidnapped and gangraped by Saudi men?

 

Under Saudi law, SHE is the criminal.

 

 

 

and thats an entirely different situation and YOU KNOW IT.

Not really.

 

And how is it not entirely different?

 

i cant wait to hear this spin.

 

404spinnotfound

 

He said "Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price."

 

And I responded accordingly with a scenario in which an absurd law resulted in the punishment of an American soldier. But hey, that's the law so who am I to question it.

Bottom line,

 

This dirtbag raped a woman, he got caught, he's in trouble.

 

Justice prevails. The UCMJ sucks, believe you me. And for the record, Marines are trouble makers.

 

Were getting an unprecedented number in from Guam from Okinawa Japan, because Japan is tired of the Marines wreaking havoc. They're even paying the US to move the Marines.

 

There are two things in this world you just don't mess with, a Drunk Marine and and Angry Marine. I know this, because they come in packs.

Ice Man, is that you in the pic? You look like a bad mothaf****r.

Accord, let me put it to you this way.

 

I break into your house, and of course, you're going to blow my head off.

 

I'm an American citizen and I should have the right to a trial by jury for breaking and entering, right?

 

Wrong.

 

I'm in your house, and you make the rules.

Bad example.Here's a more appropriate example:

 

Muhammed breaks into your house and steals all of your weapons before you get home. He hears your keys in the lock and blows your tiny pecker off [Muhammed is a great shot] as you step through the door. As you lay there writhing in pain, he strips you naked, takes your "self defense" weapon out of your ankle holster and inserts your pecker into your anus. After raping your sister, your mother, and your grandmother and loading his Ryder rent-a-van with all of your possessions he heads off for his fortress of solitude.

 

While cruising up 95, Muhammed runs out of gas [i guess he didn't realize how heavy his booty was going to be]. A trooper stops to offer assistance, obviously not noticing that Muhammed was an Arab until he was already stopped. Once the trooper sees an Arab out of gas, he becomes immediately suspicious and draws his sidearm while forcing Muhammed from the van face down on the pavement. The trooper calls for immediate SWAT and FBI assistance thinking any Arab driving a van must be trying to blow something up. Once backup arrives, they find your crap and take Muhammed into custody.

 

Lucky day? Not for you. Muhammed is a soldier in the Kerplakistani army training with the 651st MP Company out of Arcadia. Instead of being tried in the US Courts, Muhammed is extradited to Kerplakistan where he is to stand trial before a Kerplakistani Military Tribunal. Due to the laws that govern the Kerplakistanis military, Muhammed is found not guilty of any wrong doing because he donated the requisite 20% of his take to charity.

 

Justice is served.

Shame on you Yankeefan, the same rules shouldn't apply to OUR enemies. Let us not forget that justice is whatever serves our immediate interest.

Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price.

How about a female soldier in Saudi Arabia who is arrested and sentenced to 90 lashes because she was kidnapped and gangraped by Saudi men?

 

Under Saudi law, SHE is the criminal.

 

 

 

and thats an entirely different situation and YOU KNOW IT.

Not really.

 

And how is it not entirely different?

 

i cant wait to hear this spin.

 

404spinnotfound

 

He said "Doesn't matter how absurd a countries laws are to you. If you visit said country, you respect its laws. You break its laws, you pay the price."

 

And I responded accordingly with a scenario in which an absurd law resulted in the punishment of an American soldier. But hey, that's the law so who am I to question it.

 

Your scenario is an extreme case, and you know very well the US would NOT allow such a punishment to occur.