little elvis
Senior member
- Sep 8, 2005
- 227
- 0
- 0
If he is really under the age of 18, couldn't he be classified as a child soldier. Just curious on how that effects any trial.
Originally posted by: Bulk Beef
If his age is in question, just cut him in half and count the rings.
Originally posted by: Engineer
I heard on the news (yesterday) that the Canadian Navy (didn't know they had one, lol) captured a boat load of pirates, took their weapons and interrogated them...and then...gasp...let them go.
Originally posted by: little elvis
If he is really under the age of 18, couldn't he be classified as a child soldier. Just curious on how that effects any trial.
Originally posted by: Iron Woode
it has to do with International Law.Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: Engineer
I heard on the news (yesterday) that the Canadian Navy (didn't know they had one, lol) captured a boat load of pirates, took their weapons and interrogated them...and then...gasp...let them go.
I guess you can do the crime without the time.
CNBC reported that each ship carries a "fund" of cash that they use to pay off pirates. I wonder how much cost that adds to our goods shipped from/to overseas?
Yep. That's been the standard procedure for British Navy for pirates they have captured.
No wonder the pirates have been running wild. Up until the Maersk, it was a high reward/low risk venture.
The British and Canadians could be charged and brought to the World Court for violating the Somali's rights to pirate.
I am not kidding either.
Originally posted by: DrawninwarD
Originally posted by: magreen
He would probably eat his mom as soon as look at her. Then find a civil rights lawyer to say he did it because he's uneducated.
WHAT THE FUCK?
I wasn't being serious.Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: Iron Woode
it has to do with International Law.Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: Engineer
I heard on the news (yesterday) that the Canadian Navy (didn't know they had one, lol) captured a boat load of pirates, took their weapons and interrogated them...and then...gasp...let them go.
I guess you can do the crime without the time.
CNBC reported that each ship carries a "fund" of cash that they use to pay off pirates. I wonder how much cost that adds to our goods shipped from/to overseas?
Yep. That's been the standard procedure for British Navy for pirates they have captured.
No wonder the pirates have been running wild. Up until the Maersk, it was a high reward/low risk venture.
The British and Canadians could be charged and brought to the World Court for violating the Somali's rights to pirate.
I am not kidding either.
Yeah, you are not kidding, you're just daft.
It has to do with NATO guidelines, not international law and no, the World Court couldn't and wouldn't do sheit about it if it was withing NATO guidelines to hold them.
I think there has been enough evidence of those kinds of action in at least two continents and three wars?
Originally posted by: thegimp03
In my opinion, they should have just shot him too. Would have saved everybody a bunch of time and expenses, and now this civil rights lawyer wants to represent him?! Is this guy nuts?
Originally posted by: DaWhim
Originally posted by: zCypher
Privacy the same as terrorism huh?Originally posted by: DaWhim
just kill all the pirates, a lot less problems to deal with.
even better, make a law to put privacy the same as terrorism. shipping insurance won't be paying.
oops.....
Originally posted by: babylon5
Don't kill him. Harvest his organs for people who are dying because of kidney failure or something.
Originally posted by: jpeyton
If you guys are so in love with the idea of instant on-the-spot executions, why haven't you moved to China or Iran yet?