I would presume those who were actually convicted do in fact wind up having to pay damages. They definitely would if they were sued.
Arizona is imposing big fines and restitution orders on the Scottsdale rioters. I don’t know how much has been collected, but I know its been demanded.
There are no parallels between BLM and Jan 6 (other than that both involved groups of people demanding things). Anyone attempting to draw a parallel is on a fool’s errand and not worth the effort to refute.
That is an awful lot of money for broken windows and pooping on the floor. Where does that 500 million come from? Are the rioters responsible for security that should have been in place before the assualt on the Capital?
Imho, they should lose every Federal benefit they currently, or are scheduled to, receive. Bye bye Tricare for Life, Medicare, Social Security, VA Benefits, etc.
Biden isn’t the President to do that, however, and I truly wish he were.
Delightfully Schadenfreudey as that is, we shouldn’t do quite that. It’s mouthwatering to imagine these people, homeless, bankrupt and broken for life, living in squalor on the streets and in the culverts.
But that’s really bad for society as a whole as well as for the individuals. (See: Just about any article on the societal problems of homelessness.) Totally ruining people like this is cutting off our societal noses to spite our societal faces.
If they are left bankrupt but having to live on some kind of dole for the rest of their lives, that’s bad enough, and that’s good enough.
If we were talking about millions, hell, even thousands, maybe.
But we’re talking, what, 500, many of whom swore oaths to defend the very thing they were attacking. For those people, penury is their due.
Only if convicted of felonies.
Or we could, you know, just lock them up for life.
There are crimes, and there are crimes. Attacking the democratic system is a grave crime. There is no redemption - not unless there is demonstrated remorse first. This isn’t getting drunk on Natty Light and riding around on your riding lawnmower drunk.
The point is, they should be.
That works too. Gets them off the streets, keeps them out of trouble (or at least, keeps the trouble contained), and they get all their basic expenses covered. But society will still be paying for it, indefinitely.
Society will be paying for it indefinitely whether they’re in jail or out of it. People who commit to the idea of taking away my right to have my vote count, who commit to basically nullifying my citizenship, should be removed from society.
Let’s put it this way: jailing them indefinitely takes away the need for vigilantism and extreme solutions to this problem.
No. We don’t do that unless convicted of felonies. Even so, some rights are maintained.
To do otherwise is a abrogation of justice, and just revenge.
It is not. The January 6ers are being convicted of very real crimes actually on the books. Not made up or after the fact crimes, which are totally and completely unconstitutional.
For example- Thomas Ballard: Assaulting, resisting or impeding certain officers using a dangerous weapon; civil disorder ; entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon ; disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon; engaging in physical violence in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon; disorderly conduct in capitol building; act of physical violence in the Capitol grounds or buildings; parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/23/us/politics/capitol-riot-sentencing.html- see this link on June 24th by @shadowfacts, low level issues there.
A Florida man who joined in the Jan. 6 assault on the U.S. Capitol will serve eight months in prison with 24 months of supervised release, in the first felony sentencing to result from the Justice Department’s sprawling investigation into the insurrection.
Only Felony so far, afaik.
Only if convicted of the appropriate crimes. Are you suggesting we make up ex post facto laws just for these malefactors? That would be a worse crime that what they did.
And conversely too, I suppose.
If we can lock up random Muslims in Guantanamo without ever charging them with crimes because they were enemy combatants against the United States, then surely we can do the same with people who’ve been recorded on video and viewed by millions of people, right?
While we’re at it: who’s the bigger threat to America’s political system: random Muslim guy hiding out in an Afghanistan cave, or people who tried to assault your congressional representatives?
There are only 40 men left, and hardly “random” but there is a legal basis for it, albeit sorta weak:
The legal foundation of Guantánamo is that after 9/11, Congress passed an “authorization for use of military force” in 2001 to go after whomever was responsible for those attacks, like al-Qaida and the Taliban. That law gives the president sweeping powers during wartime, and the government claims that includes the ability to detain prisoners without charge or trial.
Note that we detained quite a few nazis during and even after the war.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/05/politics/guantanamo-detainee-qahtani-biden-invs/index.html
At the camp, according to US military records, al-Qahtani met al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and swore his loyalty to him. Bin Laden personally selected him to take part in the 9/11 attacks, the records claim.
On August 4, 2001, al-Qahtani landed in Orlando, Florida, with a one-way ticket and $4,000 in cash, which made immigration officials suspicious. They questioned him for 90 minutes before sending him back to Dubai.
It appears to include the cost of paying the National Guard and the Capitol police. I’m unsure if that includes just the National Guard who had to come on the scene to deal with them then, or also the troops who had to stay to protect the place afterwards solely because of their actions and threats.
Do note that securing the building needed all those troops. It wasn’t for show. It takes a lot of people to actually secure a location.
I will note that at least $1.5 million is for property damage, which would suggest they did more than your minimal description of the damages.
There was external damage to the barriers and the building. They broke doors and windows inside the building. Somebody ripped out panic buttons from certain members’ offices and there was a lot of other vandalism and theft involved (including Pelosi’s laptop).
I’d also note that there are windows and windows. Proper restoration of a window in a historic building is going to cost a lot more than is popping in a standard sized basic version in stock at Home Depot.
Quite right, and the assessed restitution for convicted rioters should reflect that.