# Bricker, Here Are A Couple Of Bozos Who Are Right Up Your Alley **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 21, 2013, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973 "2013-05-21T23:55:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/41 "2013-05-23T15:33:04Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > You were done when you posted your pointless OP. > > Before you can find a person guilty in a court of law, there has to be a violation of some existing statute. Them’s the rules. > > Jindal and Boehner stated that whomever violate the law should go to jail/prison. There still has to be an investigation and then a trial. > > If you demand that someone should go to jail, it’s not unreasonable to ask you what statute you think that person violated or how you think that person violated a statute. Arguing that a particular “someone” should go to prison BECAUSE **RTFirefly** says so wouldn’t even be allowed in court as evidence. I hope you don’t mind that I have no fucking clue about what you’re driving at here. > [@](#): > > Jindal and Boehner stated that whomever violate the law should go to jail/prison. I sure missed this part. Could you quote the specific language where they said this? > [@](#): > > Before you can find a person guilty in a court of law, there has to be a violation of some existing statute. Them’s the rules. No question about it. I would be appalled if any court of law in a civilized country applied a different set of rules. Again, your point? > [@](#): > > Arguing that a particular “someone” should go to prison BECAUSE **RTFirefly** says so wouldn’t even be allowed in court as evidence. Of course not. And…??? > [@](#): > > If you demand that someone should go to jail, it’s not unreasonable to ask you what statute you think that person violated or how you think that person violated a statute. How about if, as a non-lawyer, and as a person not in a position where I am expected to apply the law to anything beyond my own personal conduct, I _express an opinion_ that someone should go to jail. For instance, suppose I say the surviving Tsarnaev brother should rot in prison for the rest of his life. If I do that, please don’t go apeshit because I haven’t assumed his innocence until his guilt is proven in a court of law. Because rules about how courts of law operate apply to what transpires in courts of law. We’re not in one. And not only will I hope you not go apeshit over my failure to assume his innocence, but I would hope that you would not expect me to produce the specific Massachusetts statute I believe he violated. I don’t have to find the murder statute in the Massachusetts legal code to have an idea that he might have violated the laws against murder. “But which murder statute,” **Bricker** would have asked in the past. “If his brother planted the bombs, maybe he’s just guilty of something less than murder one, so even if we assume that he did indeed help his brother out with the bombings, saying he should rot in jail for life is unjustified, unless you can back it up with the specific statute and why you’re sure it applies, given what we know and don’t know. How do you know the law and the facts support a sentence of life in prison in his case?” It’s gotten to the point where _everybody_ expects this ridiculous and absurd Spanish fucking Inquisition. But fortunately, **Bricker** has now washed his hands of this game. Because if he were to ever pull this stunt again, I could just ask him, “are you suggesting that there’s no potential criminal law that could have been violated here?” Because what he’s saying is that it’s OK for Boehner and Jindal, high public officials in charge of writing Federal laws (Boehner) and faithfully executing the laws of Louisiana (Jindal) to say people should go to jail, without having a clue about a specific statute, as long as there is a potential criminal law that could have been violated. I would certainly expect that **Bricker** (or anyone else) holds people on a message board to a less strict standard than Boehner and Jindal are held to, with respect to such utterances. So I’m pretty happy with this thread. I feel like it’s accomplished something useful in terms of bringing an all-too-frequently recurring bit of pedantry, stupidity, and legal nitpicking to an end on this board. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/42 "2013-05-23T15:40:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What the hell phrase does someone use if they wish to to convey “They should go to jail because they actually did something that’s actually illegal?” > > I nominate: They should go to jail - for realsies! Well, by your past standards, I believe the phrase should be, “they’ve been convicted of a crime that includes prison time as a possible sanction, and [depending on whether we’re talking about past or future] (a) I hope that when sentencing occurs, the judge sends them to prison.” [or] (b) when sentencing occurred, the judge should have sent them to prison." Because when else could you have said “They should go to jail because they actually did something that’s actually illegal?” but after conviction of a crime\* in a court of law? ETA:\*that carried a potential jail sentence. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/43 "2013-05-23T15:42:44Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Any statement of “They should go to jail” has one of two implicit arguments behind it. Either they should go to jail “if what they did was illegal” or they should go to jail “because what they did should be illegal.” > > It just would be nice if **Bricker** would figure that out. He seems so close! It would be nice if you, and others, would figure out that the second statement is both wrong and dangerous. Someone should _not_ got to jail if what they did is not illegal, no matter how much you, or anyone else, dislikes it. To think otherwise is to say that you have no regard for the law, and want those with the power to jail people to disregard the law, and there is in that situation no reason why it won’t be you or me that’s next to be disliked by someone, and jailed. _That_ is why people like **Bricker** , myself, and others, are so concerned with this issue. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/44 "2013-05-23T15:53:52Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > I would certainly expect that **Bricker** (or anyone else) holds people on a message board to a less strict standard than Boehner and Jindal are held to, with respect to such utterances. No. Because this board is interactive. When you say stupid shit, I can post about how stupid it is and give you a chance to correct it or expand upon it. Boehner and Jindal, unfortunately, don’t post here, so it does me no good to ask them what the fuck they’re talking about. They don’t answer. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/45 "2013-05-23T16:19:36Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. > > Because this board is interactive. When you say stupid shit, I can post about how stupid it is and give you a chance to correct it or expand upon it. > > Boehner and Jindal, unfortunately, don’t post here, so it does me no good to ask them what the fuck they’re talking about. They don’t answer. So you hold people you interact with, whoever they may be and however little influence they may have in this world, to a higher standard than those in positions of actual power and responsibility? So if Obama said, “it’s a pity I can’t have the entire Cincinnati IRS office taken out and shot,” you’d be more concerned if I said it, because you can interact with me, even though you know I know my words have no influence, so I can say outrageous things without consequence. O-_kay_. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/46 "2013-05-23T16:33:39Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > It would be nice if you, and others, would figure out that the second statement is both wrong and dangerous. Someone should _not_ got to jail if what they did is not illegal, no matter how much you, or anyone else, dislikes it. To think otherwise is to say that you have no regard for the law, and want those with the power to jail people to disregard the law, and there is in that situation no reason why it won’t be you or me that’s next to be disliked by someone, and jailed. > > _That_ is why people like **Bricker** , myself, and others, are so concerned with this issue. Next time you think that’s what someone actually means by that on this board, please point it out. Because generally when I see that sort of usage here, the underlying meaning is, “there ought to already _be_ a law that would send that sucker to jail for that, because such conduct is deserving of a prison sentence.” This is a perfectly reasonable belief about the difference between how the world is and how one thinks it should already be. Saying, “I think we should ignore the fact that X is currently legal, and we should throw this guy into jail anyway because he did X” is a genuinely dangerous sentiment, but I have rarely if ever seen this sentiment expressed here. I think it doesn’t do anyone any favors to confuse the frequent occurrences of the reasonable belief with the rare occurrences of the dangerous one. It’s on a par with finding a Communist behind every bush. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/47 "2013-05-23T16:48:52Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Next time you think that’s what someone actually means by that on this board, please point it out. That’s been the gist of many of my posts in the George Zimmerman thread, where many people are of the opinion that, even if his behaviour was legal - and it quite possibly was - he should still be in jail. Same goes for the threads on bankers. I see regularly people saying we need to find a law that someone has broken so they can be punished, because of legal but disliked behaviour. This attitude is of course prevalent outside this message board, although it has a somewhat different focus. The presumed guilt of certain people explains why so many black people are in prison, for example. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/48 "2013-05-23T17:07:19Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Next time you think that’s what someone actually means by that on this board, please point it out. I know you were talking to **Steophan** , but pointing that out is kinda what **Bricker** is known for. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/49 "2013-05-23T17:40:25Z")
There was a relevant [Oped in the Washington Post](http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/richard-cohen-irs-scandal-inspires-a-kafka-esque-tale/2013/05/20/206286e2-c16e-11e2-8bd8-2788030e6b44_story.html) highlighting the Kafkaesque notion of “Mistakes were made, somebody needs to go to jail.” ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/50 "2013-05-23T20:43:14Z")
I wouldn’t have thought it likely, but this is making me sympathetic to the IRS. ---
**Author:** ![abbeytxs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@abbeytxs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/abbeytxs)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/51 "2013-05-23T22:09:57Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > This will not end well. Especially since it didn’t start well. This will not end - full stop. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/52 "2013-05-23T22:35:32Z")
> [@abbeytxs](#): > > This will not end - full stop. Oh, don’t be silly, there’s sure to be another Republican president, eventually. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/53 "2013-05-23T22:56:45Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Oh, don’t be silly, there’s sure to be another Republican president, eventually. When Bush was President, **RTFirefly** had plenty of criticism to post about Bush. Since Obama became President, I haven’t said much at all that’s critical of Obama. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/54 "2013-05-23T23:02:01Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > When Bush was President, **RTFirefly** had plenty of criticism to post about Bush. > > Since Obama became President, I haven’t said much at all that’s critical of Obama. Well, that probably says more about Obama and Bush than about either of you guys. ---
**Author:** ![Chessic\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Chessic\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chessic_Sense)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2013, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/55 "2013-05-23T23:03:00Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Jindal and Boehner stated that whomever violate the law should go to jail/prison. You may not have violated the law, but [I still think you should do some time in the slammer.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=549670) Seriously, man, there’s not a preposition in sight. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2013, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/56 "2013-05-24T00:02:56Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > But fortunately, **Bricker** has now washed his hands of this game. Because if he were to ever pull this stunt again, I could just ask him, “are you suggesting that there’s no potential criminal law that could have been violated here?” You really should include the link when you ask him [“Are you suggesting that there’s no potential criminal law that could have been violated here?”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16312144&postcount=10) Waiting for him to evade the question and _then_ posting the link is just not sporting. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2013, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/57 "2013-05-25T22:31:51Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > …So I’m pretty happy with this thread. I feel like it’s accomplished something useful in terms of bringing an all-too-frequently recurring bit of pedantry, stupidity, and legal nitpicking to an end on this board. But you’re still posting so the pedantry, stupidity, and legal nitpicking continues. :smack: Apparently you object to people asking questions on an open forum. Just because you are unable to answer the questions, maybe someone else could or, at the very least, would like to discuss the issue. You could let the conversation run it’s course OR you could piss and moan about something you know nothing about simply because you don’t know the answer. If that’s what makes you happy, then I’m happy for you. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2013, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/58 "2013-05-25T23:46:32Z")
I have no comment on this thread, other than to give the OP a 2/10 for weak, stupid pitting, but this sentence fragment: > [@RTFirefly](#): > > So if Obama said, “it’s a pity I can’t have the entire Cincinnati IRS office taken out and shot,” … … begs a comment. I’ve always wanted to become [del]dictator[/del] President-for-Life of some third world country, just so I could say _“Take him away and have him shot.”_ and someone would _actually do it._ 😃 ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2013, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/59 "2013-05-26T00:31:46Z")
It should be noted that no US laws were broken by the OP of this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2013, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973/60 "2013-05-26T00:36:12Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It should be noted that no US laws were broken by the OP of this thread. He should be given 3 to 7 years hard time, anyway. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bricker-here-are-a-couple-of-bozos-who-are-right-up-your-alley/658973.md?page=4)