Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Charged With "Using a Weapon of Mass Destruction"

[Gravekeeper]

I find this rather fascinating and perhaps a little unsettling. Apparently the US has a separate "civilian" definition of a weapon of mass destruction aside from the military one. Which they came up with around 2006 it looks. Its so broad as to basically include everything from a grenade to a a teaspoon of toxin powder in an envelope. Regardless of the actual damage or casualties inflicted. It also applies when there are no casualties at all, only property damage.

It also does not have a set sentence length. The court can determine any term they like I guess up to and including life. So the accused is at the mercy of the court regardless of how much or how little damage is actually caused. If a death results from the attack, its the death sentence though.

My main question here is why is there a law on the books designed to skip past having to deal with multiple counts of murder/assault to get right to the death penalty, but incidents which are comparatively far more deadly on average like mass shootings, are comprised of individual charges?

Tsarnaev is not being charged with murder. Only the use of a weapon of mass destruction and malicious destruction of property resulting in death. So the law seems like a legal short hand to let the courts met out whatever sentence they like without having to deal with individual charges.

[Greenday]

I guess there's no specific charge on terrorism? Seems kind of silly.

[Panacea]

Pretty much. Our terrorism laws suck when it comes to little things like due process and rule of law.

But the reason this law is being used instead of plain old vanilla murder is because that would have to be a state charge, and Massachusetts doesn't have the death penalty. The government wants to execute this guy. And they will. The bomber doesn't have a chance. It'll take about 10 years, then he'll get the needle.

[Gravekeeper]

Pretty much. Our terrorism laws suck when it comes to little things like due process and rule of law.

Didn't a few of the GOP want to make this guy an "enemy combatant" so they could gitmo his ass?

But the reason this law is being used instead of plain old vanilla murder is because that would have to be a state charge, and Massachusetts doesn't have the death penalty. The government wants to execute this guy. And they will. The bomber doesn't have a chance. It'll take about 10 years, then he'll get the needle.

That's...actually kinda fucked up. So if he had gone a shooting spree and killed 10 people he'd live. But killing 3 with a bargain bin explosive and its the death penalty?

[smileyeagle1021]

It'll take about 10 years, then he'll get the needle.

Or they could simply leave him in general population... save a lot of expense, and be over with a lot quicker.

That's...actually kinda fucked up. So if he had gone a shooting spree and killed 10 people he'd live. But killing 3 with a bargain bin explosive and its the death penalty?

Got to love the power of the NRA lobby... if shooting sprees were treated as a terrorist attack (which I personally think they should be), then we would have to admit that at least certain firearms are weapons of mass destruction, and God knows that will never happen in this country.

[Dreamstalker]

Didn't a few of the GOP want to make this guy an "enemy combatant" so they could gitmo his ass?

Yup. I didn't think US citizens (unless I'm wrong, Dzokhar is a citizen) could be 'enemy combatants' as to use that declaration don't we actually have to be at war with the country in question?

(although in a sense, the US is at war with itself...).

Smiley, a police officer was killed (we don't know who actually shot him, although it seems to be a moot point). Unless I'm completely off-base that's a pretty much guaranteed death sentence in the states that have it. MA doesn't; although the feds do.

As for the can of worms that is the fact that he wasn't Mirandized immediately, not all suspects are. Ignoring the public safety exception for a second, when he was taken into custody he was in no condition to consent or even comprehend the warning, so it was given when he was able.

[lordlundar]

As for the can of worms that is the fact that he wasn't Mirandized immediately, not all suspects are. Ignoring the public safety exception for a second, when he was taken into custody he was in no condition to consent or even comprehend the warning, so it was given when he was able.

Another thing to note is that the Miranda rights are about rights during interrogation, not arrest. If the police have no intent to interrogate him they don't have to read the rights and get consent.

[Panacea]

That's...actually kinda fucked up. So if he had gone a shooting spree and killed 10 people he'd live. But killing 3 with a bargain bin explosive and its the death penalty?

Not really. It's not HOW the crime was committed but WHY that's important here. The violence was used to create terror among the greater population in support of a radical point of view (in this case Islam, but racism or homophobia would be the same exact crime). I.e., the crime has political overtones, not simply greed or pathology.

Or they could simply leave him in general population... save a lot of expense, and be over with a lot quicker.

I'm generally not a fan of the death penalty because of the racial bias inherent in our system. However, this is one of those few cases that is pretty clear cut.

It would be cheaper to give him life in prison, and it would be over quicker. I wouldn't wish that on anyone; these terrorism guys who get life get 23 hour a day lockdown and very few privileges. That in itself is torture IMHO. This case deserves the death penalty, same as Tim McVeigh.

Got to love the power of the NRA lobby... if shooting sprees were treated as a terrorist attack (which I personally think they should be), then we would have to admit that at least certain firearms are weapons of mass destruction, and God knows that will never happen in this country.

Semi automatic weaons ARE weapons of mass destruction, by definition. The rate of fire is so fast, you can kill just as many if not more with a Semi auto rifle as you can with an explosive device. And you're more likely to kill than to maim.

Yup. I didn't think US citizens (unless I'm wrong, Dzokhar is a citizen) could be 'enemy combatants' as to use that declaration don't we actually have to be at war with the country in question?

They can't . . . unless they are detained on a foriegn battle field. That's what happened to the "American Taliban", John Walker Lindh. Tsarnaev is a US citizen arrested on US soil. He can't be treated as an enemy combatant for purposes of prosecution because US citizens can't be tried by military commissions. They can be interrogated, but the answers can't be used against them in a civilian court.

Smiley, a police officer was killed (we don't know who actually shot him, although it seems to be a moot point). Unless I'm completely off-base that's a pretty much guaranteed death sentence in the states that have it.

And the feds can still charge him with that if the terrorism case doesn't do well.

As for the can of worms that is the fact that he wasn't Mirandized immediately, not all suspects are. Ignoring the public safety exception for a second, when he was taken into custody he was in no condition to consent or even comprehend the warning, so it was given when he was able.

You only have to be Mirandized if the police plan to question you. If you pull out a gun in a liquor store, shoot the clerk, in full view of witnesses and video to boot, Mirdanda doesn't matter. The cops don't have to Mirandize you because they don't need your statement to convict you.

[Andara Bledin]

You only have to be Mirandized if the police plan to question you. If you pull out a gun in a liquor store, shoot the clerk, in full view of witnesses and video to boot, Mirdanda doesn't matter. The cops don't have to Mirandize you because they don't need your statement to convict you.

This. Miranda rights only come into play in the matter of self-incrimination. If outside factors incriminate a person, whether or not he was Mirandized is rendered moot.

[Hyena Dandy]

This. Miranda rights only come into play in the matter of self-incrimination. If outside factors incriminate a person, whether or not he was Mirandized is rendered moot.

Actually, he was being questioned, under an Imminent Threat exemption, which only extends as far as there is an active, Imminent Threat. That exemption essentially reverses the Miranda Rights - You do not have the right to remain silent, nothing you say can be used against you in a court of law.

[Bright Star]

Put him in a room with all the people that he hurt when he exploded those bombs. It shouldn't take more than 5 minutes for him to be torn apart.

[BlaqueKatt]

I'm generally not a fan of the death penalty because of the racial bias inherent in our system. However, this is one of those few cases that is pretty clear cut.

It would be cheaper to give him life in prison, and it would be over quicker. I wouldn't wish that on anyone; these terrorism guys who get life get 23 hour a day lockdown and very few privileges. That in itself is torture IMHO. This case deserves the death penalty, same as Tim McVeigh.

going to dissent on deserving the death penalty, think of how much data is lost every time we execute a fanatic or sociopath? We have no idea if treatment is possible, what early intervention might do, or what the cause is because any time we have a subject to be studied.....we kill them.

Semi automatic weaons ARE weapons of mass destruction, by definition. The rate of fire is so fast, you can kill just as many if not more with a Semi auto rifle as you can with an explosive device. And you're more likely to kill than to maim.

trigger reset and how fast a person can squeeze(remember semi-auto means one shot per trigger pull) limit rate of fire to around 3 shots per 2.5 seconds, sustaining anything higher than 40 rounds a minute will overheat the barrel, they can melt, jam, or something called a "cook off" where the gunpowder doesn't ignite properly and turns the firearm into a low power grenade.

[Gravekeeper]

Put him in a room with all the people that he hurt when he exploded those bombs. It shouldn't take more than 5 minutes for him to be torn apart.

Yes, have society lower itself to his level. That will solve everything.

trigger reset and how fast a person can squeeze(remember semi-auto means one shot per trigger pull) limit rate of fire to around 3 shots per 2.5 seconds, sustaining anything higher than 40 rounds a minute will overheat the barrel, they can melt, jam, or something called a "cook off" where the gunpowder doesn't ignite properly and turns the firearm into a low power grenade.

Not sure what your point is, there are many more drawbacks and dangers to using an IED. History proves firearms are more effective on monthly basis in the US. Yet there is no similar classification or charge related to them. They would, without a doubt, have inflicted more fatalities if they had both just walked into the crowd with firearms.

[Panacea]

going to dissent on deserving the death penalty, think of how much data is lost every time we execute a fanatic or sociopath? We have no idea if treatment is possible, what early intervention might do, or what the cause is because any time we have a subject to be studied.....we kill them.

Not disagreeing, just wondering . . . what would be the point?

[wolfie]

Semi automatic weaons ARE weapons of mass destruction, by definition. The rate of fire is so fast, you can kill just as many if not more with a Semi auto rifle as you can with an explosive device. And you're more likely to kill than to maim.

Please cite the definition (text and source). In the absence of a definition, the only REMOTE connection I can see is that they use a chemical propellant, and that chemical weapons are one of the 3 classes of WMD. The "bomb vs. gun" issue was explored in (yep, I know it's a work of fiction) At Any Price by David Drake (part of the Hammer's Slammers series), with the opposite conclusion. As for killing vs. maiming, many land mines are designed to maim rather than kill, because if you kill a soldier, you take him out of combat, but if you maim a soldier, you take him and at least one other (tending to his wounds) out of combat.

sustaining anything higher than 40 rounds a minute will overheat the barrel, they can melt, jam, or something called a "cook off" where the gunpowder doesn't ignite properly and turns the firearm into a low power grenade.

Problems due to overheating depend on the weapon involved. For example, with a given sustained rate of fire, a model 1911 Colt is more likely to have problems due to heat than an AR15, since it's DESIGNED for semiauto-only operation, while the AR15 is based on (and likely to have the heat dissipation capability) the M16, which (in the A1 variant) was capable of fully automatic operation. Also, from my understanding, that's not what a "cook off" is - it's when continuous fire heats the chamber to such a degree that when you stop firing, the heat conducted through the cartridge case is enough to ignite the powder in the chambered round - an unintentional discharge, rather than something that would damage the weapon.

"Cook off" is why some submachineguns fire "from the open breech". What this means is that when you release the trigger, the cycle stops with the bolt open and the spent case ejected, rather than with the bolt closed after chambering the next round. While this sacrifices accuracy (mass of the bolt slamming closed shakes up the weapon), it prevents "cook-off" since the next round is still in the magazine, not the chamber.