What about it? Suppose I call the Department of Homeland Security and say "Robert Munn posted an email where he talked about killing thousands of people" and they come and lock you up. I haven't lied, simply spun what you said to make you sound guilty. Remove the presumption of innocence, and the burden of proof is on you. You would be jailed, your home searched, your computers confiscated, etc.. and in the end, you've probably got pretty good chance of being convicted - especially if you are held in GITMO or some super secret facility with no access to legal council, family, friends, etc..
Now perhaps they wouldn't take my word against yours in a court of law, but what if my name was Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld, or Alberto Gonzales? Or some Iraq politician or Afghani warlord who just didn't like you, or wanted to seize your land or money. Would the possibility of a holding a guilty man who might, emphasis might, kill a lot of people be critical enough to warrant holding you when you are innocent? Would you volunteer to stay in jail so the guilty man would have to stay too? Should we just lock everybody up? On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Robert Munn <[email protected]> wrote: > What about freeing a guilt man who then goes on to kill a thousand people? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:286588 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
