I think the most striking thing for me is the last paragraph. What good would sentencing a nun to jail-time be?
She’s definitely used to privation, and she’d be surrounded by people that she would see it as her duty to help.
I’m an atheist, but I have utmost respect for the strength of character required to devote your life to religion so selflessly.
Effectively, any punishment meted out by the system will not be seen as such by this lady.
9 Likes
Nuns kick arse sometimes.
3 Likes
I was wondering why that didn’t happen. According to the article, they manage to “cut through three separate security fences”. I’m assuming that meant 3 lines of security fences, if that was spotted on the 3rd line, they would of been shot, no questions asked.
I know even some plants would also include a guard for visitors whose orders are to shoot if there was such an event where the visitor did something really stupid. Like jump into the cooling pools for a swim. (XKCD)
2 Likes
IANAL, but I believe the real crime she committed here was making the government look bad. They hate that. That being said, she did violate the letter and the intent of the law. She can be prosecuted, and it looks like she will. That’s how the law works. Don’t like it? You live in a representative democracy, petition for change. This problem doesn’t get solved by expecting the courts to do anything about it. It has nothing to do with me being sympathetic or unsympathetic.
Puts on Smokey the Bear Hat and points:
Only YOU can prevent mandatory minimums. Only YOU can petition the president for clemency. Only YOU can apply political pressure to the prosecutor (well, not really but the President, who’s close enough). Only YOU can create laws that protect certain kinds of behavior.
Stop expecting the justice system to work in a vacuum, there are three branches of government- use them!
You want to know what I like about this story? This:
she could still end up spending the rest of her life behind bars. “It’s of absolutely no consequence to her,” says her friend Ralph Hutchinson, coordinator for the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance. “As a nun she believes strongly that she is called to be a servant of God wherever she is.”
That’s what civil disobedience looks like. It doesn’t come with the expectation that an exception will be made. Civil disobedience takes guts, and it takes real character. There is a difference between doing something that should be legal, or doing something legal but inconvenient to those in power; and doing something because it is illegal and without apology. Why? Because it’s worth it, because it matters. The way I see it, and preface this with the fact that I’m not a Christian and never have been, there are two types of Christian: Those that weep with sorrow at the suffering of Jesus on the cross, and those that weep with joy. Only the second group really gets it.
6 Likes
I can’t edit this comment to get rid of the smiley because “body is too similar to post” or somesuch nonsense. Imagine the 
is the letter P.
I agree - there’s a similar story about Timothy Leary, who simply refused to perceive his prison, and instead decided he was free.
5 Likes
Depends on where you fall on the trinitarian/unitarian scale: they don’t use the phrase ‘smite your foes the old testament way’ because god is an especially nice guy…
Sorted
Move Harper to some remote part of Nunavut to keep him safe.
4 Likes
The problem I have with considering intent is that intent doesn’t make the difference you might think.
A person shooting an abortion doctor is probably doing it for the greater good of society. At least in their opinion. We have to be very careful with how we treat people with good intentions. In a better world Mr Snowden for example would go to trial for what he has done, and everything involved would be thoroughly investigated. He could then be found guilty but have the sentence suspended as a matter of public policy, or something like that.
3 Likes
This unfortunate acronym needs revision IMO; it always catches my eye. Who includes 1 and 2 letter words in acronyms anyway?
Seriously. What’s wrong with I’m No Lawyer? Doesn’t seem taken.
Don’t you just love how authoritarians make everything into a black/white situation?
Please. If it were so simple there would be no need for a trial. You could just plug the crime report into a computer and have the sentence spit right out. In the real world there are shades of gray. Mitigating circumstances, don’t you know? That’s why we have trials…and lawyers. The system is nearly always in flux due to changing understandings and interpretations. Possession of a joint in Texas used to be a mandatory and ridiculously long sentence. Now it won’t be long before the state is selling it to willing customers.
Try a little nuance, and fewer caps.
4 Likes
We got some new problems to deal with, but that doesn’t indicate that things are getting worse. In fact it’s quite the opposite. New problems means we’re making progress.
I quote myself:
The US has everything in place for it’s totalitarian regime:
- State influenced media and press
- massive surveillance apparatus
- secret courts
- unaccountable government officials esp. police forces
- corruption and nepotism through lobbyism
- strong hints on manipulated elections (remember Bush’s?)
- torture
- a prevalent militarism in the society
But keep pretending when you go to bed tonight, wrapped tightly in your the star spangled banner that you live in some kind of special snowflake country, the one country on this planet through all times, inspired by god and the spirit of freedom itself were such things cannot happen.
6 Likes
Did you just say that two-letter words shouldn’t be used in acronyms, and then make an acronym with two two-letter words in it?
Maybe the acronym for “I Am Not A Lawyer” should just be NL. That would leave out the one and two-letter words, at least. 
So how do you feel about things like what Aaron Swartz did?
2 Likes
I figure two-letter words that are typically capitalised in titles are exceptions to that one, but I guess it was too much to hope that goes without saying.
Anyway, just look at that succession of letters you (oops, I mean ActionAbe - do we have a strike tag?) typed up there.
Just look at it.
1 Like
OK - I am confused as to what actually happened. Did they just cut 3 fences and deface a wall? Did they actually get INTO a building? If not, I don’t see this as a major deal. At no time where they a real threat. Probation, community service (oh no, Br’er Bear, not the briar patch!), and payment for damages seems reasonable. Like most things in life, it should be looked at in context. They weren’t breaking in to get material for a dirty bomb. They broke in to make a point.
5 Likes
I’m glad security failed to follow procedure, if indeed that is to just flat-out kill anyone who apparently doesn’t belong straight up.
Seems a bit OTT not just to me but to the guys meant to follow it.
While I applaud this nun’s chutzpah for breaking into a federal nuclear facility (and as others have mentioned, she really IS lucky she didn’t get shot), those saying “Oh, but look at the greater good she accomplished by showing how lax their security is” really do need to recognize that it wasn’t her intention to do that. Comparing it to the hacker metaphor (wait, is that the word I’m looking for? Teething toddlers make for sluggish brains in the morning), she’s not a white hat hacker that went out explicitly to expose security flaws for the greater good of society. She’s more like a script kiddie who only wanted to break in in order to vandalize (for protesting purposes, sure), but happened upon a glaring security flaw on the way.
Well, when it comes to weapons-grade uranium, they tend to take that stuff pretty seriously. It doesn’t surprise me that they will take absolute extreme measures to prevent that from getting into the wrong hands.
1 Like
And their minions will second-guess their deskbound bloodlust, thank fuck.
I like how little old ladies can drive a wedge between power and a gun.
1 Like
