Why hasn't Gregory been charged?

[il Padrino Ute]

I doubt we have a different definition of double standard. But there are certain circumstances, chief among them being the fact that you don't like the law, that are doing a lot of work in helping you arrive at the conclusion that this outcome is the product of a double standard.

I'd really like you to define double standard so you can verify your claim that I think it's a double standard because I don't like the law.

It's a double standard because Gregory is anti-gun and hasn't been charged.

[All-American]

I'd really like you to define double standard so you can verify your claim that I think it's a double standard because I don't like the law.

It's a double standard because Gregory is anti-gun and hasn't been charged.

Different outcomes doesn't automatically mean different standards. A prosecutor doing their utmost to encourage compliance with the law could easily come to the decision that Gregory shouldn't be charged and that the veteran should.

Do you think that the veteran should have been charged, by the way?

[DU Ute]

Why does it matter that this guy is a Vet? Should he be getting preferential treatment?

[All-American]

Why does it matter that this guy is a Vet? Should he be getting preferential treatment?

Or that the other guy is a left-leaning liberal, for that matter.

[il Padrino Ute]

Different outcomes doesn't automatically mean different standards. A prosecutor doing their utmost to encourage compliance with the law could easily come to the decision that Gregory shouldn't be charged and that the veteran should.

Do you think that the veteran should have been charged, by the way?

Yes, I do, because he broke the law. That he did it unintentionally isn't the point. Gregory intentionally broke the law and should be charged as well.

[il Padrino Ute]

Why does it matter that this guy is a Vet? Should he be getting preferential treatment?

Who made that claim?

[All-American]

Who made that claim?

Nobody, yet, but you found the fact that one guy was a vet and the other was a left-wing apologist worth mentioning for some reason.

[il Padrino Ute]

Nobody, yet, but you found the fact that one guy was a vet and the other was a left-wing apologist worth mentioning for some reason.

I mentioned it to highlight the double standard.

[All-American]

I mentioned it to highlight the double standard.

So you think they're out to punish vets?

[il Padrino Ute]

So you think they're out to punish vets?

No, I said that the vet was charged when he unintentionally broke the law, but Gregory hasn't been charged, despite intentionally breaking the law. I pointed out the double standard that you said doesn't exist.

[All-American]

No, I said that the vet was charged when he unintentionally broke the law, but Gregory hasn't been charged, despite intentionally breaking the law. I pointed out the double standard that you said doesn't exist.

Right, but it's still odd that you found the fact that he was a vet so significant. You haven't really explained why you thought it worth mentioning.

But no matter. You haven't pointed out a double standard just by finding disparate outcomes in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. You know well enough that application of the same standard in two different situations can lead to two different outcomes.

[venkman]

Right, but it's still odd that you found the fact that he was a vet so significant. You haven't really explained why you thought it worth mentioning.

But no matter. You haven't pointed out a double standard just by finding disparate outcomes in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. You know well enough that application of the same standard in two different situations can lead to two different outcomes.

Because the prosecutor likes one type of person, but not the other type of person? By using prosecutorial discretion on silly laws the law becomes a tool to punish those you don't like.

[il Padrino Ute]

Right, but it's still odd that you found the fact that he was a vet so significant. You haven't really explained why you thought it worth mentioning.

But no matter. You haven't pointed out a double standard just by finding disparate outcomes in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. You know well enough that application of the same standard in two different situations can lead to two different outcomes.

That he was a vet is not significant. He just happened to be a vet. All I did was search for a report about someone who had been charged for breaking that law and that was the first one that came up.

And yes, I have pointed out that there is a double standard. You just call it prosecutorial discretion.

[All-American]

Because the prosecutor likes one type of person, but not the other type of person? By using prosecutorial discretion on silly laws the law becomes a tool to punish those you don't like.

Il Pad doesn't think so. Or, at least, if he does, he won't say so.

[All-American]

That he was a vet is not significant. He just happened to be a vet. All I did was search for a report about someone who had been charged for breaking that law and that was the first one that came up.

And yes, I have pointed out that there is a double standard. You just call it prosecutorial discretion.

So is your objection to prosecutorial discretion a general one, or just as it is applied here?