4 ms·

I have zero knowledge as far as sentence's go. So with that said, how is being required to only server 1/3 of a sentence brutal? What am i missing?

sillysaurus2 13y ago
Well, for one, he's transsexual, which may or may not indicate he's less of a threat to society. If he's not a threat to society, and won't do what he did again, then it seems like the motive is to make an example of him.
- kintamanimatt 13y ago
  I'm under the impression he's transgender, not a transsexual. I'm not sure how being transgender makes one more, or less of a threat to society. People are people regardless of sexual orientation, physical gender, or the gender they identify with. That being said, I don't think Manning is (or has been) a threat to society at all. Perhaps he should have been a little more careful about what he released but I feel he's done the world community a net good by exposing war crimes, etc[0]. I do agree he is being made an example of, and this sentence and his treatment is intended to be a signal and a warning sign to would-be leakers. I hope they still come forward and behave more like Snowden than Manning. [0] http://www.bradleymanning.org/learn-more/what-did-wikileaks-reveal http://www.bradleymanning.org/learn-more/what-did-wikileaks-...
  - sillysaurus2 13y ago
    I was unaware of the distinction. Thank you for pointing it out. As for why I brought up his transgenderism, it was one of those unexamined beliefs based on hearsay that seemed natural to believe, and wasn't obvious how absurd it was until it was pointed out. Specifically, the idea that transgender people are less likely to engage in crime like murder or theft, and hence would be less dangerous to society after spending time in prison. But that logic doesn't really follow, and the assumption was probably false anyway. Apologies. I meant no disrespect.
- sophacles 13y ago
  Wait - what does the transsexual thing have to do with sentencing and length of time served at all? How is that a relevant fact?
- fiblye 13y ago
  Transgenderism and transsexuality aren't disabilities. The gender a person identifies with doesn't in any way make them less dangerous. Regardless, Manning was never a threat to society because his "crimes" never hurt anybody. He revealed corruption and I don't think his gender or sexuality played any role in that.
simias 13y ago
I should've been more explicit: it's not the one-third per-se that's brutal, it's just that when I read "35 years in prison" it seemed like a hell of a long time to me. I don't know how the american judiciary system works, so I was was wondering if he would be able to reduce his sentence significantly for good conduct or something. But a third of 35 years is still very long... He's going to spend at least 12 years in prison. I don't know if whether he deserves it or not, but it is brutal.
- chimeracoder 13y ago
  Minus the 112 days he received as "credit" for his "inhumane treatment" in Quantico! I mean, that's some consolation, right? /s

sillysaurus2 13y ago

Well, for one, he's transsexual, which may or may not indicate he's less of a threat to society. If he's not a threat to society, and won't do what he did again, then it seems like the motive is to make an example of him.

kintamanimatt 13y ago
I'm under the impression he's transgender, not a transsexual. I'm not sure how being transgender makes one more, or less of a threat to society. People are people regardless of sexual orientation, physical gender, or the gender they identify with. That being said, I don't think Manning is (or has been) a threat to society at all. Perhaps he should have been a little more careful about what he released but I feel he's done the world community a net good by exposing war crimes, etc[0]. I do agree he is being made an example of, and this sentence and his treatment is intended to be a signal and a warning sign to would-be leakers. I hope they still come forward and behave more like Snowden than Manning. [0] http://www.bradleymanning.org/learn-more/what-did-wikileaks-reveal http://www.bradleymanning.org/learn-more/what-did-wikileaks-...
- sillysaurus2 13y ago
  I was unaware of the distinction. Thank you for pointing it out. As for why I brought up his transgenderism, it was one of those unexamined beliefs based on hearsay that seemed natural to believe, and wasn't obvious how absurd it was until it was pointed out. Specifically, the idea that transgender people are less likely to engage in crime like murder or theft, and hence would be less dangerous to society after spending time in prison. But that logic doesn't really follow, and the assumption was probably false anyway. Apologies. I meant no disrespect.
sophacles 13y ago
Wait - what does the transsexual thing have to do with sentencing and length of time served at all? How is that a relevant fact?
fiblye 13y ago
Transgenderism and transsexuality aren't disabilities. The gender a person identifies with doesn't in any way make them less dangerous. Regardless, Manning was never a threat to society because his "crimes" never hurt anybody. He revealed corruption and I don't think his gender or sexuality played any role in that.

simias 13y ago

I should've been more explicit: it's not the one-third per-se that's brutal, it's just that when I read "35 years in prison" it seemed like a hell of a long time to me. I don't know how the american judiciary system works, so I was was wondering if he would be able to reduce his sentence significantly for good conduct or something. But a third of 35 years is still very long... He's going to spend at least 12 years in prison. I don't know if whether he deserves it or not, but it is brutal.

chimeracoder 13y ago
Minus the 112 days he received as "credit" for his "inhumane treatment" in Quantico! I mean, that's some consolation, right? /s