Bag of Randomness

This entry was posted in Personal. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Bag of Randomness

  1. David Bryant says:

    Regarding the Secret Service, I wonder how their employment contract is worded to justify firing them. As I understand it, prostitution is legal in that country. If that is the case, then they were breaking no laws. So, does their contract have some sort of 'morals' clause that supersedes local laws? Is it similar to Baseball's 'best interest of the sport' clause that allows them to punish even when no specific rule was broken? In no way am I justifying what they did, I am just curious how they are justifying the firing.

    • theangrypanda says:

      Actually, under International Legal Principles, you can be charged with a crime in your home country even if it is committed abroad. This is very often ignored and very rarely cited within the U.S. court system. So it doesn't really matter if prostitution is legal in that country, they can still face any manner of punishment that is deemed appropriate by the authorities that may have jurisdiction in this case. International Legal jurisdiction is a tricky business, and the United States doesn't seem to get along with the International Legal System on the grounds of claimed sovereignty. So the argument is often made that since the US isn't party to treaty -X then they cannot be held accountable for a violation of treaty-X. This is a fallacy, as every sovereign nation is beholden to customary legal principles. In this particular case, I would imagine that if one is a representative of the United States (in this case a government employee), that the US would have the authority to bring down any number of sanctions down upon you if you violate US law while abroad. There is a great deal of politicking in-between the lines here on this particular issue, but that is the gist.

      • David Bryant says:

        Prostitution is not against federal law. It is a local/state law otherwise it could not be legal in parts of NV. So, the agents would not have broken any US law which would make your point irrelevant.

        • theangrypanda says:

          No, my point still stands, that had they done something that was illegal in the US then they could still be charged with something that may have been legal in another country. You made the point of it being legal in another country, which makes that statement the irrelevant one. As for the conduct of a representative of the United States, even customers of prostitutes are subject to fines and potential imprisonment depending upon the circumstances. The instances in NV are very heavily regulated and are limited to brothel institutions. If you want to make generalizations be my guest, I was simply explaining how they could have been legally liable for committing any kind of offense while abroad.

  2. Paul says:

    Keith, you're not trying to pay some penance for hurting people by ending these posts with that line are you?

Comments are closed.