If an incident happened on US soil outside of a foreign embassy and the person doesn't have diplomatic privileges, American law should be used.

American or US Law still can be used if the person has diplomatic privileges as by treaty US law recognizes such privileges, just as it does the ICJ by treaty. Of course US law applies to US citizens everywhere.

You just really don't have any idea what you are talking about. Just make it up as you go along do ya?

I suspect libertarian Gary knows precisely what he is talking about.

I'm thinking ID denies Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).

As to my example, could be I know a LEO who cuffed a perp.

---

If an incident happened on US soil outside of a foreign embassy and the person doesn't have diplomatic privileges, American law should be used.

American or US Law still can be used if the person has diplomatic privileges as by treaty US law recognizes such privileges, just as it does the ICJ by treaty. Of course US law applies to US citizens everywhere.

You just really don't have any idea what you are talking about. Just make it up as you go along do ya?

I suspect libertarian Gary knows precisely what he is talking about.

American or US Law still can be used if the person has diplomatic privileges as by treaty US law recognizes such privileges, just as it does the ICJ by treaty. Of course US law applies to US citizens everywhere.

No Gary if you are in a foreign country (w/ no diplo privileges) and you commit a crime, the foreign countrys' law takes precedence. You can go to a US Embassy for help but you are still bound by the foreign nation's laws.

You misunderstand, if you are A US Citizen and in a foreign country and break US law, but not the foreign country's law, US law still applies. An well known example is the differing age of consent laws between the USA and other countries.

I wasn't trying to imply that a US citizen is not bound by the law where he is located, including at sea.

---

If an incident happened on US soil outside of a foreign embassy and the person doesn't have diplomatic privileges, American law should be used.

American or US Law still can be used if the person has diplomatic privileges as by treaty US law recognizes such privileges, just as it does the ICJ by treaty. Of course US law applies to US citizens everywhere.

You just really don't have any idea what you are talking about. Just make it up as you go along do ya?

We don't give up sovereignty--ever. If someone tell you you must they are guilty of treason. A unconstitutional law is NO law at all and will get no respect or will be treated as law.

The stoning argument still holds water if you wish for international law, if you're gay and come out with it, you will be stoned. If you cheat in a marriage the lady will be stoned. You cannot have it both ways. We either follow the rule of law within our borders or we accept international law and stone people. Make up your mind.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

American or US Law still can be used if the person has diplomatic privileges as by treaty US law recognizes such privileges, just as it does the ICJ by treaty. Of course US law applies to US citizens everywhere.

No Gary if you are in a foreign country (w/ no diplo privileges) and you commit a crime, the foreign countrys' law takes precedence. You can go to a US Embassy for help but you are still bound by the foreign nation's laws.

---

If an incident happened on US soil outside of a foreign embassy and the person doesn't have diplomatic privileges, American law should be used.

American or US Law still can be used if the person has diplomatic privileges as by treaty US law recognizes such privileges, just as it does the ICJ by treaty. Of course US law applies to US citizens everywhere.

---

Hell no, lets have Sharia Law and stone them to death, diplomatic immunity or not. It's the law in half the world so it's international law too. A good old fashion stoning is in order.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

If an incident happened on US soil outside of a foreign embassy and the person doesn't have diplomatic privileges, American law should be used.

---

Would anyone understand the word--sovereignty?

Reading is downloading wetware for the mind.

We don't give up such things when dealing with other countries?

The U.N. should find another home.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

When dealing with other countries, shouldn't International Law take precedence?

---

Well, of course, in our dealing with other countries, and their people, our US Constitution should be the final word on the LAW. Right, it's obvious?