Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No. But I have common sense. A judge with a swamped calendar saying a few sharp words just doesn't scare people.
...
Frankly that's one of the reasons for a bit of rough and tumble. Arrests simply don't work unless the system if interested in providing room and boad for about, in the case of this offender, 70 or 80 years.
The problem with this is that the level of corruption in the system (and the police force) has reached a point that it has turned into a war between police vs. the citizens of this country.
Let's take pot for example. It is still illegal. The police love that because it allows them to be a bit "rough and tumble" against those they don't like (historically blacks and other minorities), while giving a pass to those they do (historically white people). Even for simple possession of a small amount.
Is that just?
It goes further. In some states (like Oklahoma) you don't get a pass even if you are white. With forfeiture laws, even one plant growing on your property is enough for the state to take your house (and they do, especially if it is paid for or has a lot of equity). How's that for rough and tumble?
With laws on the books like our insane pot laws, where does it end?
It goes further. In some states (like Oklahoma) you don't get a pass even if you are white. With forfeiture laws, even one plant growing on your property is enough for the state to take your house (and they do, especially if it is paid for or has a lot of equity). How's that for rough and tumble?
With laws on the books like our insane pot laws, where does it end?
That isn't what I'm advocating. I do not support forfeiture laws for minor crimes.
I moved this discussion from Man punched Home Depot cashier in the face to here since my views are likely to be outside the noncontroversial scope of Current Events.
This point of view is unpopular among my fellow lawyers but I agree. I have no problem with the police getting more than a little be rough during the arrest. Maybe in the struggle the guy csan be badly beaten or killed. I'm sorry, when someone does something so egregious there should be a real penalty, not just some stern-sounding judge doing the finger-wag and letting the guy off with time served. And the fact is we don't have the resources for lengthy imprisonment.
You are an Attorney? Seems like you might want to consider another career field, law and justice do not seem to be your forte.
That isn't what I'm advocating. I do not support forfeiture laws for minor crimes.
That might be the crux of the problem. Who gets to decide what's a minor crime and what isn't? For example, in Oklahoma the maximum penalty for growing your own is life in prison. In Colorado it is legal, no penalty.
You don't get to the point where mankind's laws of two bordering states are so diametrically opposed unless money (corruption) is the key player involved. With money (corruption) driving things, leaving things like "rough and tumble" up to anyone except a judge is a dangerous, slippery slope.
You are an Attorney? Seems like you might want to consider another career field, law and justice do not seem to be your forte.
I guess you're not intelligent enough to grasp the merits of the issue. We don't have court facilities or judges to try every low-level offense. A swift kick in the rear might dissuade some educable people from repeat offenses. In another context, I suggested using the lac of court resources as a method of defeating the enforcement of certain petty traffic offenses, Strategy to Defeat Speed Traps, Texting and Other Nonsense Laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa
Here's my modest proposal; that people organize to have large numbers of people take tickets of the kind described below to trial. The results could be both effective, comedic and educational.
After reading a book by William Adler called The Man Who Never Died, about Joe Hill, a labor organizer (a book I highly recommend) I came up with a strategy. The labor movement, int he early part of the 20th Century was harassed by communities issuing tickets for "disorderly conduct" and jailing people on trumped up charges to stop demonstrations. The demonstrators came up with the strategy of having everyone plead "not guilty" and demanding a jury trial. Towns with limited resources, such as Fresno in 1908 or 1909 (still not a wealthy place) would be fiscally ruined by the expense.
So why not try to get people who were not actually endangering life and limb to plead not guilty, and demand the most elaborate trial possible. Many jurisdictions don't allow for jury trials on traffic infringements. But if large numbers of people stopped for low-grade speeding violations or cell-phone violations pleaded not guilty, showed up and refused to take a plea and the pretrial conferences and demanded a trial, the part-time judges' calendars would stretch well into the night. And the courtroom would be packed with just about every police officer who would have to appear.
Worth a try?
The fact is we can't try everyone. If the police created some minor pain for offenders who were caught in the act they may not do it again.
it was his opinion, not that he would actually do it, maybe some of the criminal need to trip getting into the car.
The only way to stop crime is to put the fear into the person if what would happen if he did the crime. Maybe treat him with kid gloves till convicted and then beat the #$^& of him, kinda like what china does with caining
I guess you're not intelligent enough to grasp the merits of the issue. We don't have court facilities or judges to try every low-level offense. A swift kick in the rear might dissuade some educable people from repeat offenses. In another context, I suggested using the lac of court resources as a method of defeating the enforcement of certain petty traffic offenses,
The fact is we can't try everyone. If the police created some minor pai for offenders who were caught in the act they may not do it again.
I am intelligent enough to know you are in the wrong business, anyone that condones the police being the judge, jury, and executioner has no business in the Justice System, at least not in the USA.
it was his opinion, not that he would actually do it, maybe some of the criminal need to trip getting into the car.
The only way to stop crime is to put the fear into the person if what would happen if he did the crime. Maybe treat him with kid gloves till convicted and then beat the #$^& of him, kinda like what china does with caining
Exactly. People learn a lot more from something that happens on the spot rather than months or years later.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 3 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,180 posts, read 13,461,836 times
Reputation: 19488
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa
Exactly. People learn a lot more from something that happens on the spot rather than months or years later.
Start deliberately injuring people and the police will very quickly become very very hated.
Allowing the police to behave in such a heavy handed way was sadly common place in disgusting totalitarian communist states such as East Germany, where ordinary people lived miserable lives in constant fear of the police and authorities and that knock at the door. This should never be allowed in democratic countries like the US.
The Police need to be accountable for their actions, as should all Local and Central Government Authorities, and they should not be able to use violence without question or see themselves as above the law.
Last edited by Brave New World; 12-03-2017 at 08:53 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
