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.
I'm from NYC. Tough on crime will only anger the left, and soft on crime will only anger the right. The best approach is a balanced method of justice especially for black and brown, mostly black youths who get in trouble in NYC. Btw in a person of color and did alright in NYC. I'm person of color too. All I know is this white liberals and black activist who say they care about black people and anything black and brown. They should get out of their ivory towers and gated communities and spend 24-7 with them to see what they truly need,instead of 8 hours at at a black and brown school while teaching some critical theory stuff.
The best approach is the one most suburbs take. Maximum amount of personal freedom and extremely tough on crime. The best way to reduce crime is to take habitual offenders off the street. What Guiliani did with NYC is a good model.
This is an example of a mother raising children who adopt her views on life. The mother sees no fault in the lawless behavior of her son. she points fingers at everyone else. Her son prob did the same thing his entire life, never taking responsibility for his 13 prior arrests, always finding blame somewhere else, so he can exonerate any blame against himself.
LOL the mother of the shooter called her son about cold french fries, and he showed up as Captain Save a Hoe my Momma.
Yes, she wanted him to punish this minimum wage fry cook. She knows her son is a violent person, he did exactly what she wanted him to do. She certainly did not call her son because she wanted someone cool headed to calm the situation. She wanted a violence response to punish the employee, so she called her violent son.
The guy at the end of the video says it all, we have lost our values. How stupid is it to be shot over cold french fries and the gun man is now heading to Prison (hopefully).
It all comes down to the big chip of machismo that so many young guys are walking around with on their shoulder. In this case you argue with my Mom I will shoot you.
How many times have we seen criminals get caught by the Police and the scene turns ugly when the Punk fights back instead of accepting that he finally got caught for his crimes?
Shooting someone over Fries. How stupid and ignorant is that? Values, Morals and Respect for Life is gone.
Yes, she wanted him to punish this minimum wage fry cook. She knows her son is a violent person, he did exactly what she wanted him to do. She certainly did not call her son because she wanted someone cool headed to calm the situation. She wanted a violence response to punish the employee, so she called her violent son.
With a lot of these women it's more nefarious. If she can get someone to shoot her son dead, a McD employee outside, or a cop.............it's possibly the lotto via lawsuit. A dead son could be worth millions. They know this.
With a lot of these women it's more nefarious. If she can get someone to shoot her son dead, a McD employee outside, or a cop.............it's possibly the lotto via lawsuit. A dead son could be worth millions. They know this.
That seems too extreme to me. I don't believe the mother thought McDonald's clerks in New York City were packing a gun and would shoot her son, so she could collect compensation for his death in a trial.
NY Dem lawmakers. Since there was more black and brown guys in lockup waiting for their trial (they can't afford bail as easily as whites is what they said) they passed bail reform. Basically you are going to be out of jail waiting for a court date unless the charge is murder, attempted murder etc.
And this is what people misinterpret or conveniently forget about the bail process in general when complaining about Bail Reform. It's not as if we went from 100% of ACCUSED (not convicted) criminals being incarcerated to a mass release into the public. Those who could afford bail were out within hours. Others languished in the cells while awaiting trial that seemingly never came. Some waited for trial longer than they would have been sentenced for the offense.
There should have been compromise built in that those who cannot afford bail are granted expedited trial scheduling. If it's such a low level offense that the case should be a slam dunk, any junior ADA should be able to eek out a win or at least a reasonable plea and free up the calendar for the bigger fish. Bail in general (and I believe sentencing as well) should be based on an objective points system. Specific dollar amounts (or time incarcerated) to be determined based on offense and a number of designated, provable contributing factors.
I'm convinced that John Adams would have been run out of town on a rail if he were alive today. He had the notion, now considered absurd, that all people deserved a fair and speedy trial by jury. Nowadays, we only seem to believe in those rights for those who fit our political narrative.
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.
