Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-02-2020, 02:33 PM
 
1,680 posts, read 1,795,427 times
Reputation: 1342

Advertisements

After committing crime White-collar or Blue-collar; petty or grand..should a Thuggish savage have the ability to select their jail or Prison?

I would vehemently recommend against affording any Criminal options beyound top bunk or lower bunk.

Apparently judges have afforded this Thug in heels the ability to select her jail.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.des...ss-and-pilates

 
Old 10-02-2020, 03:03 PM
 
2,289 posts, read 1,574,436 times
Reputation: 1800
Just an FYI, thug or thuggish implies physical violence, which is excluded from the definition of white collar crime.

I don't think it's a big deal for low risk convicts, who are usually the ones who benefit. It's also not the case that they get to choose. They make a request that may or may not be granted.

It's more than just about the personal desires of the convicted. Ease of visitation by innocent family members is also a consideration, as is the lower cost of lower security incarceration.

That said, if she pleaded guilty or not (I don't remember), should have some bearing on the decision.
 
Old 10-02-2020, 04:33 PM
 
1,680 posts, read 1,795,427 times
Reputation: 1342
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Very Man Himself View Post
Just an FYI, thug or thuggish implies physical violence, which is excluded from the definition of white collar crime.

I don't think it's a big deal for low risk convicts, who are usually the ones who benefit. It's also not the case that they get to choose. They make a request that may or may not be granted.

It's more than just about the personal desires of the convicted. Ease of visitation by innocent family members is also a consideration, as is the lower cost of lower security incarceration.

That said, if she pleaded guilty or not (I don't remember), should have some bearing on the decision.

Rubbish a criminal is a Criminal is a Criminal also- never should we negotiate with criminals; affording criminals blue-collar/white-collar Thug or HOODLUMS alike.

Have you ever considered such leniency prior to this particular woman?
 
Old 10-02-2020, 04:36 PM
 
464 posts, read 203,270 times
Reputation: 997
I'd go with house arrest, if we're picking and choosing. lol
 
Old 10-02-2020, 04:48 PM
 
1,680 posts, read 1,795,427 times
Reputation: 1342
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80sHorrorJunkie View Post
I'd go with house arrest, if we're picking and choosing. lol
18 months in the "House" of Corrections purposefully sending a message to those considering such a path in the future.

Judges over sentence in various circumstances; to include sending messages or setting a tone in efforts to deter future offenders.
 
Old 10-02-2020, 07:02 PM
 
2,289 posts, read 1,574,436 times
Reputation: 1800
Quote:
Originally Posted by SPECFRCE View Post
Rubbish a criminal is a Criminal is a Criminal also- never should we negotiate with criminals; affording criminals blue-collar/white-collar Thug or HOODLUMS alike.

Have you ever considered such leniency prior to this particular woman?
Prosecutors routinely negotiate plea deals with criminals.

Yes, I have considered what you call "leniency" previously, but not in this case. You need to answer the question: Why does the gummint build these facilities, and who should occupy them?
 
Old 10-02-2020, 09:48 PM
 
Location: The High Desert
16,124 posts, read 10,801,858 times
Reputation: 31583
As a former prison administrator the idea of judges deciding what prison an offender is assigned to is ridiculous. They have no idea of the classification systems that determine inmate custody levels and housing.

This is a federal case with an extremely short sentence of two months. I will be surprised if she serves it all. The cost of incarcerating someone in a higher security prison or even transporting her across country would be a silly expense in this case. This is during a pandemic and inmate populations are being hard hit but they get free healthcare. Do we want to pay for her medical bills, too? Putting her under monitored house arrest for 6 months followed by the supervision and the fine would actually make more sense.
 
Old 10-02-2020, 09:55 PM
 
1,680 posts, read 1,795,427 times
Reputation: 1342
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Very Man Himself View Post
Prosecutors routinely negotiate plea deals with criminals.

Yes, I have considered what you call "leniency" previously, but not in this case. You need to answer the question: Why does the gummint build these facilities, and who should occupy them?



Nicely constructed..smiles all around.

Certainly, not this woman!
 
Old 10-02-2020, 10:02 PM
 
1,680 posts, read 1,795,427 times
Reputation: 1342
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunGrins View Post
As a former prison administrator the idea of judges deciding what prison an offender is assigned to is ridiculous. They have no idea of the classification systems that determine inmate custody levels and housing.

This is a federal case with an extremely short sentence of two months. I will be surprised if she serves it all. The cost of incarcerating someone in a higher security prison or even transporting her across country would be a silly expense in this case. This is during a pandemic and inmate populations are being hard hit but they get free healthcare. Do we want to pay for her medical bills, too? Putting her under monitored house arrest for 6 months followed by the supervision and the fine would actually make more sense.
Provide said criminal with a mask, according to studies and most Americans mask positively combats the virus.
 
Old 10-02-2020, 10:07 PM
 
Location: San Diego, Ca/ SLO county Ca
798 posts, read 504,740 times
Reputation: 974
I would say the correct answer should be No.

They are Criminals and Criminals do not have that many

rights except for defense rights Felons do NOT have the Right to VOTE.

Do they have the Right to Shower more than 3 X per week?

What is the correct answer?
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top