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.
Ha! You really think? You can start by citing the 37,000 pages of federal laws. Then shift to state laws, then, international laws, that are enforced by the USA. Then tell me how many you may have violated throughout your life, without abusing another's rights, as you state.
You know perfectly well that Huckleberry wasn't talking about violating something written down on paper somewhere. "Abusing someone's rights" meant such things as mugging, raping, murdering--things for which the individual responsible needs to be removed from society as a whole.
If Person A can murder Person B and still stand there screaming and yelling about his "rights," that's when you know the legal system is in need of reform. Drastic reform.
Here is the reform: Make sure the rights that they have are not violated so that we don't have to fork out millions of dollars. Because, frankly, those taxes that are getting jacked......they also come from my pocket depending on where they are incarcerated.
If Person A can murder Person B and still stand there screaming and yelling about his "rights," that's when you know the legal system is in need of reform. Drastic reform.
But when person C (Fred314x, for example) is accused of murdering person B, what are his rights? The right to sell your house to pay bail, and to sell your parents' house to pay your defense attorney, plus the full cost of gathering all the evidence necessary to prove that the evidence against you, gathered at public expense by the taxpayers, with the single-minded goal of putting you in prison, is not beyond a reasonable doubt.
If person A is finally convicted, and we know he is guilty (since you've just spend a million dollars to prove that it wasn't you), what limits to you propose to his punishment? Should there be any limits, and if so, what are they? Can we pull his fingernails out with pliers? Can we hang him on a rack to be eaten by rats until he starves to death? Can we put him in a cell with other criminals who will rape him repeatedly? What are the limits the civilized people in YOUR society can do to punish a person, who has already been removed from society and is no longer a danger? No limits, he has no rights?
I believe we are talking about two very different things. I was refering to someone who has been accused of a crime; you are talking about someone who has been convicted of a crime. Anyway, American citizens accused of a crime have many rights guaranteed to them by The Bill of Rights; specifically:
Amendment IV (protection from unreasonable search and siezure)
Amendment V (due process guaranteed, double jeopardy restrictions)
Amendment VI (right to speedy trial, witnesses)
Amendment VII (right of trial by jury)
Amendment VIII (protection from excessive bail & cruel & unusual punishment)
Certainly you do not disagree with The Bill of Rights and the protections it affords people who have been ACCUSED of a crime..... or do you?
You hit it on the head, we're talking about two different things. And I agree with you on the point of accusation. I don't think the OP's statement was clear in regards to accused or convicted.
No, you said "I CHOOSE to not commit crimes so I stay out of jail". But you cannot choose to not be a suspect, you cannot choose to not be accused, and therefore you cannot choose to stay out of a situation in which your rights will be exactly the same as a person who actually committed a crime and has been convicted. An innocent accused has exactly the same rights, and is treated exactly the same way on a day-to-day pretrial basis, as a guilty accused.
The reason you have collision insurance on your car is to cover you if you have an at-fault accident, and by having insurance, you acknowledge that such accidents can happen, even to you, no matter how cautions and prudent you may be. If someone is killed in such an accident, you go straight to jail, and now you have committed a crime, and staying out of jail is not an option. You will now have every shred of dignity methodically stripped from you by experts at that skill, be issued an orange jumpsuit, and escorted to a tiny filthy stinky cell to spend most of the rest of your life being brutalized at will by both official and unofficial sociopaths.
Correct, however I can minimize my chances of becoming a suspect. By CHOOSING to stay out of certain situations. For the most part I make good choices, many others do not. They end up finding themselves in bad situations where becoming a suspect in a crime is a possibility. I have little sympathy for the woe is me crowd, at some point you had to realize that something may go wrong and it'll look bad for you. The whole "the cops locked me up for no reason" when you really look at all the facts usually isn't true.
The whole "the cops locked me up for no reason" when you really look at all the facts usually isn't true.
Nobody ever looks at all the facts, though. Most were sent to prison without a trial. A huge majority of all charges are plea bargained. It is abundantly clear to a suspect that even if perfectly innocent, there is very little chance of proving his innocence in court, with the prosecution having virtually infinite resources to build a barely plausible case against him. Only a small percentage of criminal prosecutions actually to before a jury where the evidence against them is examined.
So the accused is faced with two choices. Plea bargain a short sentence, or risk many years or additional punishment for slapping the court in the face and daring to go to trial.
A person who believes he will receive a fair trial is one of two things. Either very very innocent and rich enough to easily prove it, or very very stupid. Everybody else goes to jail on a plea bargain, without any due process at all.
I would like to add my two cents on the issue of medical care for inmates.
During the ten years I worked in corrections I saw several instances where a LIFER(With no parole) was given open heart surgery at the states expense. I think that was a waste of taxpayers money. I don't know the final outcome of the case but when I was still on the job a Male inmate at our institution was suing the state to pay for a sex change operation. Even if he did not get the state to pay for the operation there were probably thousands of dollars spent by the State in legal fees fighting this case. In my opinion in situations like these medical care is not a right.
Health care needs of an inmate that could result in a danger to the public if left untreated absolutely need to be treated. Communicable disease must be treated or the PUBLIC is at risk. Staff can be a vector for disease to the Public or releasing infected inmates back into the outside. One thing that always amazed me was the fabulous dental care the inmates at our institution received. Several short timers left with a mouthful of shiny white teeth that a movie star would be envious of. ALL AT THE EXPENSE OF THE TAXPAYER.
One HUGE danger that the Public should be aware of are the HIV positive inmates that are released back in to society. Unless the law has changed in the years since I left the job it is against the LAW for the state to release any information about the HIV status of released inmates to any officials.
That MUST BE CHANGED. HIV/AIDS cannot be reported to Health Officials but Gonorrhea, Syphilis, Herpes and other STD's have to be reported to the officials in the County where an inmate is released to. That is totally idiotic.
Nobody ever looks at all the facts, though. Most were sent to prison without a trial. A huge majority of all charges are plea bargained. It is abundantly clear to a suspect that even if perfectly innocent, there is very little chance of proving his innocence in court, with the prosecution having virtually infinite resources to build a barely plausible case against him. Only a small percentage of criminal prosecutions actually to before a jury where the evidence against them is examined.
So the accused is faced with two choices. Plea bargain a short sentence, or risk many years or additional punishment for slapping the court in the face and daring to go to trial.
A person who believes he will receive a fair trial is one of two things. Either very very innocent and rich enough to easily prove it, or very very stupid. Everybody else goes to jail on a plea bargain, without any due process at all.
Mopst pleas are to get a lighter sentence because the evidence is overwhelming. The sate does it to save the time and expense of a trial.-In our system anyone that actaully says he is inocent the judge can not except his plea of guilty.that is quite common at pleas. Besides to actaully get to prison it takes a long history of violations of serious nature. As they say a person has to work his way to prison unless he/she committs a very serious crime.
I would like to add my two cents on the issue of medical care for inmates.
During the ten years I worked in corrections I saw several instances where a LIFER(With no parole) was given open heart surgery at the states expense. I think that was a waste of taxpayers money. I don't know the final outcome of the case but when I was still on the job a Male inmate at our institution was suing the state to pay for a sex change operation. Even if he did not get the state to pay for the operation there were probably thousands of dollars spent by the State in legal fees fighting this case. In my opinion in situations like these medical care is not a right.
Health care needs of an inmate that could result in a danger to the public if left untreated absolutely need to be treated. Communicable disease must be treated or the PUBLIC is at risk. Staff can be a vector for disease to the Public or releasing infected inmates back into the outside. One thing that always amazed me was the fabulous dental care the inmates at our institution received. Several short timers left with a mouthful of shiny white teeth that a movie star would be envious of. ALL AT THE EXPENSE OF THE TAXPAYER.
One HUGE danger that the Public should be aware of are the HIV positive inmates that are released back in to society. Unless the law has changed in the years since I left the job it is against the LAW for the state to release any information about the HIV status of released inmates to any officials.
That MUST BE CHANGED. HIV/AIDS cannot be reported to Health Officials but Gonorrhea, Syphilis, Herpes and other STD's have to be reported to the officials in the County where an inmate is released to. That is totally idiotic.
GL2
It is currently illegal to report the HIV status to CO's or any other person. That is a friggin' lawsuit waiting to happen. Medical is so important. You can go to county and pick up TB. In the 3-4 weeks it takes for person A to be medically evaluated, your done. Kiss the rest of the alphabet goodbye.
"The big problem . . . is that not everyone who gets booked into jail [and gets their mugshot on the internet] is guilty. Some are never prosecuted because the charges get dropped. Others are found not guilty at trial."
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.
