|
SedanChair posted:I'm a little surprised that a person having any familiarity with the legal system would think that the murder rate applies to them if they are not: To be honest, it's downright shocking how rare it is for prosecutors and judges to be targeted for violent crime considering how many lives they destroy. Even police officers are almost never targeted (there are exceptions, like Dorner's spree) outside of the heat of the moment. Violence targeted at the state just isn't a thing here for whatever reason. AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Nov 26, 2014 |
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:43 |
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:how many lives they destroy. oh for gently caress's sake.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Cole posted:Neither of these answers the question. I know it's hard for you guys to follow proper discussion, but I'll ask it again. Is there actually a law that you can't point things at cops? The guy was arrested for "felony menacing", which isn't cop specific. Also this case is never going to go to trial, because you have to "knowingly place someone in fear of imminent bodily harm" and the guy clearly thought he was being funny, and was also boggled that someone would actually mistake a banana for a gun. But hey, I'm a cop, someone made me look foolish, better arrest them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:oh for gently caress's sake. You're going to dispute this? Most glaringly, corrupt/racist/malicious prosecutors and judges are destroying lives, full stop. You've never read cases of Southern prosecutors railroading black men for charges that barely make sense upon closer review? Or the judges in PA sending kids to private prisons for kickbacks? Even a perfectly ethical prosecutor or judge is still destroying lives, it's just that in those cases we accept that it's for the greater good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
Davethulhu posted:Is there actually a law that you can't point things at cops? The guy was arrested for "felony menacing", which isn't cop specific. Also this case is never going to go to trial, because you have to "knowingly place someone in fear of imminent bodily harm" and the guy clearly thought he was being funny, and was also boggled that someone would actually mistake a banana for a gun. But hey, I'm a cop, someone made me look foolish, better arrest them. I'd take issue with: quote:knowingly placed Deputy Love and I in imminent fear by use of an article fashioned in the manner to cause us to reasonably believe it was a deadly weapon Can a banana reasonably be said to have been "fashioned"? By whom, Mother Nature? A million year course of evolution?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Internet: where poo poo I googled trumps real world experience every time. One time I spent an hour showing a client guitar chords because the police had shot her next door neighbor and her mom asked me to distract her so she'd stop staring at the corpse as it lay in the driveway. Another time, I was locked in a client's trailer for four hours because the state police had cordoned off the trailer park to search for a double murderer. I don't expect you to believe these, or any of my other stories, because this the Internet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:oh for gently caress's sake. Prosecutors and judges? How controversial is this? You can argue how much the people they convict deserve it, but I don't think you can argue that their lives are ruined.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
And I've been mugged and threatened by cops, and the cops were more frightening because I knew what the mugger wanted, and that he just wanted to get my poo poo and run, but the cops started making threats right off the bat, and I had no idea what they were going to do, and that they'd have the full weight of the police force behind them no matter what they did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:You're going to dispute this? Most glaringly, corrupt/racist/malicious prosecutors and judges are destroying lives, full stop. You've never read cases of Southern prosecutors railroading black men for charges that barely make sense upon closer review? Or the judges in PA sending kids to private prisons for kickbacks? convenient that you left out "corrupt" the first time around. I believe that's called "moving the goal post." And please explain to me the logic behind "I committed a violent crime. Was prosecuted by a prosecutor and sentenced by a judge. They ruined my life."
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:I'd take issue with: Excuse me, I think you'll find that the banana was fashioned by the loving hand of God almighty. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfv-Qn1M58I Maybe the cops were atheists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:convenient that you left out "corrupt" the first time around. I believe that's called "moving the goal post." Ya know, since this is the Reform thread there might be some credibility in assuming the "corrupt" part.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:convenient that you left out "corrupt" the first time around. I believe that's called "moving the goal post." Really? Because it's pretty self-evident that some proportion of judges/prosecutors are corrupt and/or racist. You're the one moving the goalposts by redefining "judges/prosecutors" as "judges/prosecutors, except for the bad ones". ActusRhesus posted:And please explain to me the logic behind "I committed a violent crime. Was prosecuted by a prosecutor and sentenced by a judge. They ruined my life." Let me amend that for you- "I committed a violent crime. Was prosecuted by a prosecutor and sentenced by a judge. They ruined my life for the benefit of others because removing me from society at least temporarily is in the public interest." Yes, that criminal's life was ruined, but at least there is some justification for it. Now, why don't we try this one: "I committed a non-violent drug crime. I was threatened with a twenty year sentence, and my overworked public defender recommended I just plea to 2-3 rather than risk being locked up until I have gray hair. The judge rubber-stamped the plea without questioning whether it was just. I luckily made it through my time in prison relatively unscathed, but I am now more or less unemployable because of my felony conviction. They ruined my life."
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 23:38
|
|
|
The criminal ruined his own life by committing crimes. The judge prosecutor and police are simply doing their jobs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
deratomicdog posted:The criminal ruined his own life by committing crimes. The judge prosecutor and police are simply doing their jobs. Makes sense. Close thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
deratomicdog posted:The criminal ruined his own life by committing crimes. The judge prosecutor and police are simply doing their jobs. And what are the judge, prosecutor, and police's jobs?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:And what are the judge, prosecutor, and police's jobs? To remove dangerous people from general society. AreWeDrunkYet posted:You're going to dispute this? Most glaringly, corrupt/racist/malicious prosecutors and judges are destroying lives, full stop. You've never read cases of Southern prosecutors railroading black men for charges that barely make sense upon closer review? Or the judges in PA sending kids to private prisons for kickbacks? Of course in these cases they absolutely are. Absolutely not when they are removing people who, of their own free will, threatened, harmed, or (at the extreme) raped or murdered others. quote:"I committed a violent crime. Was prosecuted by a prosecutor and sentenced by a judge. They ruined my life for the benefit of others because removing me from society at least temporarily is in the public interest." No, and in fact the judge or prosecutor may be bound by relevant statues and laws and don't even have a choice in the matter. 3 strike laws as an example. It's also not impossible for someone to come out better than they went in, but of course the general prison situation in the US does not allow for it. tsa fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Nov 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:convenient that you left out "corrupt" the first time around. I believe that's called "moving the goal post." ...There's nothing inconsistent with the quote you posted. The fact that the criminal committed [X] crime doesn't somehow take moral responsibility away from the justice system when they kill said criminal for committing said crime or effectively amputate them from society so they can't even try to get a normal life started after being imprisoned.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
That's a problem with US prisons and should be reformed. However in other countries reformation is very common.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
tsa posted:To remove dangerous people from general society. Nope! This is an idealistic and naive view that doesn't explain why, for instance, people are arrested for possession of marijuana, or why prosecutors routinely seek the highest possible sentence then bargain down.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Nope! This is an idealistic and naive view that doesn't explain why, for instance, people are arrested for possession of marijuana, or why prosecutors routinely seek the highest possible sentence then bargain down. I don't waste my time with simple possession cases. Diversionary program and accelerated rehabilitation. I'm too busy dealing with 8 year old kids being shot in the head.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:I don't waste my time with simple possession cases. Diversionary program and accelerated rehabilitation. I'm too busy dealing with 8 year old kids being shot in the head. You're aware that many of the situations people take offense to start with simple possession cases? Why would you just wave those away as not important? I think we can all agree that the murder of children, or anyone really, is bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:I don't waste my time with simple possession cases. Diversionary program and accelerated rehabilitation. I'm too busy dealing with 8 year old kids being shot in the head. You're a true hero!
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
Dum Cumpster posted:You're aware that many of the situations people take offense to start with simple possession cases? Why would you just wave those away as not important? Because they aren't important and, if we're talking about system reforms, I would suggest courts should employ social workers, as we do, to assess a defendant's suitability for alternative programs, and use those where there's potential for rehabilitation. It's what we do..when we're, you know...not ruining people's lives.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Because they aren't important and, if we're talking about system reforms, I would suggest courts should employ social workers, as we do, to assess a defendant's suitability for alternative programs, and use those where there's potential for rehabilitation. It's what we do..when we're, you know...not ruining people's lives. Why should anyone believe that this is anything but empty platitudes coming from you (you in the general sense, referring to prosecutors and others setting the direction and priorities of the criminal justice system) when the incarceration and recidivism rates in the US are far above the rest of the developed world? Are we to believe that this just some sort of unfortunate coincidence of policy and ignore the role of those administering "justice" on a day to day basis, or pretend that the criminal justice system here is not uniquely cruel and vindictive?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
who gets any sort of jail time for simple possession cases anyways? I repeatedly see felony drug cases get released without any bond.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:33
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Because they aren't important and, if we're talking about system reforms, I would suggest courts should employ social workers, as we do, to assess a defendant's suitability for alternative programs, and use those where there's potential for rehabilitation. It's what we do..when we're, you know...not ruining people's lives. Well then. I guess there's nothing to fix in the system. Thank you for your service. I guess the people who's lives have been ruined by simple possession might think different but what would I know, I'm privileged 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:uniquely cruel and vindictive? bahahahahahahhahahahaha.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
deratomicdog posted:who gets any sort of jail time for simple possession cases anyways? I repeatedly see felony drug cases get released without any bond. It's just ActusRhesus being disingenuous, again. She is focusing on one mention of possession in the thread (and in the context of arrest and not prison time, at that) when the issue is non-violent drug crime generally. Someone selling even a moderate amount of controlled substances can be threatened with multiple decades-long sentences, almost everyone (as in 90%+ of defendants) agree to a plea deal rather than risking spending most of the rest of their lives in prison and bringing the matter to trial. It's a farce as far as actual justice is concerned, but prosecutors won't turn down easy wins. ActusRhesus posted:bahahahahahahhahahahaha. What now, you're going to give us some horror stories from Sudan or Mauritania? As far as rich, developed countries go, the criminal justice system in the US is undeniably cruel and vindictive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:It's just ActusRhesus being disingenuous, again. She is focusing on one mention of possession in the thread (and in the context of arrest and not prison time, at that) when the issue is non-violent drug crime generally. Someone selling even a moderate amount of controlled substances can be threatened with multiple decades-long sentences, almost everyone (as in 90%+ of defendants) agree to a plea deal rather than risking spending most of the rest of their lives in prison and bringing the matter to trial. It's a farce as far as actual justice is concerned, but prosecutors won't turn down easy wins. define "moderate amount" and tell me more about how prosecutors think.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:I don't waste my time with simple possession cases. Diversionary program and accelerated rehabilitation. I'm too busy dealing with 8 year old kids being shot in the head. That doesn't speak to his point that the role of police, prosecutors, and judges is to "remove dangerous people from general society." If removing dangerous people from society is their sole goal, then why are there so many arrests for possession? I understand you can only be so lenient and still keep your job, but if the goal of police is to remove dangerous people from society, why are they even bothering with arrests for possession? They too have rules they have to abide by, but it's far more complicated than just removing dangerous people, which is why I called his view idealistic and naive. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:That doesn't speak to his point that the role of police, prosecutors, and judges is to "remove dangerous people from general society." If removing dangerous people from society is their sole goal, then why are there so many arrests for possession? I understand you can only be so lenient and still keep your job, but if the goal of police is to remove dangerous people from society, why are they even bothering with arrests for possession? They too have rules they have to abide by, but it's far more complicated than just removing dangerous people, which is why I called his view idealistic and naive. well, now that the trend seems to be legalization, it may be a non-issue in a few years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:well, now that the trend seems to be legalization, it may be a non-issue in a few years. I guess we shouldn't waste our time thinking of those who were sent to prison or killed in no knock raids.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
Dum Cumpster posted:I guess we shouldn't waste our time thinking of those who were sent to prison or killed in no knock raids. now where exactly did I say I supported no knock raids, and where exactly did I say I supported jail time for simple posession? Because I'm pretty sure I said the opposite of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:well, now that the trend seems to be legalization, it may be a non-issue in a few years. Just to be clear, you're not defending tsa's statement from my claim that it's idealistic and naive, right? Anyways, "in the future this may not be an issue" is cold comfort to students who get diversion on a weed charge and then are denied student loans because of it. The fact is, it still is an issue. I agree with you that kids getting shot is infinitely more important, which is why I disputed tsa's claim in the first place. edit: To be clear, I don't think you cackle over the misery of pot smoking kids, but my point is that this is a systemic issue. Sharkie fucked around with this message at 01:57 on Nov 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:now where exactly did I say I supported no knock raids, and where exactly did I say I supported jail time for simple posession? Because I'm pretty sure I said the opposite of that. You said you don't deal with it and it'll be solved in the future which to me sounds like you think it isn't a big deal. I threw in the no knocks for funzies. Also your response to "lives they destroy"
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Just to be clear, you're not defending tsa's statement from my claim that it's idealistic and naive, right? Anyways, "in the future this may not be an issue" is cold comfort to students who get diversion on a weed charge and then are denied student loans because of it. The fact is, it still is an issue. I agree with you that kids getting shot is infinitely more important, which is why I disputed tsa's claim in the first place. I wouldn't say naive...I'd say incorrect. general sentencing philosophies are deterrence, retribution and rehabilitation. Sometimes people are jailed because that's what the law says has to happen. The Enron guys weren't violent, but them being locked up was the right call. Now, we can debate what crimes are worth locking up and what aren't, and I'd agree that, IMO, simple weed possession should be an infraction at best.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:That doesn't speak to his point that the role of police, prosecutors, and judges is to "remove dangerous people from general society." If removing dangerous people from society is their sole goal, then why are there so many arrests for possession? I understand you can only be so lenient and still keep your job, but if the goal of police is to remove dangerous people from society, why are they even bothering with arrests for possession? They too have rules they have to abide by, but it's far more complicated than just removing dangerous people, which is why I called his view idealistic and naive. Actually it looks like with the more marijuana arrests made there are less violent crime arrests, because the violent offenders are already locked up on the weed charges. Can't commit those associated violent crimes when your in jail. Thanks war on drugs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
A HOT TOPIC posted:Actually it looks like with the more marijuana arrests made there are less violent crime arrests, because the violent offenders are already locked up on the weed charges. Can't commit those associated violent crimes when your in jail. Thanks war on drugs. As well all know, correlation equals causation. Now track it with sales of Harry Potter books.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
Harping on arrests for possession is really missing the forest for the trees. Fix the dumb laws and take that out of the hands of the police. Prosecution/sentencing is more shaky, but the root issue is still that they have the ability to go for such huge sentences in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:43 |
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:define "moderate amount" What difference does it make what the exact amount is? We're talking about non-violent drug crime. You can't possibly be claiming that only large wholescale distributors are being locked up given the sheer number of people imprisoned for drug crimes. ActusRhesus posted:and tell me more about how prosecutors think. The statement about the thought process may be presumptive, but the results speak for themselves. The system you're a part of and are valiantly defending keeps something like an order of magnitude more of its population locked up than its counterparts in most comparably developed nations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2014 02:23
|
|