Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

    There is one set of rules for the rich and one set of rules for the not rich. That is never going to change.
    CCT '77 & '78
    4 kids
    8 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18, TJL 1/22, BRL 6/23, NDL 2/24)
    2 granddaughters (EML 4/18, LCL 5/20)

    ?€Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.?€
    - Benjamin Franklin

    Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

    I want to live forever. So far, so good.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

      Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
      Would it? It's immediate sentencing reform. Either the crazy disproportionate sentences minorities receive go down or white and/or rich sentencing never sees a Stanford case again.
      I'm thinking more along the lines of the appeals, additional lawsuits (I got this because I'm [insert whatever]), etc etc. Then the public outcry on the original cases, as well as the appeals/additional cases. I think it would go exponential, and that's just not good.
      Never really developed a taste for tequila. Kind of hard to understand how you make a drink out of something that sharp, inhospitable. Now, bourbon is easy to understand.
      Tastes like a warm summer day. -Raylan Givens

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

        If you ever get in trouble with the law, hire more attorney than you can possibly afford.
        The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved. <-- Virtue signaling.

        North Dakota Hockey:

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

          Originally posted by jen View Post
          People suck. Makes you want to never leave the house.
          ^^ This.
          **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

          Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
          Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by The Sicatoka View Post
            If you ever get in trouble with the law, hire more attorney than you can possibly afford.
            But be careful if you let someone else foot your legal bills (or you foot the bill for someone else), because you run into issues where what the person paying wants is not necessarily what's best for the actual client.

            My wife says she's seen plenty of letters of support written for her clients that are way worse than what the dad in the Stanford case wrote. And she would've never let the dad's letter see the light of day. But then she's paid by the state, not dad, so she could tell the dad to fark off without worry.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

              Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
              Would it? It's immediate sentencing reform. Either the crazy disproportionate sentences minorities receive go down or white and/or rich sentencing never sees a Stanford case again.
              We have a problem with sentencing in this country. First, we have way too many people incarcerated, and second, what we have chosen to incarcerate people for and the time for which they are incarcerated has disproportionately affected minorities.

              Here is my personal opinion about where we went wrong.

              It used to be that we basically relied on the judge to make the correct sentencing decision. He, or she, was the person who listened to the evidence, heard the defendant confess or testify or respond to the guilty verdict, heard the arguments of counsel, read the law and handed down the sentence.

              It wasn't a perfect system. We do have a few racist judges. You would see some inconsistencies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction with respect to a sentence imposed. But in my opinion it generally worked.

              But, as with everything in this country, someone became aggrieved by their case, and so laws were changed. "Sentencing guidelines" were created and judges were basically told you do not deviate from these unless extreme circumstances exist. We started doing massive pre-sentence investigations in which people in the incarceration system come up with their own recommendation for what the sentence should be.

              The effect has been to basically tie the hands of judges when it comes to sentencing. We could have a laptop do it for us. As a result, we've taken away both the need and obligation on the part of judges to truly think about what to sentence. Instead, they go the safe route and stay within the guidelines and sentence in accordance with the pre-sentence report and clock out at the end of the day.

              If I'm not mistaken, in the Stanford case the pre-sentence report basically said send this kid away for something like 6 months to a year. The judge just followed that, and is now paying the price, possibly.

              I say take sentencing out of the hands of the untrained people who didn't see and hear the defendant and didn't hear the evidence, and put it back in the hands of judges.
              That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

                Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                If I'm not mistaken, in the Stanford case the pre-sentence report basically said send this kid away for something like 6 months to a year. The judge just followed that, and is now paying the price, possibly.

                I say take sentencing out of the hands of the untrained people who didn't see and hear the defendant and didn't hear the evidence, and put it back in the hands of judges.
                That's interesting. I had no idea.

                Regarding the concept of a PSIR, I had very little knowledge of how these were even written. Shows how much I understand the sentencing phase of criminal proceedings.

                Thanks for the info
                Code:
                As of 9/21/10:         As of 9/13/10:
                College Hockey 6       College Football 0
                BTHC 4                 WCHA FC:  1
                Originally posted by SanTropez
                May your paint thinner run dry and the fleas of a thousand camels infest your dead deer.
                Originally posted by bigblue_dl
                I don't even know how to classify magic vagina smoke babies..
                Originally posted by Kepler
                When the giraffes start building radio telescopes they can join too.
                He's probably going to be a superstar but that man has more baggage than North West

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

                  Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
                  That's interesting. I had no idea.

                  Regarding the concept of a PSIR, I had very little knowledge of how these were even written. Shows how much I understand the sentencing phase of criminal proceedings.

                  Thanks for the info
                  http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...nient-sentence
                  That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

                    Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                    We have a problem with sentencing in this country. First, we have way too many people incarcerated, and second, what we have chosen to incarcerate people for and the time for which they are incarcerated has disproportionately affected minorities.

                    Here is my personal opinion about where we went wrong.

                    It used to be that we basically relied on the judge to make the correct sentencing decision. He, or she, was the person who listened to the evidence, heard the defendant confess or testify or respond to the guilty verdict, heard the arguments of counsel, read the law and handed down the sentence.

                    It wasn't a perfect system. We do have a few racist judges. You would see some inconsistencies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction with respect to a sentence imposed. But in my opinion it generally worked.

                    But, as with everything in this country, someone became aggrieved by their case, and so laws were changed. "Sentencing guidelines" were created and judges were basically told you do not deviate from these unless extreme circumstances exist. We started doing massive pre-sentence investigations in which people in the incarceration system come up with their own recommendation for what the sentence should be.

                    The effect has been to basically tie the hands of judges when it comes to sentencing. We could have a laptop do it for us. As a result, we've taken away both the need and obligation on the part of judges to truly think about what to sentence. Instead, they go the safe route and stay within the guidelines and sentence in accordance with the pre-sentence report and clock out at the end of the day.

                    If I'm not mistaken, in the Stanford case the pre-sentence report basically said send this kid away for something like 6 months to a year. The judge just followed that, and is now paying the price, possibly.

                    I say take sentencing out of the hands of the untrained people who didn't see and hear the defendant and didn't hear the evidence, and put it back in the hands of judges.
                    If that's what you want, we then go to mandatory minimums. Some of which are evidently lobbied by the prison-industrial complex. That's working REAL well, especially for things that are victimless and non-violent.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

                      Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
                      Right. But if person A committed a rape and person B committed rape under similar circumstances and with a similar rap sheet, person A and B should receive the same sentences.
                      I think the key is, there needs to be better sentencing guidelines. They need to better defined, regardless of what your background or race or sex or whatever is.
                      Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.

                      RIP - Kirby

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by bigblue_dl View Post
                        I think the key is, there needs to be better sentencing guidelines. They need to better defined, regardless of what your background or race or sex or whatever is.
                        Disagree. The federal sentencing guidelines lead to horrendous outcomes. Zero tolerance rules by school boards lead to first graders getting expelled because they brought pointed scissors instead of rounded ones. I don't think the states need to go down that route en masse and continue that same series of mistakes.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

                          Trump supporter? You are no longer welcome in this coffee shop.

                          Remember kids, it's only discrimination when the shopkeeper is conservative and bans people based on his beliefs. When a liberal sludge slinger does it, he should be celebrated!

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

                            Originally posted by unofan View Post
                            Disagree. The federal sentencing guidelines lead to horrendous outcomes. Zero tolerance rules by school boards lead to first graders getting expelled because they brought pointed scissors instead of rounded ones. I don't think the states need to go down that route en masse and continue that same series of mistakes.
                            Dang. We agree on something.
                            The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved. <-- Virtue signaling.

                            North Dakota Hockey:

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

                              Originally posted by unofan View Post
                              Disagree. The federal sentencing guidelines lead to horrendous outcomes. Zero tolerance rules by school boards lead to first graders getting expelled because they brought pointed scissors instead of rounded ones. I don't think the states need to go down that route en masse and continue that same series of mistakes.
                              Ok, I see that point.
                              Having a clear conscience just means you have a bad memory or you had a boring weekend.

                              RIP - Kirby

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Nice Planet XII: It's Cruel to be Kind!

                                At the same time, people need to do time for their crimes. In my local rag, I see so many people busted for stuff, who get fined or jail time, with most if not all that fine or jail time suspended, and then see guys get busted for breaking into cars, or whatever, who have rap sheets a mile long, but had suspended sentences and fines in their previous histories.

                                If there's no punishment for breaking the law, then people are just gonna keep doing it.
                                What kind of cheese are you planning to put on top?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X