Jedi Council Forums - The State of Prisons in U.S.

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: The State of Prisons in U.S.
anakin_girl Title: Founding Member & Retired FF CR Charlotte , NC Registered: Oct '00	Date Posted: 6/6/04 10:39am Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S. - Date Edited: 6/6/04 10:40am (1 edits total) Edited By: anakin_girl
	Branthoris: We can hope she'll remain there. However, what you have to understand about this woman is that she is really convincing. She pulled the wool over a lot of people's eyes. The only ones who were not fooled by her syrupy-sweetness were the parents of both husbands--they knew something was up before their sons died. Bledsoe called her "the epitomy of evil". As far as Graham--his prior convictions (and I had thought there might have been a sexual assault in there but I wasn't sure) made it easier to convict him this time, however, I still think it was completely and utterly wrong that he was sentenced to death based on the testimony of one eyewitness in this case, even if other guys had pointed him out as the guy who shot them in other cases. Those were other cases--this is a separate case and should be tried separately. I'm not a big fan of "prior behavior" being used as evidence--sometimes it can be useful, but in many cases, including Bill Clinton's case, it turns the trial into a farce. Gary Graham was a poor man with a court-appointed lawyer. If he were O.J. Simpson, he would have gotten off. That is wrong. DarthBud: Harsh, in the beginning some would test it, but after the first years, people would understand, Break the law=Death. So you expect everyone to be perfect or die. Sounds too much like fascist Spain or Italy, communist USSR, Hitler's Germany, or present-day Iraq or Iran to me. -----signature----- "A person should not believe in an -ism, a person should believe in himself." Ferris Bueller
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DarthBud Registered: Jan '03	Date Posted: 6/6/04 10:49am Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	"So you expect everyone to be perfect or die. " Not perfect, just law biding. It is easy not to break the law. -----signature----- The demons we fight are the demons we create. I'm becoming who people think I am and slowly losing who I really am.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
anakin_girl Title: Founding Member & Retired FF CR Charlotte , NC Registered: Oct '00	Date Posted: 6/6/04 10:56am Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	Depends. How many laws are there? Right now the federal laws would fill up about a dozen books. There's a law that says all women in Charlotte, North Carolina must not be seen in public unless covered by sixteen yards of cloth. I break that one every day. -----signature----- "A person should not believe in an -ism, a person should believe in himself." Ferris Bueller
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DarthBud Registered: Jan '03	Date Posted: 6/6/04 11:07am Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	Uh oh Stealing, in any way=bad killing=bad assaulting someone=bad We actually had to write down our laws, but I don't feel like getting my paper out, but that's the gist of it. Oh yeah, women can wear belly shirts and hip huggers if you want. -----signature----- The demons we fight are the demons we create. I'm becoming who people think I am and slowly losing who I really am.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Special_Fred Registered: Jul '03	Date Posted: 6/6/04 11:07am Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	Capital punishiment would be the only punishment. The death penalty for petty offenses like speeding? Ridiculous. I think within 5-10 years after implementing it, society would be virtually crime free. Because almost everyone would be dead! You'd be surprised how many people have committed misdemeanors. You propose that we execute ALL of them? It would be as close to Utopia as we humans would ever get... Hey, what do you know? That's how Hitler justified the Holocaust!!! Yes, there would be some who would exploit the system. Like, um...the government? (cough) Police state! (cough cough) Not perfect, just law biding. It is easy not to break the law. But everyone makes mistakes. The idea of executing a person for a relatively trivial offense is disgusting and inexcusable, IMHO. -----signature----- People shouldn't be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. Vote Libertarian, or don't vote at all.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
anakin_girl Title: Founding Member & Retired FF CR Charlotte , NC Registered: Oct '00	Date Posted: 6/6/04 11:10am Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	That sounds about like my list for what people should go to jail for: killing or assault of a person or animal, theft, rape. I'm an eye-for-an-eye person though: Killing for any reason other than self-defense or defense of one's family deserves death, assault deserves assault in kind, theft means you pay back what you stole plus some, rape means you lose the organs you raped with. People are smoking pot? Leave them alone unless they get behind the wheel of a car. Drunk driving? Take their licenses permanently. Writing bad checks? They pay back the amount they wrote, plus some--treat it like stealing, because that's really what it is. -----signature----- "A person should not believe in an -ism, a person should believe in himself." Ferris Bueller
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Branthoris Registered: Nov '02	Date Posted: 6/6/04 11:16am Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S. - Date Edited: 6/6/04 11:18am (1 edits total) Edited By: Branthoris
	DarthBud: what we understand by 'jury trial' at the moment is actually trial by judge and jury, with review by appellate courts and with a requirement for unanimous or near-unanimous verdicts. What you are proposing is a radical departure from anything we've ever seen--a decision by simple majority with no review by an appeal court. Jury decisions being 'final' might seem like a nice idea until you consider the horrific miscarriages of justice that would arise from it. What about cases involving inadequate assistance of counsel, misdirection by the judge, failure to disclose exonerating evidence, or other clear failures in the trial procedure? What about new evidence after conviction? And what about cases where the evidence is so flimsy that no reasonable jury could possibly have found the defendant guilty? What you are proposing actually undermines the rule of law, because without the power of appellate courts to set aside unfounded jury verdicts, a jury could convict anyone of anything and not be subject to reversal. Laws defining the elements of a crime would be meaningless: the jury could convict a person on any evidence they pleased. And your death-or-nothing sentencing proposal is too ridiculous to contemplate. anakin_girl: What about killing after years of abuse by a spouse or partner? What about killing resulting from insanity or a diminished mental state? These broad, catch-all rules proposed by people in this thread would, I think, be abandoned in an instant if they had actually to be applied to real cases.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DarthBud Registered: Jan '03	Date Posted: 6/6/04 11:50am Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	"What you are proposing is a radical departure from anything we've ever seen--a decision by simple majority with no review by an appeal court." That's the point. Judges would be nonexistant, an offical of the court would be there to maintain order, but they wouldn't have a vote. "Jury decisions being 'final' might seem like a nice idea until you consider the horrific miscarriages of justice that would arise from it." Yes, it would be horrific, but people would think twice if they were to committ a crime. "Billy was innocent but they killed him anyway." To quote Tarkin, "Fear would keep them inline." "What about new evidence after conviction?" If your family wanted it to be seen, they could clear your name, but you'd still be dead. "And what about cases where the evidence is so flimsy that no reasonable jury could possibly have found the defendant guilty?" Then the defendant beat the system. "the jury could convict a person on any evidence they pleased. And your death-or-nothing sentencing proposal is too ridiculous to contemplate." Yes, but the jurors would have to live with the fact they sentenced some one to die for no reason. After awhile society would become used to the idea of death for punishment for guilty parties, they'd want to make sure the person they sentenced was truly guilty. But remember its not really going to happen unless I build up my forces (my Jack Russell, named Jack) and stage a coup. I don't like mowing the grass, so staging a revolt to start my twisted version of Utopia won't happen anytime soon. -----signature----- The demons we fight are the demons we create. I'm becoming who people think I am and slowly losing who I really am.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Darth_Guy Registered: Aug '02	Date Posted: 6/6/04 12:24pm Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	To quote Tarkin, "Fear would keep them inline." Hehehe... Tarkin was wrong. -----signature----- Perhaps I'll breed some sort of albino shouting gorilla.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
anakin_girl Title: Founding Member & Retired FF CR Charlotte , NC Registered: Oct '00	Date Posted: 6/6/04 1:00pm Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	Yeah, we all saw what happened to Tarkin too. (Go Luke!) What about killing after years of abuse by a spouse or partner? What about killing resulting from insanity or a diminished mental state? Killing after years of abuse is, IMHO, self-defense. Killing resulting from insanity--I'd have to see an example of a case you're talking about. Jeffrey Dahmer was considered insane too. That doesn't mean he doesn't deserve what he got. I thought I had made it clear in my post that I was talking about cold-blooded first-degree murder, not self-defense, not second-degree murder and not manslaughter. If I didn't, allow me to clarify that now. -----signature----- "A person should not believe in an -ism, a person should believe in himself." Ferris Bueller
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Branthoris Registered: Nov '02	Date Posted: 6/6/04 1:45pm Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	I accept that this is a Star Wars message board, despite the dilution of that theme over the past few years, but that does not require us to draw analogies with Star Wars from sunrise to sunset. DarthBud, I fail to see why making findings of guilty or not guilty less reliable will yield increased deterrence value. I think, rather, that it would be less of a deterrent, since more people who should have been found guilty will be acquitted. While the convictions of the innocent would be horrific, it's likely that even more people would be wrongly let off, since statistically, juries are more prone to acquittals than judges. Your proposal is misguided from start to finish. Cases "where the evidence is so flimsy that no reasonable jury could possibly have found the defendant guilty" are surely those where convictions should be set aside by appellate courts, since allowing unreasonable guilty verdicts to stand creates a great risk that miscarriages of justice will occur. anakin_girl, when you say "self-defense", do you mean reasonable force in self defence, or any action taken for the purpose of 'defending' oneself in one way or another? Killing after years of abuse is surely not reasonable force in self defence, but then if self-defence, however disproportionate, is excused, then it becomes acceptable to kill someone for petty theft. I don't know about your state, but in England there are two types of 'mental state' defence. The first, insanity, applies in relation to all crimes, and results in no conviction at all (although makes the defendant liable to indefinite detention in a mental hospital). The second, diminished responsibility, applies only in relation to murder, reducing the offence to manslaughter (the result of which being that a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment no longer applies). Tony Martin was a man who shot two burglars, one of which died. He escaped a sentence of life imprisonment for murder only on the basis of having diminished responsibility--a personality disorder brought on by years of living alone in a farmhouse. Self-defence did not apply because shooting an unarmed burglar is not "reasonable force". Going by your proposal, Martin should have been executed by now.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
anakin_girl Title: Founding Member & Retired FF CR Charlotte , NC Registered: Oct '00	Date Posted: 6/6/04 1:48pm Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	I hardly think abuse is the same as petty theft, so no, it's not acceptable to shoot someone over petty theft. Self-defense implies that the person's life is in danger. Defense of family implies that a family member's life is in danger. -----signature----- "A person should not believe in an -ism, a person should believe in himself." Ferris Bueller
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Cyprusg Registered: Nov '02	Date Posted: 6/6/04 2:47pm Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	Cyprusg, why does the presence of DNA evidence have anything to do with whether a person should be eligible for the death sentence? By your proposal, death would be permitted in the case of rape where semen from the defendant was found within a mile of the crime scene, but not where the accused was seen by a crowd of 100 people raping the victim in broad daylight. The word 'absurd' comes to mind. What the heck are you talking about? What does semen being found a mile from a crime scene have anything to do with anything? Read what I said I again... The word "absurd" does come to mind... You conclude that "prison sentences are a JOKE" on the basis of vague anecdotes about "rapists that got out of prison in less than 5 years". Perhaps if you posted the circumstances and details of the case to which you're referring, we could actually make an informed judgement. http://www.poe-news.com/stories.php?poeurlid=28343 Man sexually assaulted boy and got 25 month prison sentence. http://www.eagletribune.com/news/stories/20040422/FP_002.htm Man raped two boys 5 and 7, and it was his second conviction and he only got 7 years in prison. I could keep on going all day long, those were just the first two links that came up. Tell me that raping two young boys and getting only 7 years is justice? I'm having trouble finding state laws regarding rape, but when I do I'll get back to you. Your logic for removing weights, for its part, applies only to violent prisoners, not to anyone who happens to be sent to prison. And it's weak logic at that. Of course it's weak logic, how is anyone going to make the case that weights help somebody commit a crime? But it doesn't matter, it's a privilege that I don't think criminals should have "just in case". We might as well give them kick boxing lessons too. -----signature----- The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Branthoris Registered: Nov '02	Date Posted: 6/6/04 3:10pm Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	Cyprusg, if semen found a mile from the crime scene were DNA tested and introduced as evidence in a case, then that would, however irrelevant, make it a case where "DNA evidence was present" (a direct quotation from your post). The point is that there's nothing magical or special about DNA evidence that makes a capital conviction safer. What are you trying to use those two cases to illustrate? Two anecdotes in which seemingly over-lenient sentences were imposed isn't sufficient to draw conclusions about sentencing practices across the entire country (that they are a "JOKE", or anything else).
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Cyprusg Registered: Nov '02	Date Posted: 6/6/04 3:22pm Subject: RE: The State of Prisons in U.S.
	Cyprusg, if semen found a mile from the crime scene were DNA tested and introduced as evidence in a case, then that would, however irrelevant, make it a case where "DNA evidence was present" (a direct quotation from your post). The point is that there's nothing magical or special about DNA evidence that makes a capital conviction safer. But that's an absurd and unrealistic situation. Obviously I'm talking specifically about DNA evidence that links the suspect to the crime. That would mean blood evidence found under the victims finger nails, or semen found in the victim. DNA evidence wouldn't automatically mean a death sentence, but what it should mean is that the death sentence becomes allowed in a violent rape case where DNA evidence concludes without a shadow of a doubt the suspect commited the said crime. What are you trying to use those two cases to illustrate? Two anecdotes in which seemingly over-lenient sentences were imposed isn't sufficient to draw conclusions about sentencing practices across the entire country (that they are a "JOKE", or anything else). Of course not, but I think it's safe to say that you can't trust judges to make fair sentences in all cases. I could probably find hundreds and hundreds of cases where a judge has wrongly given a violent criminal a lenient sentence. Judges are human and make mistakes, but we shouldn't allow judges to make those mistakes by giving them the option for a lenient sentence like 5 years for a violent conviction. The judge in the above case shouldn't even have had the option to give only a 7 year sentence on raping TWO YOUNG BOYS. C'mon, that is ridiculous. Unfortunately for whatever reason I'm having troubles finding what the actual minimum sentence is on a rape conviction... shakes fist at google So it's kind of hard for me to make a valid argument without that information. (Damn I hate when I can't find information) -----signature----- The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 - Previous | Next | Reload