The Bundy family, who used armed force to take over a federally controlled wildlife refuge and destroyed several pieces of property, in an organized march of sedition against the US government, to the point that police fired at them when they left the building, killing one...
Were acquitted by a jury of all charges.
This comes less than a year after Stanford rapist Brock Turner served less than three months for raping a student on campus, and Ethan Couch (the affluenza teen) was arrested in Mexico for violating parole.
Obviously, something is borked in the system when stuff like this happens. So what are your suggestions for fixing the American judicial system, or does it need fixing?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
I don't think it's the worst thing in the world if protesters get acquitted, even if I'm not really on board with what they're protesting for or how they went about it. I'd rather have that than see protesters getting lengthy prison sentences. I don't really see this as similar to the Turner and Couch cases.
I don't think it's the worst thing in the world if protesters get acquitted, even if I'm not really on board with what they're protesting for or how they went about it. I'd rather have that than see protesters getting lengthy prison sentences. I don't really see this as similar to the Turner and Couch cases.
Except that it entirely sends a message that "you are allowed to take control of government buildings, threaten the entire US government, advise others in treason, all with the threats of violence and a variety of firearms, and that is totally okay."
This wasn't a peaceful protest. This was an extremely dangerous armed militia group seizing a building by force. And they just got off with absolutely zero consequences.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
Except that it entirely sends a message that "you are allowed to take control of government buildings, threaten the entire US government, advise others in treason, all with the threats of violence and a variety of firearms, and that is totally okay."
This wasn't a peaceful protest. This was an extremely dangerous armed militia group seizing a building by force. And they just got off with absolutely zero consequences.
Okay, but at the same time, it was an unoccupied building for a wildlife refuge in rural Oregon. Treason seems like a strong word for that.
I'm not saying I would have voted to acquit if I were on the jury, but this is a case where I'm not that upset if the jury was too lenient. It's important that the right to protest be protected, and I'm willing to have a few people be acquitted even if they're guilty to protect that right.
Except that it entirely sends a message that "you are allowed to take control of government buildings, threaten the entire US government, advise others in treason, all with the threats of violence and a variety of firearms, and that is totally okay."
This wasn't a peaceful protest. This was an extremely dangerous armed militia group seizing a building by force. And they just got off with absolutely zero consequences.
Zero consequences?
Zero consequences would have been if they were never even charged with a crime to begin with.
They were charged with several crimes. They (I presume) were judged by impartial jurors who took all available evidence and determined that they weren't guilty of said charges.
Unless evidence shows up that-
1- The jurors were not impartial.
2- The defense did something illegal and so skewed the trial in their favor.
then this is the best you can do.
You can't go about saying the system needs to change just because it doesn't do things in your favor.
That's the sort of ***** that Trump claims he wants to do.
I should point out that Brock Turner did not get off scot-free. He was forced to register as a sexual offender for life. You can make the argument that is far worse than serving only a few months in jail. Being a registered sex offender is society's equivalent of a scarlet letter and completely ruins your life in so many ways imaginable.
I should point out that Brock Turner did not get off scot-free. He was forced to register as a sexual offender for life. You can make the argument that is far worse than serving only a few months in jail. Being a registered sex offender is society's equivalent of a scarlet letter and completely ruins your life in so many ways imaginable.
At this point, I don't even understand the purpose behind our system of punishment.
Is it meant to deliver justice for the victims by punishing the criminal? Is it meant to be rehabilitation?
The Bundy family, who used armed force to take over a federally controlled wildlife refuge and destroyed several pieces of property, in an organized march of sedition against the US government, to the point that police fired at them when they left the building, killing one...
Were acquitted by a jury of all charges.
This comes less than a year after Stanford rapist Brock Turner served less than three months for raping a student on campus, and Ethan Couch (the affluenza teen) was arrested in Mexico for violating parole.
These events had entirely unrelated causes in the system. The Bundy decision was made by a jury, the Turner decision was made by a judge, and Couch's Mexican vacation was the fault of his mother and, I guess if you squint a little, his parole officer for not keeping close enough tabs on him.
Obviously, something is borked in the system when stuff like this happens.
Three cases, with three different (and arguable) failure points. Out of how many cases the American justice systems (note plural) handle each year? Holy selection bias, Batman.
Except that it entirely sends a message that "you are allowed to take control of government buildings, threaten the entire US government, advise others in treason, all with the threats of violence and a variety of firearms, and that is totally okay."
Sez you. A random person following the case through the news who has probably never been within a hundred miles of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. I don't say this as condemnation per se: I fit exactly the same description. But seriously -- is your proposed fix simply that you personally sit as judge and jury on every case? Because you don't seem to be getting at any point more specific than "Something happened and I don't like it."
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The Bundy family, who used armed force to take over a federally controlled wildlife refuge and destroyed several pieces of property, in an organized march of sedition against the US government, to the point that police fired at them when they left the building, killing one...
Were acquitted by a jury of all charges.
This comes less than a year after Stanford rapist Brock Turner served less than three months for raping a student on campus, and Ethan Couch (the affluenza teen) was arrested in Mexico for violating parole.
These events had entirely unrelated causes in the system. The Bundy decision was made by a jury, the Turner decision was made by a judge, and Couch's Mexican vacation was the fault of his mother and, I guess if you squint a little, his parole officer for not keeping close enough tabs on him.
Obviously, something is borked in the system when stuff like this happens.
Three cases, with three different (and arguable) failure points. Out of how many cases the American justice systems (note plural) handle each year? Holy selection bias, Batman.
Except that it entirely sends a message that "you are allowed to take control of government buildings, threaten the entire US government, advise others in treason, all with the threats of violence and a variety of firearms, and that is totally okay."
Sez you. A random person following the case through the news who has probably never been within a hundred miles of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. I don't say this as condemnation per se: I fit exactly the same description. But seriously -- is your proposed fix simply that you personally sit as judge and jury on every case? Because you don't seem to be getting at any point more specific than "Something happened and I don't like it."
"One executed innocent person is one too many. One guilty man walking free due to the failure of the system is one too many."
All three reflect the issue that the rules for the common man, and the rules for those with money are completely different in judicial systems. The Turners, the Couchs and the Bundys had enough money to throw at a trial to make any legal issue go away.
Some have tried to frame the three instances as race related, but I think it is simply money related. There are hundreds of cases in the system where people with money escaped with barely a punishment simply because they could afford to pay a good lawyer to drag things out until the prosecutor will just settle for some minor charge. Meanwhile, if you don't have money, your public defender will not have nearly the same resources or ability to manipulate the proceedings in such a way.
That's what I would like to see changed. Make legal representation equal for all parties, not this "separate but equal" bullcrap we deal with now.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
I should point out that Brock Turner did not get off scot-free. He was forced to register as a sexual offender for life. You can make the argument that is far worse than serving only a few months in jail. Being a registered sex offender is society's equivalent of a scarlet letter and completely ruins your life in so many ways imaginable.
At this point, I don't even understand the purpose behind our system of punishment.
Is it meant to deliver justice for the victims by punishing the criminal? Is it meant to be rehabilitation?
Our system is medieval in nature: assign massive sentences to make people scared of committing crimes.
But since the entire purpose is punishment, not rehabilitation, a large percentage of prisoners get released from jail, have no ability to get a job or an apartment because of a felony conviction, so they turn back to crime in order to survive.
Honestly, if the purpose of the system is to punish criminals long after they have been released from jail, then the US needs to just switch to mandatory executions for major crimes. Saves money, frees up prison space, and prevents them from committing crimes in the future. Yes, this is barbaric, cruel, and inhumane, but so is our system of punishment.
I understand the purpose behind the sex offender registry, but an automatic DQ from even things like minimum wage jobs and apartments is going too far. If you're going to make it nearly impossible to live once they get out of jail, why have them leave jail in the first place.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Level 1 Judge
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
You don't call "dying to removal" if the removal is more expensive in resources than the creature. If you have to spend BG (Abrupt Decay), or W + basic land (PtE) to remove a 1G, that is not "dying to removal". Strictly speaking Goyf dies to removal, but actually your removal is dying to Goyf.
Our system is medieval in nature: assign massive sentences to make people scared of committing crimes.
Trade unions are also medieval in nature, but that doesn't mean they're bad things. Lots of good came out of the Middle Ages. Not that it's really relevant, as this sentence is simply untrue. If anything, our system is Early Modern in nature.
But since the entire purpose is punishment, not rehabilitation...
Wait. You literally just said that the entire purpose was deterrence. Deterrence is not the same thing as punishment. So which is it? And beyond punishment, rehabilitation, and deterrence, I can think of two more purposes for the penal system just off the the top of my head -- restitution and restoration of order -- and I'm a total layman in the field of penology myself. So I think it's safe to say that the subject is a little more complicated than the picture you're painting with your historically chauvinistic sweeping generalizations.
I should point out that Brock Turner did not get off scot-free. He was forced to register as a sexual offender for life. You can make the argument that is far worse than serving only a few months in jail. Being a registered sex offender is society's equivalent of a scarlet letter and completely ruins your life in so many ways imaginable.
At this point, I don't even understand the purpose behind our system of punishment.
Is it meant to deliver justice for the victims by punishing the criminal? Is it meant to be rehabilitation?
Our system is medieval in nature: assign massive sentences to make people scared of committing crimes.
But since the entire purpose is punishment, not rehabilitation, a large percentage of prisoners get released from jail, have no ability to get a job or an apartment because of a felony conviction, so they turn back to crime in order to survive.
Honestly, if the purpose of the system is to punish criminals long after they have been released from jail, then the US needs to just switch to mandatory executions for major crimes. Saves money, frees up prison space, and prevents them from committing crimes in the future. Yes, this is barbaric, cruel, and inhumane, but so is our system of punishment.
I understand the purpose behind the sex offender registry, but an automatic DQ from even things like minimum wage jobs and apartments is going too far. If you're going to make it nearly impossible to live once they get out of jail, why have them leave jail in the first place.
Start with Jeremy Bentham and the movement surround those reforms and move into people like Jane Adams' autobiography. You're really going to have to get into some history of jail reform by reading about the history of a jail. There's a lot of things going on in here that are really complicated and take time to understand an institution.
Right now the issue in the US is moving away from a simple question: How much punishment is necessary to serve as a deterrent for crime?
But we also have to ask ourselves what makes people happy and what makes them thrive. So this is not just research but also practice into creating lifestyle choices, ease of access to well paying jobs, and so forth that are offered up.
Jail->Transition Period->Full time working citizen
That's the ideal and what we need to move towards. We have the statistics, the sciences, and so on. It's really about implementation.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life is a beautiful engineer, yet a brutal scientist.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/28/us/bundy-brothers-acquitted-in-takeover-of-oregon-wildlife-refuge.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur
The Bundy family, who used armed force to take over a federally controlled wildlife refuge and destroyed several pieces of property, in an organized march of sedition against the US government, to the point that police fired at them when they left the building, killing one...
Were acquitted by a jury of all charges.
This comes less than a year after Stanford rapist Brock Turner served less than three months for raping a student on campus, and Ethan Couch (the affluenza teen) was arrested in Mexico for violating parole.
Obviously, something is borked in the system when stuff like this happens. So what are your suggestions for fixing the American judicial system, or does it need fixing?
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Except that it entirely sends a message that "you are allowed to take control of government buildings, threaten the entire US government, advise others in treason, all with the threats of violence and a variety of firearms, and that is totally okay."
This wasn't a peaceful protest. This was an extremely dangerous armed militia group seizing a building by force. And they just got off with absolutely zero consequences.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Okay, but at the same time, it was an unoccupied building for a wildlife refuge in rural Oregon. Treason seems like a strong word for that.
I'm not saying I would have voted to acquit if I were on the jury, but this is a case where I'm not that upset if the jury was too lenient. It's important that the right to protest be protected, and I'm willing to have a few people be acquitted even if they're guilty to protect that right.
Zero consequences?
Zero consequences would have been if they were never even charged with a crime to begin with.
They were charged with several crimes. They (I presume) were judged by impartial jurors who took all available evidence and determined that they weren't guilty of said charges.
Unless evidence shows up that-
1- The jurors were not impartial.
2- The defense did something illegal and so skewed the trial in their favor.
then this is the best you can do.
You can't go about saying the system needs to change just because it doesn't do things in your favor.
That's the sort of ***** that Trump claims he wants to do.
Don't be like Trump.
At this point, I don't even understand the purpose behind our system of punishment.
Is it meant to deliver justice for the victims by punishing the criminal? Is it meant to be rehabilitation?
So what exactly do you want to revamp?
Three cases, with three different (and arguable) failure points. Out of how many cases the American justice systems (note plural) handle each year? Holy selection bias, Batman.
Sez you. A random person following the case through the news who has probably never been within a hundred miles of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. I don't say this as condemnation per se: I fit exactly the same description. But seriously -- is your proposed fix simply that you personally sit as judge and jury on every case? Because you don't seem to be getting at any point more specific than "Something happened and I don't like it."
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
"One executed innocent person is one too many. One guilty man walking free due to the failure of the system is one too many."
All three reflect the issue that the rules for the common man, and the rules for those with money are completely different in judicial systems. The Turners, the Couchs and the Bundys had enough money to throw at a trial to make any legal issue go away.
Some have tried to frame the three instances as race related, but I think it is simply money related. There are hundreds of cases in the system where people with money escaped with barely a punishment simply because they could afford to pay a good lawyer to drag things out until the prosecutor will just settle for some minor charge. Meanwhile, if you don't have money, your public defender will not have nearly the same resources or ability to manipulate the proceedings in such a way.
That's what I would like to see changed. Make legal representation equal for all parties, not this "separate but equal" bullcrap we deal with now.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Our system is medieval in nature: assign massive sentences to make people scared of committing crimes.
But since the entire purpose is punishment, not rehabilitation, a large percentage of prisoners get released from jail, have no ability to get a job or an apartment because of a felony conviction, so they turn back to crime in order to survive.
Honestly, if the purpose of the system is to punish criminals long after they have been released from jail, then the US needs to just switch to mandatory executions for major crimes. Saves money, frees up prison space, and prevents them from committing crimes in the future. Yes, this is barbaric, cruel, and inhumane, but so is our system of punishment.
I understand the purpose behind the sex offender registry, but an automatic DQ from even things like minimum wage jobs and apartments is going too far. If you're going to make it nearly impossible to live once they get out of jail, why have them leave jail in the first place.
"I hope to have such a death... lying in triumph atop the broken bodies of those who slew me..."
Expand on how you would accomplish this.
Trade unions are also medieval in nature, but that doesn't mean they're bad things. Lots of good came out of the Middle Ages. Not that it's really relevant, as this sentence is simply untrue. If anything, our system is Early Modern in nature.
Wait. You literally just said that the entire purpose was deterrence. Deterrence is not the same thing as punishment. So which is it? And beyond punishment, rehabilitation, and deterrence, I can think of two more purposes for the penal system just off the the top of my head -- restitution and restoration of order -- and I'm a total layman in the field of penology myself. So I think it's safe to say that the subject is a little more complicated than the picture you're painting with your historically chauvinistic sweeping generalizations.
"Barbaric"? Now you're being outright racist.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Start with Jeremy Bentham and the movement surround those reforms and move into people like Jane Adams' autobiography. You're really going to have to get into some history of jail reform by reading about the history of a jail. There's a lot of things going on in here that are really complicated and take time to understand an institution.
Right now the issue in the US is moving away from a simple question: How much punishment is necessary to serve as a deterrent for crime?
But we also have to ask ourselves what makes people happy and what makes them thrive. So this is not just research but also practice into creating lifestyle choices, ease of access to well paying jobs, and so forth that are offered up.
Jail->Transition Period->Full time working citizen
That's the ideal and what we need to move towards. We have the statistics, the sciences, and so on. It's really about implementation.
Modern
Commander
Cube
<a href="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/the-cube-forum/cube-lists/588020-unpowered-themed-enchantment-an-enchanted-evening">An Enchanted Evening Cube </a>