US prison population hits 2 million.

[Warik]

Referring to the right to a trial by jury as a "legal technicality" is bizarre. It's straight out of the Constitution.

Red herring alert. I'm asking YOU.

I'm not asking you if you were convicted of a crime. I'm asking you if you committed a crime. There are only two possible answers: "yes" or "no." Conviction or acquital does not change that. I understand that for legal reasons, you may not be inclined to answer. I will accept "stop being a little kid who's never been to jail" as a "yes I clearly committed a crime."

Anyway: The charge is "driving under the Influence", not "driving with a BAC above .08". Free law note for you: There are states where being above .08 is itself a crime. Florida is not one of them.

uh, Florida's legal limit is 0.08. The fact is that you are presenting a mountain of evidence to suggest that you weren't driving under the influence, but none of which pertain to cold hard facts. The machine "could" have been inaccurate, you "could" have driven home just fine.

You know what the problem is? Someone whose test WASN'T inaccurate and who COULD NOT have driven home COULD get off on the same defense on which you're going to get off, and that's a problem.

Trial by jury is to protect the innocent, not the guilty bubba.

You said I could have killed someone. So can you when you drive to the store. Your response above is a non-sequitur.

Fair enough. Ok - I could have killed someone when I went to the store... and you could have killed someone when you were driving that night. However, you're not in trouble simply for the fact that you could have killed someone; you're in trouble because of the fact that you performed an action prior to starting your car that is legally defined as an action that increases your chances of killing someone while driving... i.e. drinking alcohol to a point where your BAC equals or exceeds 0.08. That's why your "could have killed someone" is a crime and mine is not.

For the DA to decide. Intent would play a big role. What does that have to do with anything?

Who, besides me, would know for a fact whether I intended to kill the guy or not? If I really did not intend to kill him, then your legal system would lock me up. If I really did intend to kill him, and I had the lawyer who's going to get you off, then I would go free. Does that seem right to you?

Tell it to a legislator.

Tell it to a legislator.

Not trying to change the world here - just trying to beat you in an argument to kill some time.

You can't incarcerate everyopne convicted of a crime forever. Convicted criminals pay their debt to society and then what?

Then they are put on a prison starship and hurled into the Sun. j/k

I don't think people should be incarcerated forever. The remainder of their natural lives should be sufficient.

Really, I don't know, but frankly a lot of the people who are convicted of a real crime where there is a real victim should be incarcerated for much longer than they typically are.

I'll agree to the death penalty for murder convictions with a standard of absolute certainty: videotape, DNA etc.

Has an innocent man ever be put to death? If so, who? (not a counterpoint... just asking out of curiousity).

Why can't the cops stop the crime, if they know where it is going to happen?

Because they don't know EXACTLY where it is going to happen. They just know statistically where it is more likely to happen. If you want water you come to Earth, not the moon. If you want crime, you go to a poor neighborhood, not the Gables.

Seems to me like the police aren't making a difference in either neighborhood. If they don't stop crime in poor areas, and there is so little in rich areas, why have cops at all, except to jail the poor people away?

Eventually the only poor people left will be the one's trying to make something of themselves. Sounds like a noble goal to me.

COPS ARE THE WAY THAT THE STATE DEALS WITH POOR PEOPLE, SINCE THEY ARE THE MOST LIKELY TOENGAGE IN VIOLENT REVOLUTION AND KICK OUT THOSE IN POWER. IT GOES ABOUT LIKE THIS:

KEEP THE RICH WEALTHY.

PLACATE THE MIDDLE CLASS WITH RHETORIC, PROPAGANDA, THE TWO PARTY "BLAME THE OTEHR GUY" SYSTEM, TV, AND DREAMS OF WEALTH THEY CAN NEVER HAVE. (KEEPS THEM SLAVING AWAY UNTIL RETIREMENT AT 65)

JAIL THE POOR.

THE AMERICAN WAY

yawn... I've already addressed this and you've ignored my point completely.

Let's try again very slowly.

Police prey on the poor, right? But in order to prey on the poor, the poor must commit crimes, right? So when a poor person commits a crime, the police show up and haul him away, right?

NOW

Since there is no difference between a poor person and a middle-class or rich person, then rich neighborhoods should be rampant with crime because there are no police there to stop right, right?

But wait! Middle-class + Rich neighborhoods are NOT rampant with crime. POOR neighborhoods are. But aren't rich people and poor people the same? Aren't poor people just innocent victims who are preyed on by police? Sorry - you'll have to do better than that.

They are in jail because they committed a crime. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me. If people in rich neighborhoods committed so many crimes, they'd either be in jail or in a criminal warzone. Neither is the case.

Face it - the poor commit more crimes than the rich.

 

[KAYNE]

People get sent to prison for the sorriest of things.

Get a speeding ticket? Don't pay it? Warrant goes out and YOU go to jail buddy.

You're 18 and she's 16? You go to jail buddy.

Your work visa expired? You didn't leave voluntarily? You go to jail buddy.

You make some software cd copies for a friend. Microsoft finds out. You go to jail buddy.

Stop paying child support cuz the bitch took the kids and won't let you see them. You go to jail buddy.

and so on and so on. No it's not all drug users and violent criminals. Maybe 45% max i would bet would comprise of those.

-= nav =-

THIS IS BY FAR YOUR BEST POST EVER.

 

[KAYNE]

Broly.... you, and many others on this board, think that you are superior to others simply b/c of the diameter of your arms so don't be sounding all righteous on Fonz.

If one had to choose a yardstick - brains or brawn - then brains is a better one to go with.

ON WHAT DO YOU BASE THIS LUDICROUS STATEMENT??? VERY RARELY DO YOU EVER HER ME POSTING ANYTHING ABOUT ME THAT PERTAINS TO HOW BIG OR SMALL I AM. HOW MUCH I BENCH OR SQUAT, ETC., ETC.

YOUR STATEMENT DOES NOTHING MORE THAN FURTHER SUPPORT THE TYPICAL STEREOTYPE THAT A PERSON WHO IS INTO THINGS SUCH AS FITNESS OR FOOTBALL IS DUMB AS A ROCK. I ALSO GET THE IMPRESSION YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT I AM NOT VERY INTELLIGENT. I GUESS IF YOU COMPARE ME TO SOMEONE LIKE EINSTEIN, THEN SURE.....I'M NOT VERY INTELLIGENT.

YOU HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT MY INTELLIGENCE (WHICH IS ABOVE AVERAGE BTW) SO I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT YOU BASE YOUR ASSUMPTION ON.

 

[KAYNE]

True.
I was limiting my comparison to Kayne (brawn) and Fonz (brain).

YEAH, I'M SO STUPID I MAKE 4.0'S SCHOOL EVEN THOUGH I'M EXTREMELY LAZY WHEN IT COMES TO STUDYING AND SCHOOL WORK.
___________________________________________________


FONZ
YOU WERE SPEAKING OF SOMEONE BEING MORE EXPERIENCED THAN ANOTHER. EXPERIENCED IN WHAT? I'M SURE YOU ARE MORE EXPERIENCED IN CERTAIN THINGS THAN I AM. BUT I'M ALSO QUITE POSITIVE THAT I'M MORE EXPERIENCED THAN YOU IN NUMEROUS THINGS AS WELL. SO WHO IS THE BETTER PERSON?

 

[KAYNE]

Babydoc is not in my field. But I do repect his education. He's just very colourful w/ his insults.

"Good" Person? What the hell are you talking about?

We aren't mormons. We are talking about "Better" not "good".

Please tell me you're not this naive.

If there weren't BETTER people than you....then how do you measure your success...in your own socio/economic/academic world?

There is no such things as Equality in life. Its a constant struggle to see who can win. It really is that simple. Civility is the only thying that keeps everything from crumbling down.

Fonz

WHEN YOU SAY YOU ARE A BETTER PERSON THAN SOMEONE ITS THE SAME AS SAYING THAT PERSON ISNT AS GOOD A PERSON AS YOU. APPLES AND ORANGES. YOUR CRITERIA ON WHAT MAKES A PERSON BETTER THAN ANOTHER IS SERIOUSLY FLAWED AND POMPOUS ON YOUR PART. NOONE IS "BETTER" THAN ANYONE (PROVIDING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NORMAL PEOPLE AND NOT PEOPLE LIKE MURDERERS, ETC. SO DONT EVEN BRING THAT UP).

BY YOUR LOGIC, YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT A PERSON WITHOUT THE SAME CREDENTIALS (SO TO SPEAK) AS YOU ISNT AS GOOD A PERSON AS YOU I.E....YOU ARE BETTER THAN THEM AS PERSON.

YOU EQUATE SUCCESS AND EDUCATION TO WHETHER SOMEONE IS AS GOOD AS YOU OR NOT. THATS STUPID. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.






KAYNE

 

[DcupSheepNipples]

Enough of this human speak! I am your Supreme Being! Bow down to your master! This discussion is over! Now sacrifice yourself for me! Or I will destroy your Bubble Universe with a Quantum Vortex!

 

[plornive]

WHEN YOU SAY YOU ARE A BETTER PERSON THAN SOMEONE ITS THE SAME AS SAYING THAT PERSON ISNT AS GOOD A PERSON AS YOU. APPLES AND ORANGES. YOUR CRITERIA ON WHAT MAKES A PERSON BETTER THAN ANOTHER IS SERIOUSLY FLAWED AND POMPOUS ON YOUR PART. NOONE IS "BETTER" THAN ANYONE (PROVIDING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NORMAL PEOPLE AND NOT PEOPLE LIKE MURDERERS, ETC. SO DONT EVEN BRING THAT UP).

BY YOUR LOGIC, YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT A PERSON WITHOUT THE SAME CREDENTIALS (SO TO SPEAK) AS YOU ISNT AS GOOD A PERSON AS YOU I.E....YOU ARE BETTER THAN THEM AS PERSON.

YOU EQUATE SUCCESS AND EDUCATION TO WHETHER SOMEONE IS AS GOOD AS YOU OR NOT. THATS STUPID. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.






KAYNE

Let me interject. Defining "goodness", or who is better, doesn't make much sense. People are too complex to quantify them with a scalar (single dimensional) value.

The fact that Fonz chooses to recognize one definition and the fact that his definition is based largely education reveal a lot about his personality.

 

[KAYNE]

The fact that Fonz chooses to recognize one definition and the fact that his definition is based largely education reveal a lot about his personality.

YOU MEAN IT REVEALS THINGS LIKE VANITY, NARCISSISM, AND SELF-ADMIRATION. STUFF LIKE THAT RIGHT!




KAYNE

 

[gwl9dta4]

Kayne is arrogant, loudmouthed, ignorant and an insecure moron. He is best ignored. He's so deeply bothered by Fonz's statement that he just can't let it go, and that is a mark of a true idiot. His inability to move on, bashing Fonz about his statements and continually positng about it over and over show the low intellect and insecurity of his persona. Kinda like a hood rat. Busting the sag Kayne? Talk about a ghetto mentality and temperament. On ignore you go.

 

[Fonz]

YOU MEAN IT REVEALS THINGS LIKE VANITY, NARCISSISM, AND SELF-ADMIRATION. STUFF LIKE THAT RIGHT!




KAYNE

Anyways,

#1

Vanity?

Everybody is vain. If i were not vain I would not lift weights.
Anybody who says they do not lift weights in order to be more physcially pleasing to the opposite sex is just downright lying.
Sure, there are different degrees of vanity.....but IMO I'm more on the left side of the vanity spectrum than most people.

#2

Narcissm?

You have to stop trying to post big words if you don't understand their meaning.

Narcisstic = Thinks he's better than everybody else.

There are plenty more people better than me. Sorry.

#3 Self-admiration?

Dumbest combination of words I have seen in quite some time. Most people call it an ego. Everybody has it. Problem is until you "do the work"(Degree, training, job, whatever).........not much ego to talk about.

Funny how its the people who haven't "done the work" that try to tell some people how big of an ego they have.

Fonz