Second Rate Citizens

[Juan_Bottom]

Naw, what's happened is that penalties have grown and continuously encroached, while the crimes have remained the same. In the 1930s anyone who was a felon was also a convict, and they got that felony by seriously jeopardizing the public's safety. It's not a coincidence that the National Firearms Act happened at the same time prohibition was repealed. Felons were the rapists, murders, robbers, thugs, extortionists, and abusers that you're thinking that they are today.
But over time the penalties for lesser crimes grew, either as fund-raisers for states, or so governor douchebag could appear tough on crime. So now you have all these different distinctions for felons, and all these people who 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago would not be called "felon." Another problem is private prisons, which make get paid for each prisoner that they house. So they lobby state governments to send them more prisoners....
Generally speaking of Illinois, any crime that can be punished by a year of prison time or more can bag you a felony. And there are a lot of crimes that can get you a year in prison. Prison time is something lawyers like to use for leverage or bargaining. But in other states it's something that judges like to use to get them kickbacks from the private prison industry.

I'd be fine with all of it though if it wasn't automatically permanent for life. If there was just some way to expunge it from your record. You can't just give people felonys for stupid crimes and then expect them to always be productive members of society. Everywhere they go they can be legally discriminated against. And that will cause a lot of trouble, either because they grow bitter, because they're not eligible for services, cant rent a room, cant buy a house in the neighborhood, or because they can't find decent work.
Another example from Illinois, if you get 3 DUIs at any point in the course of your lifetime, that's an automatic Class 2 Felony. That's the same as manslaughter.
Maybe you deserve a felony for that, and I'm not saying that you don't. But manslaughter?

[Phatscotty]

Sounds like the government is way too big and has too many laws for every little thing, and the citizen is too small and rights are not respected much.

But yeah, when you commit crime and get caught, and you are entangled in the government system, it can really really really really really really suck.

Does anyone remember my post a few years back about what I needed to do, and how many days off work I had to take, and how many times I needed to drive downtown, and how many times I needed to call and fax, and how long I sat on hold, and how many times I got wrong information and went through the run around, just to get a signature from a government agency?

[PLAYER57832]

Sounds like the government is way too big and has too many laws for every little thing, and the citizen is too small and rights are not respected much.

Do you ever step outside your rhetoric to actually THINK?

The problem is that citizens keep demanding that leaders "do something" about crime. AND. of you were honest, you would put yourself firmly into that group. Any talk about easing up on crime and criminals meets with instant attack and derision from you.

Does anyone remember my post a few years back about what I needed to do, and how many days off work I had to take, and how many times I needed to drive downtown, and how many times I needed to call and fax, and how long I sat on hold, and how many times I got wrong information and went through the run around, just to get a signature from a government agency?

I do remember your repeated, constant demands that government be shrunk, taxes lowered.

Cause and effect, cause and effect!

[Woodruff]

Juan, do you think this could be the governments attempt at revoking the right to bear arms? By taking away more and more people's rights with frivolous convictions of felonies?

I don't see how this could be the case. Even though the United States' rate of conviction is extraordinarily high, it's still not remotely reaching the sort of critical mass that would be necessary for that to take place. There are, quite frankly, far easier ways to do it than that.

Naw, what's happened is that penalties have grown and continuously encroached, while the crimes have remained the same. In the 1930s anyone who was a felon was also a convict, and they got that felony by seriously jeopardizing the public's safety.

Exactly correct. This is what has happened.

[Woodruff]

Another problem is private prisons, which make get paid for each prisoner that they house. So they lobby state governments to send them more prisoners....

This is why the War on Drugs will never be allowed to end. It would kill the for-profit prison system that we now "enjoy".

[Woodruff]

Sounds like the government is way too big and has too many laws for every little thing, and the citizen is too small and rights are not respected much.

I disagree that it's a problem of "too many laws" or "the government is too big" in this case. Rather, it is a problem of injustice...the punishment no longer fits the crime.

[Funkyterrance]

Sounds like the government is way too big and has too many laws for every little thing, and the citizen is too small and rights are not respected much.

I disagree that it's a problem of "too many laws" or "the government is too big" in this case. Rather, it is a problem of injustice...the punishment no longer fits the crime.

I agree with both of you. The citizen is too small(perhaps of their own doing at this point) and the punishment no longer fits the crime.
I might however enhance Scotty's answer in that government may not be too big(as the population increases in size so must the government) but the government is becoming too powerful.

[Woodruff]

Sounds like the government is way too big and has too many laws for every little thing, and the citizen is too small and rights are not respected much.

I disagree that it's a problem of "too many laws" or "the government is too big" in this case. Rather, it is a problem of injustice...the punishment no longer fits the crime.

I agree with both of you. The citizen is too small(perhaps of their own doing at this point) and the punishment no longer fits the crime.
I might however enhance Scotty's answer in that government may not be too big(as the population increases in size so must the government) but the government is becoming too powerful.

I took that as what Phatscotty meant. I think by "big", he meant "having too much control". Correct me if I'm wrong on that, Phatscotty.

[Woodruff]

Another problem is private prisons, which make get paid for each prisoner that they house. So they lobby state governments to send them more prisoners....

This is why the War on Drugs will never be allowed to end. It would kill the for-profit prison system that we now "enjoy".

An excellent example:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 98147.html

[kentington]

Naw, what's happened is that penalties have grown and continuously encroached, while the crimes have remained the same. In the 1930s anyone who was a felon was also a convict, and they got that felony by seriously jeopardizing the public's safety. It's not a coincidence that the National Firearms Act happened at the same time prohibition was repealed. Felons were the rapists, murders, robbers, thugs, extortionists, and abusers that you're thinking that they are today.

I was being a little nutty with that statement.
But I am on board with the rest of your post. Felonies should be reserved for more dastardly crimes.
As far as the DUI goes I understand the three strikes felony on that and a permanent revoking of driver's license. Maybe there was no manslaughter, but that was three times he had a large chance of killing at least one person due to neglect and recklessness. Maybe not manslaughter but public endangerment.

[BigBallinStalin]

So, now that there's some agreement among y'all, surely y'all will select the politicians who will promote your favored policies, amirite?

[Woodruff]

So, now that there's some agreement among y'all, surely y'all will select the politicians who will promote your favored policies, amirite?

WE CAN'T LET THE OTHER SIDE BE ELECTED!!!!

[thegreekdog]

So, now that there's some agreement among y'all, surely y'all will select the politicians who will promote your favored policies, amirite?

WE CAN'T LET THE OTHER SIDE BE ELECTED!!!!

I think he was referring to the idea that there are more than two sides.

I mean, as long as Player and JB keep voting Democrat and PS and Night Strike keep voting Republican, we'll continue on this track.

[BigBallinStalin]

So, now that there's some agreement among y'all, surely y'all will select the politicians who will promote your favored policies, amirite?

WE CAN'T LET THE OTHER SIDE BE ELECTED!!!!

I think he was referring to the idea that there are more than two sides.

I mean, as long as Player and JB keep voting Democrat and PS and Night Strike keep voting Republican, we'll continue on this track. *(regardless of the debate and the preferred policies, which (a) are promised and/or aren't provided by politicians, and (b) are a small portion of the total preferred policies as advertised by the mainstream politicians.

Both of y'all express the same underlined sentiment.

In other words, even if we can come to some realm of 'public reason', I remain skeptical that through the political process we can get what we've agreed upon--in this particular case.

Not much matters until the ideological problem can be corrected through proper education (not just in school, but self-education through social processes--e.g. self-government, critical thinking, controlling for cognitive bias, etc.).

[Woodruff]

So, now that there's some agreement among y'all, surely y'all will select the politicians who will promote your favored policies, amirite?

WE CAN'T LET THE OTHER SIDE BE ELECTED!!!!

I think he was referring to the idea that there are more than two sides.

I mean, as long as Player and JB keep voting Democrat and PS and Night Strike keep voting Republican, we'll continue on this track.

That's exactly who I was pointing at.

[Phatscotty]

Sounds like the government is way too big and has too many laws for every little thing, and the citizen is too small and rights are not respected much.

Do you ever step outside your rhetoric to actually THINK?

The problem is that citizens keep demanding that leaders "do something" about crime. AND. of you were honest, you would put yourself firmly into that group. Any talk about easing up on crime and criminals meets with instant attack and derision from you.

Does anyone remember my post a few years back about what I needed to do, and how many days off work I had to take, and how many times I needed to drive downtown, and how many times I needed to call and fax, and how long I sat on hold, and how many times I got wrong information and went through the run around, just to get a signature from a government agency?

I do remember your repeated, constant demands that government be shrunk, taxes lowered.

Cause and effect, cause and effect!

wut? I agree that we should do something about crime. LOL! I think we differ in that you think the answer is grow the state/restrict liberties.

[Phatscotty]

So, now that there's some agreement among y'all, surely y'all will select the politicians who will promote your favored policies, amirite?

WE CAN'T LET THE OTHER SIDE BE ELECTED!!!!

I think he was referring to the idea that there are more than two sides.

I mean, as long as Player and JB keep voting Democrat and PS and Night Strike keep voting Republican, we'll continue on this track. *(regardless of the debate and the preferred policies, which (a) are promised and/or aren't provided by politicians, and (b) are a small portion of the total preferred policies as advertised by the mainstream politicians.

Both of y'all express the same underlined sentiment.

In other words, even if we can come to some realm of 'public reason', I remain skeptical that through the political process we can get what we've agreed upon--in this particular case.

Not much matters until the ideological problem can be corrected through proper education (not just in school, but self-education through social processes--e.g. self-government, critical thinking, controlling for cognitive bias, etc.).

I thought debate was the part where you try to persuade. I agree the problem is with education. As for being attacked or frowned upon for voting, we do what we can, hopefully those actions/inactions are trying to move us in a better direction, and not in a worse direction. Not every action/inaction taken has to have a be-all end-all action with immediate results, nor does that mean an action is worthless. We don't have control over everything. We have to do a bunch of little things in whatever areas we can to set the stage for bigger things later.

all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Do not allow evil to triumph. Do not do sit by and do nothing.

[Juan_Bottom]

The further you get up the political chain, the further away from Criminal's Rights reform you're gonna get. It's just the nature of national politics, and of the public.

[BigBallinStalin]

So, now that there's some agreement among y'all, surely y'all will select the politicians who will promote your favored policies, amirite?

WE CAN'T LET THE OTHER SIDE BE ELECTED!!!!

I think he was referring to the idea that there are more than two sides.

I mean, as long as Player and JB keep voting Democrat and PS and Night Strike keep voting Republican, we'll continue on this track. *(regardless of the debate and the preferred policies, which (a) are promised and/or aren't provided by politicians, and (b) are a small portion of the total preferred policies as advertised by the mainstream politicians.

Both of y'all express the same underlined sentiment.

In other words, even if we can come to some realm of 'public reason', I remain skeptical that through the political process we can get what we've agreed upon--in this particular case.

Not much matters until the ideological problem can be corrected through proper education (not just in school, but self-education through social processes--e.g. self-government, critical thinking, controlling for cognitive bias, etc.).

I thought debate was the part where you try to persuade. I agree the problem is with education. As for being attacked or frowned upon for voting, we do what we can, hopefully those actions/inactions are trying to move us in a better direction, and not in a worse direction. Not every action/inaction taken has to have a be-all end-all action with immediate results, nor does that mean an action is worthless. We don't have control over everything. We have to do a bunch of little things in whatever areas we can to set the stage for bigger things later.

all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Do not allow evil to triumph. Do not do sit by and do nothing.

1. There is a difference between debate and contributing to the problem of the current political process.

2. You think that your small action of voting actually changes things. This is amusing. You're merely reinforcing the status quo.

You're "doing something" doesn't help anybody; you further the problem.

[Phatscotty]

voting is the problem? or is it just my vote?

we'll see

[BigBallinStalin]

voting is the problem? or is it just my vote?

we'll see

Have at your way, Mr. Ideologue. It's a narrow vision of reality, but perhaps that's all you can take.

[thegreekdog]

This thread is a great example of the problem with the political system and the willful (at times) ignorance of people. JB and PS are both ostensibly in favor of not taking away certain rights (or perhaps all rights) from ex-convicts. What politician or political group is most likely to also be in favor of not taking away certain rights (or perhaps all rights) from ex-convicts? What politicians or political groups do JB and PS identify with or vote for?

We can make the educated assumption that JB voted Demorat and PS voted Republican. Neither of those political parties has demonstrated an interest in allowing ex-convincts to retain rights. So what gives?

[Metsfanmax]

voting is the problem? or is it just my vote?

we'll see

Have at your way, Mr. Ideologue. It's a narrow vision of reality, but perhaps that's all you can take.

So, combining this and the Obamacare thread, I can summarize BBS' position as the following:

"Do not be narrow minded. You can only be open minded by being informed, like me."

[AndyDufresne]

voting is the problem? or is it just my vote?

we'll see

Have at your way, Mr. Ideologue. It's a narrow vision of reality, but perhaps that's all you can take.

So, combining this and the Obamacare thread, I can summarize BBS' position as the following:

"Do not be narrow minded. You can only be open minded by being informed, like me."

BBS 2016

Be alarmed! Get emotional!!1

--Andy

[BigBallinStalin]

voting is the problem? or is it just my vote?

we'll see

Have at your way, Mr. Ideologue. It's a narrow vision of reality, but perhaps that's all you can take.

So, combining this and the Obamacare thread, I can summarize BBS' position as the following:

"Do not be narrow minded. You can only be open minded by being informed, like me."

Ha, casual trolling.