Police brutality and police reform (US)
couple links. im sure you can find others. the video is essentially showing the killing so be advised.
Minneapolis police were called to a scene involving a possibly bad check at a grocery store. police say he was resisting arrest. one officer is shown to kneel with full body weight on Floyds neck, while Floyd tells the officer he cant breathe, the officer continues to suffocate Floyd until he appears to become unconscious and Floyd dies either on the way to hospital/or at hospital depending on the reports.
police initially recorded the event as "suspect had medical distress".
this is one of those events where i believe that every single officer at the scene should be fired at the minimum for allowing Floyd to be killed in their presence and obviously the officer killing floyd to be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible. i have not looked up the minnesota murder statutes but in my jurisdiction this would seem to be Murder 2, imo which is the "depraved mind" willful disregard for human life non premeditation version.
i dont know if there will be much discussion on this one as it appears fairly cut and dry that this was an absolute unnecessary killing over some groceries in a depression. but i thought it deserved a thread.
If you make it legal you can regulate it's production, sale and consumption like we do for legal substances. That means far far far less deaths (linked to fentanyl ending up mixing with other substances). It also means you can treat addiction properly with medical knowledge for everyone who suffers from it.
It also means it's far cheaper so people don't steal to buy, nor kill to control the ground to sell it.
It also means you can help peopl
Agreed. The lessons of the prohibition experiment/debacle have not been learnt at all.
Do you see the situation in El Salvador as the same as the situation in the USA?
Do you think such measures would also be met with such high approval percentages in the USA?
The suspension of the rule of law to fix "emergencies" should be something discussed only after everything legal has be tried with all available resources, and only if the emergency is really exceptional.
Neither conditions apply to the US by far, both were reasonably true for El Salvador (and the rule of law in place before the suspension wasn't a first world one to begin with, it's not like they lost actual freedoms in the sense we discuss them in the west).
The US already has draconian sentencing laws and they haven't proved to be a deterrent to crime. What do you propose? Putting together vigilante groups to shoot minor drug dealers in the streets a la Duterte?
I think you are completly mistaken here btw.
This is just one of a gazillion cases, but the idea is that you are found guilty of sexual assaulting teens and the minimum sentence isn't at least 10y, you can't call the system "draconian" tbh
Do you see the situation in El Salvador as the same as the situation in the USA?
Do you think such measures would also be met with similarly high approval percentages in the USA?
Currently no El Salvador as it relates to homicides but if you look at the deaths from Fentanyl it’s scary. We’re seeing more and more of these gangs from Mexico and Central America setting up larger controls in the USA .
Though let’s be clear in El Salvador the rats give away the folks that they need to jail
I think you are completly mistaken here btw.
This is just one of a gazillion cases, but the idea is that you are found guilty of sexual assaulting teens and the minimum sentence isn't at least 10y, you can't call the system "draconian" tbh
Draconian for some crimes, not for all.
It's definitely not a list - the militia clause gives the reason the right to bear arms was deemed necessary.
It can certainly be interpreted various ways, but IMO it's clear that weapons were expected to be regulated.
When it was written, "regulated" meant in proper working order - such as a well regulated clock. Whether the amendment gives the rights to the state militias or to individuals is the question.
That's a pretty big aside.
But aside from that, prosecutors in the US love to overcharge to try and get a defendant to plead out. Let's say you steal a cheque book and write 5 cheques to the tune of 1000 dollars. You won't get charged for stealing 1000 dollars. You'll get one count per cheque, with the risk of the sentences running consecutive if you take it to trial. Same for selling drugs, they can charge each individual sale as a separate count. And don't get me started on "conspiracy". Basically, any crime where more than one person is involved, they charge you with the crime and also with conspiracy to commit that crime, as separate counts. And your favourite subject, guns. In the federal system, carrying a firearm during the commission of a felony carries a minimim mandatory (meaning it's not up to the judge) 5 year sentence enhancement. A second offense carries a minimum mandatory 25 year sentence enhancement. It's called stacked 924c's, look it up. You have people doing 25+ years for selling a few dime bags of crack with a gun in their pocket.
I posted out a response to you d2 but I didn't actually post it or something in regards to you claiming that dems are lenient on crime. The gist is that dem politicians have been very outspoken on where they are on cash bail, reducing sentences, decriminalizing some crimes, BLM riots and defunding the police. I think this is going to be a problem for whoever the dem nominee as I think trump is going to hammer them with claims of soft on crime.
Also, if someone steals and writes 5 bad checks off someone else account why shouldn't that be treated as 5 different crimes? If you murder 5 people you are charged with 5 murders.
I posted out a response to you d2 but I didn't actually post it or something in regards to you claiming that dems are lenient on crime. The gist is that dem politicians have been very outspoken on where they are on cash bail, reducing sentences, decriminalizing some crimes, BLM riots and defunding the police. I think this is going to be a problem for whoever the dem nominee as I think trump is going to hammer them with claims of soft on cri
What's the difference between writing 5 checks for 200 dollars each and writing one check for 1000 dollars? Same crime, same amount, different possible sentences. Up to 5x in this hypothetical.
Oh wait, the junkie writing 5 checks was engaging in a "continuing criminal enterprise". Let's tack on another 20 years for that, for good measure. He'll be coming out on a walking stick or in a box.
Anyone who thinks that sentencing laws and/or practices in the US are not draconian is either dissembling (bahbah) or not sufficiently informed (Luciom).
I posted out a response to you d2 but I didn't actually post it or something in regards to you claiming that dems are lenient on crime. The gist is that dem politicians have been very outspoken on where they are on cash bail, reducing sentences, decriminalizing some crimes, BLM riots and defunding the police. I think this is going to be a problem for whoever the dem nominee as I think trump is going to hammer them with claims of soft on cri
many countries don't tbh (i prefer the american system).
In most places you get some aggravated sentence because you do that regularly but you don't get a count each
What's the difference between writing 5 checks for 200 dollars each and writing one check for 1000 dollars? Same crime, same amount, different possible sentences. Up to 5x.
If you commit a crime once and that's all we have on you, of modest gravity, you could still be a decent person who slipped in life.
If you commit 5 crimes of modest gravity in 5 different occasions over some span of time, that's your way of life, we have elements to consider you exceptionally worse for society than the other person.
Yes, cash bail should not be a thing for minor offenses. The primary purpose purpose of bail is to ensure the defendant's appearance in court. If there is a suspicion that the defendant has the means, motivation and opportunity to flee, then bail should be assessed in such an amount as to ensure that he or she doesn't. Additionally, if there is a suspicion that the defendant is a physical danger to the community or to possible witnesses, he or she should be held without bail. If it is assessed that the defendant is an economic danger to the comminity, bail should be assessed commensurate with the danger suspected. Otherwise, the defendant should be released on personal recognaizance, until his or her first failure to appear in court, or breach of any other bail conditions.
All dems did was enforce those principles. Giving some small time crack dealer a 5k bail he can't make makes no sense, given what bail is supposed to be used for.
If you commit a crime once and that's all we have on you, of modest gravity, you could still be a decent person who slipped in life.
If you commit 5 crimes of modest gravity in 5 different occasions over some span of time, that's your way of life, we have elements to consider you exceptionally worse for society than the other person.
Sure. You can subscribe to this theory. So if there is a jurisdiction that runs those sentences consecutively, I would call that "draconian". That was the point at issue in the present discussion.
That's a pretty big aside.
But aside from that, prosecutors in the US love to overcharge to try and get a defendant to plead out. Let's say you steal a cheque book and write 5 cheques to the tune of 1000 dollars. You won't get charged for stealing 1000 dollars. You'll get one count per cheque, with the risk of the sentences running consecutive if you take it to trial. Same for selling drugs, they can charge each individual sale as a separat
Also, all this other stuff.
what is this 5 different crimes thing about? i once saw a charging sheet with 27 counts of LMFR(shoplifitng) on it. i was amused.
eta- are you guys talking about 5 different crimes at once or like on the second page?
what is this 5 different crimes thing about? i once saw a charging sheet with 27 counts of LMFR(shoplifitng) on it. i was amused.
eta- are you guys talking about 5 different crimes at once or like on the second page?
I gave a lot of different examples of overcharging in the post above.
But, ok, for example, in my specific case, I was charged with forgery (making the cheques), larceny (stealing the money), and uttering (passing the fake cheques). So, I made some fake cheques, but I take it to trial, I have literally have life+100 worth of charges, for stealing 250k. In my case, taking it to trial was pointless, and I ended up with a 20 month committed sentence after pleading out. But prosecutors stack charges and counts exactly for this reason. The fact you can charge pretty much anything that has been done more than two or three times as a punishable by life offense gives prosecutors way too much power within the system.
Go and look up all the people who are doing the best part of life for stacked 924c's in the feds
I gave a lot of different examples of overcharging in the post above.
But, ok, for example, in my specific case, I was charged with forgery (making the cheques), larceny (stealing the money), and uttering (passing the fake cheques). So, I made some fake cheques, but I take it to trial, I have literally have life+100 worth of charges, for stealing 250k. In my case, taking it to trial was pointless, and I ended up with a 20 month committed se
okay. so we're talking about one case with overcharging. because luciom is talking about second page sentence enhancement of subsequent offenses. you can't have sentence enhancement until you've been sentenced on a prior crime, otherwise they are all first offenses while they are playing out.
both are awful. my personal favorite is charging drug dealers with failing to attach the requisite tax stamps. it's an extra felony for some made up tax that no one has ever paid.
okay. so we're talking about one case with overcharging. because luciom is talking about second page sentence enhancement of subsequent offenses. you can't have sentence enhancement until you've been sentenced on a prior crime, otherwise they are all first offenses while they are playing out.
both are awful. my personal favorite is charging drug dealers with failing to attach the requisite tax stamps. it's an extra felony for some made up t
Lol, you think that is an isolated incident? I gave you the broad outlines of how this happens above. There are thousands of examples of each of those things. Especially stacked 924c's.
Ironically, you mention second and subsequent. That was exactly the problem with the stacked 924c's. Prosecutors "forgot" the "and subsequent" part, and the courts just went along with it.
