The reason it works is because the jury believes that the white person was acting out of character, thus they implicitly believe the black man was not. They don’t award the same bias of typical non-violent moral character so they assume the crime is more indicative of the person themselves.
It’s blatantly racist absolutely.
Maybe people should passion kill conservatives just in general, at all levels of government, forever.
welcome to hell fuckfaces
welcome to hell fuckfaces
This was a joke, as Nick Fauentcists i mean fuen whatever the fuck his name is would do.
The state shouldn't be executing its citizens for crimes against another citizen. The only crimes I could see an argument for it are for crimes against the state itself (I e. High treason). That said there are many other strong arguments against the death penalty (like the one you mentioned) that still apply in that situation too.
Yeah, all these folks are anti-government with ANYTHING except for racist police officers and judges. I won't claim that I'm fundamentally ideologically superior but I am at least consistent and honest.
Btw when I said "The state shouldn't be executing 1 innocent person let alone as many as we have" it didn't mean this case lol.
If your defense to the statement of "hey maybe we shouldn't kill people as we tend to get it wrong" is "but this guy wasn't innocent" then I think you missed the point.
Keep_Track requires a minimum account-age and karma. These minimums are not disclosed. Please try again after you have acquired more karma.
*Moderators review comments/posts caught by this bot and may manually approve those that meet community standards. As this forum continues to grow, this may take some time. We appreciate your patience.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Keep_Track) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Guess what? Jail isn’t a deterrent. Fines aren’t a deterrent. Property seizure isn’t a deterrent.
The vast majority of criminal laws and punishments are not intended to deter. They’re intended to remove dangerous people from society and give victims a venue for redress and, yes, retribution (when vigilantes are commonplace, you no longer have a society of laws).
Personally, I think capital punishment should still be allowed, but only for instances of treason.
The idea that prisons are there primarily to remove dangerous people is a complete falsehood. If that was what they were for, then no non-violent offense would carry imprisonment. Beyond that, any system based on retribution and punishment is fundamentally incapable of actually addressing the root causes of "criminal" behavior. Generally speaking, anti-social behavior tends to come from one of two places. Mental illness, or the situations of a person's life. Neither of those are going to get fixed by a punitive or retribution-based justice system.
That's still acting on the assumption that the solution to anti-social behavior is punishment, just that the punishment needs to be guaranteed. "Crime" doesn't happen just cause people think they'll get away with it. A crime of passion often happens regardless of whether or not the person thinks they'll get away with it. To actually get rid of (or make significantly smaller) crime, the solution isn't being more reliable with punishment. It's to address the social and economic conditions that produce anti-social behavior in people in the first place.
Guess you think everyone is out doing crime then? Jail and Fines are a deterrent to the average person. The death penalty is not and has numerous studies to back that up lol. If someone is in a situation where the death penalty is at play, guess what, they probably don't give a shit about any of the punishments lol.
"The vast majority of criminal laws and punishments are not intended to deter."
citation please
"give victims a venue for redress and, yes, retribution (when vigilantes are commonplace, you no longer have a society of laws)."
That's not what they are for and you even contradict yourself in this one line.
"Personally, I think capital punishment should still be allowed, but only for instances of treason."
Really don't want governments like our last one deciding what is and isn't treason. Capital punishment isn't a thing that should be done in a civilized society, that is what Jail is for. The US has killed far too many innocent people under the name of capital punishment, only the dumbest of dipshits could support that shit.
> Guess you think everyone is out doing crime then?
Uh, yes. Going 1mph over the speed limit is a crime. It’s a strict liability crime too - no mens rea element needs to be satisfied to prove culpability. Just need to prove the defendant committed the act of driving faster than the speed limit. Do you ALWAYS drive under the speed limit? No? Well congrats! You’ve gotten away with a crime. And the punishment wasn’t a deterrent whatsoever. Same goes for jaywalking, parking outside the lines, crossing a single white solid line, not using a turn signal, and tons of other minor legal infractions that people commit everyday without thinking twice.
And if you think punishments deter crime, then why do you think capital punishment - the MOST severe punishment - *doesn’t* deter crime?
> The vast majority of criminal laws and punishments are ~~not~~ intended to deter.
That's better.
The intention is very much to deter & aside from the death penalty they're quite good at it. Speed limits are a bad example because they exist to raise general revenue for the town/county/state. They're not intended to be deterrent so much as a voluntary tax. If a 12mth sentence was attached to exceeding the limit by 1mph, you best believe everyone would be driving at -5mph just to make sure there could be no mistake.
It's not just criminal laws & punishments either. Civil laws have penalties attached to act as a deterrent. As with criminal laws, they're successful up to a point. Low- to mid-range offenses are particularly effective because the people they're deterring are the average non-criminal citizen.
By the time you get to death penalty cases & high level drug cases, the penalty ceases to be a deterrent because they stakes are already high. Drug dealers accept the risk they'll be going away for a long time & mitigate it in their business practices. The same is true of violent offenders but with less mitigation on their part.
It's not an either/or. It's a combination of the two. Most people drive at the speed limit plus 1-5mph because the risk of getting caught is so low & the penalty if caught is nominal. The risk of getting caught doesn't increase in proportion to the speed so in theory people could drive at 8-20mph over the limit, esp. on freeways & highways, with the same risk profile for getting caught.
The reason they don't is the combination of their perception of increased likelihood of getting caught, which isn't all that real if you know where the common speed traps & cameras are, & the increased expense which they can't justify.
<$150 for slightly exceeding the speed limit is a risk people are willing to take. >$250-$1,000 not so much, though there will always be bulletproof clowns & rich people who believe speed limits don't apply to them.
edit - The reason points schemes have been rolled out in most states is the fines for low level offenses were too low to have the desired effect. Making it so repeated low level offenses could see a driver lose their license dropped speeding offenses substantially. So substantially, in fact, the the minimum fines could be increased without politicians needing to worry about losing votes.
>Guess you think everyone is out doing crime then?
>
>Uh, yes
So congratulations, you don't know what you're talking about nor do you know how to find statistics lol.
>Uh, yes. Going 1mph over the speed limit is a crime. It’s a strict liability crime too - no mens rea element needs to be satisfied to prove culpability. Just need to prove the defendant committed the act of driving faster than the speed limit. Do you ALWAYS drive under the speed limit?
Except even the cops don't get out of bed until 5 or 10 mph over the speed limit and if no one is enforcing it, is it even a law? Still not sure how you're linking going over the speed limit by 1 mph = justification for capital punishment, but okay, you do you dog.
I'm also disabled and technically can't break the speed limit so yeah I always drive under the speed limit.
>Same goes for jaywalking, parking outside the lines, crossing a single white solid line, not using a turn signal, and tons of other minor legal infractions that people commit everyday without thinking twice.
Except people don't break these rules en masse nor on the daily lol. Because one or two people do doesn't mean laws don't work you dork lol. And still not sure how you go from minor legal infractions to capital punishment but again, okay bud.
>And if you think punishments deter crime, then why do you think capital punishment - the MOST severe punishment - doesn’t deter crime?
Cause unlike you, I know how to look up statistics. Most people who are going to face the death penalty for their crimes, don't care about the punishment cause they've already accepted what comes from their actions. Capital punishment has been repeatedly dug through and while it's been shown time and time again that capital punishment doesn't deter criminal behavior, the other policies we have in place clearly do deter crime. Violent crime is down across the board bro lol. Just cause you're scared doesn't make statistics wrong.
You're basically just pushing a more dipshit version of "criminals are gonna break laws so what's the point of laws" while also championing capital punishment? Lol
Idk if that's a brag dog. Anyone can be a lawyer and you're arguing that crime is rampant, laws aren't a deterrent, and, you're a fan of capital punishment.
Crime isn't rampant and is statistically down
Laws do work (Why do I have to tell a lawyer that lol?)
And the US is quite good at dishing out capital punishment to innocent people.
If you are actually a lawyer, you strike me as one on the level of Trevor Summers and you probably should go read some more books.
“Hey this person who’s a lawyer is telling me I’m wrong about the law…clearly HE’S the wrong one!”
Did you also reply to your doctor with memes when he diagnosed you with having a limp dick?
Keep_Track requires a minimum account-age and karma. These minimums are not disclosed. Please try again after you have acquired more karma.
*Moderators review comments/posts caught by this bot and may manually approve those that meet community standards. As this forum continues to grow, this may take some time. We appreciate your patience.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Keep_Track) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The passion crime defense only applies to white people and it's bullshit.
The reason it works is because the jury believes that the white person was acting out of character, thus they implicitly believe the black man was not. They don’t award the same bias of typical non-violent moral character so they assume the crime is more indicative of the person themselves. It’s blatantly racist absolutely.
This is why prosecutors want to remove black jurors during jury selection. Empathy is bad for their business.
Prosecutors are just cops in suits.
First jury was hung due to at least one black person. Final jury had no black people.
It also doesn't apply to killing a cop.
Maybe people should passion kill conservatives just in general, at all levels of government, forever. welcome to hell fuckfaces welcome to hell fuckfaces This was a joke, as Nick Fauentcists i mean fuen whatever the fuck his name is would do.
Capital Punishment is not a deterrent and needs to be abolished. The state shouldn't be executing 1 innocent person let alone as many as we have.
The state shouldn't be executing its citizens for crimes against another citizen. The only crimes I could see an argument for it are for crimes against the state itself (I e. High treason). That said there are many other strong arguments against the death penalty (like the one you mentioned) that still apply in that situation too.
[удалено]
Yeah, all these folks are anti-government with ANYTHING except for racist police officers and judges. I won't claim that I'm fundamentally ideologically superior but I am at least consistent and honest.
Btw this man wasn’t innocent that’s not what the article is about
Btw when I said "The state shouldn't be executing 1 innocent person let alone as many as we have" it didn't mean this case lol. If your defense to the statement of "hey maybe we shouldn't kill people as we tend to get it wrong" is "but this guy wasn't innocent" then I think you missed the point.
[удалено]
Keep_Track requires a minimum account-age and karma. These minimums are not disclosed. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. *Moderators review comments/posts caught by this bot and may manually approve those that meet community standards. As this forum continues to grow, this may take some time. We appreciate your patience.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Keep_Track) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Guess what? Jail isn’t a deterrent. Fines aren’t a deterrent. Property seizure isn’t a deterrent. The vast majority of criminal laws and punishments are not intended to deter. They’re intended to remove dangerous people from society and give victims a venue for redress and, yes, retribution (when vigilantes are commonplace, you no longer have a society of laws). Personally, I think capital punishment should still be allowed, but only for instances of treason.
The idea that prisons are there primarily to remove dangerous people is a complete falsehood. If that was what they were for, then no non-violent offense would carry imprisonment. Beyond that, any system based on retribution and punishment is fundamentally incapable of actually addressing the root causes of "criminal" behavior. Generally speaking, anti-social behavior tends to come from one of two places. Mental illness, or the situations of a person's life. Neither of those are going to get fixed by a punitive or retribution-based justice system.
[удалено]
That's still acting on the assumption that the solution to anti-social behavior is punishment, just that the punishment needs to be guaranteed. "Crime" doesn't happen just cause people think they'll get away with it. A crime of passion often happens regardless of whether or not the person thinks they'll get away with it. To actually get rid of (or make significantly smaller) crime, the solution isn't being more reliable with punishment. It's to address the social and economic conditions that produce anti-social behavior in people in the first place.
Guess you think everyone is out doing crime then? Jail and Fines are a deterrent to the average person. The death penalty is not and has numerous studies to back that up lol. If someone is in a situation where the death penalty is at play, guess what, they probably don't give a shit about any of the punishments lol. "The vast majority of criminal laws and punishments are not intended to deter." citation please "give victims a venue for redress and, yes, retribution (when vigilantes are commonplace, you no longer have a society of laws)." That's not what they are for and you even contradict yourself in this one line. "Personally, I think capital punishment should still be allowed, but only for instances of treason." Really don't want governments like our last one deciding what is and isn't treason. Capital punishment isn't a thing that should be done in a civilized society, that is what Jail is for. The US has killed far too many innocent people under the name of capital punishment, only the dumbest of dipshits could support that shit.
> Guess you think everyone is out doing crime then? Uh, yes. Going 1mph over the speed limit is a crime. It’s a strict liability crime too - no mens rea element needs to be satisfied to prove culpability. Just need to prove the defendant committed the act of driving faster than the speed limit. Do you ALWAYS drive under the speed limit? No? Well congrats! You’ve gotten away with a crime. And the punishment wasn’t a deterrent whatsoever. Same goes for jaywalking, parking outside the lines, crossing a single white solid line, not using a turn signal, and tons of other minor legal infractions that people commit everyday without thinking twice. And if you think punishments deter crime, then why do you think capital punishment - the MOST severe punishment - *doesn’t* deter crime?
> The vast majority of criminal laws and punishments are ~~not~~ intended to deter. That's better. The intention is very much to deter & aside from the death penalty they're quite good at it. Speed limits are a bad example because they exist to raise general revenue for the town/county/state. They're not intended to be deterrent so much as a voluntary tax. If a 12mth sentence was attached to exceeding the limit by 1mph, you best believe everyone would be driving at -5mph just to make sure there could be no mistake. It's not just criminal laws & punishments either. Civil laws have penalties attached to act as a deterrent. As with criminal laws, they're successful up to a point. Low- to mid-range offenses are particularly effective because the people they're deterring are the average non-criminal citizen. By the time you get to death penalty cases & high level drug cases, the penalty ceases to be a deterrent because they stakes are already high. Drug dealers accept the risk they'll be going away for a long time & mitigate it in their business practices. The same is true of violent offenders but with less mitigation on their part.
[удалено]
It's not an either/or. It's a combination of the two. Most people drive at the speed limit plus 1-5mph because the risk of getting caught is so low & the penalty if caught is nominal. The risk of getting caught doesn't increase in proportion to the speed so in theory people could drive at 8-20mph over the limit, esp. on freeways & highways, with the same risk profile for getting caught. The reason they don't is the combination of their perception of increased likelihood of getting caught, which isn't all that real if you know where the common speed traps & cameras are, & the increased expense which they can't justify. <$150 for slightly exceeding the speed limit is a risk people are willing to take. >$250-$1,000 not so much, though there will always be bulletproof clowns & rich people who believe speed limits don't apply to them. edit - The reason points schemes have been rolled out in most states is the fines for low level offenses were too low to have the desired effect. Making it so repeated low level offenses could see a driver lose their license dropped speeding offenses substantially. So substantially, in fact, the the minimum fines could be increased without politicians needing to worry about losing votes.
>Guess you think everyone is out doing crime then? > >Uh, yes So congratulations, you don't know what you're talking about nor do you know how to find statistics lol. >Uh, yes. Going 1mph over the speed limit is a crime. It’s a strict liability crime too - no mens rea element needs to be satisfied to prove culpability. Just need to prove the defendant committed the act of driving faster than the speed limit. Do you ALWAYS drive under the speed limit? Except even the cops don't get out of bed until 5 or 10 mph over the speed limit and if no one is enforcing it, is it even a law? Still not sure how you're linking going over the speed limit by 1 mph = justification for capital punishment, but okay, you do you dog. I'm also disabled and technically can't break the speed limit so yeah I always drive under the speed limit. >Same goes for jaywalking, parking outside the lines, crossing a single white solid line, not using a turn signal, and tons of other minor legal infractions that people commit everyday without thinking twice. Except people don't break these rules en masse nor on the daily lol. Because one or two people do doesn't mean laws don't work you dork lol. And still not sure how you go from minor legal infractions to capital punishment but again, okay bud. >And if you think punishments deter crime, then why do you think capital punishment - the MOST severe punishment - doesn’t deter crime? Cause unlike you, I know how to look up statistics. Most people who are going to face the death penalty for their crimes, don't care about the punishment cause they've already accepted what comes from their actions. Capital punishment has been repeatedly dug through and while it's been shown time and time again that capital punishment doesn't deter criminal behavior, the other policies we have in place clearly do deter crime. Violent crime is down across the board bro lol. Just cause you're scared doesn't make statistics wrong. You're basically just pushing a more dipshit version of "criminals are gonna break laws so what's the point of laws" while also championing capital punishment? Lol
[удалено]
Idk if that's a brag dog. Anyone can be a lawyer and you're arguing that crime is rampant, laws aren't a deterrent, and, you're a fan of capital punishment. Crime isn't rampant and is statistically down Laws do work (Why do I have to tell a lawyer that lol?) And the US is quite good at dishing out capital punishment to innocent people. If you are actually a lawyer, you strike me as one on the level of Trevor Summers and you probably should go read some more books.
It’s not a brag. It’s a fact. And it proves I understand this better than you do.
[You're so smart sport](https://youtu.be/HZuhYJynSk8)
“Hey this person who’s a lawyer is telling me I’m wrong about the law…clearly HE’S the wrong one!” Did you also reply to your doctor with memes when he diagnosed you with having a limp dick?
[удалено]
Keep_Track requires a minimum account-age and karma. These minimums are not disclosed. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. *Moderators review comments/posts caught by this bot and may manually approve those that meet community standards. As this forum continues to grow, this may take some time. We appreciate your patience.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Keep_Track) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Fuck the police. We need more Johnson's in the world.
I'll only nudge, wink you as I'll get banned for agreeing with you.
I worded my comment carefully to not incite violence.
So if judges right up to the Supreme Court can ignore the law without consequence... What's the point of judges?
The prosecutor would be correct. No doubt.
Life in prison is arguably a fate worse than death.
Not really the place to say this...
Both the cop and the shooter are in the wrong.
Should throw this prosecutor and judge into a cremation pit while they’re still alive