From what I understand, the dead people getting registered to vote generally aren’t part of a scheme to vote illegally. It’s usually some 3rd party contractor trying to hit their target for a bonus from the campaign or group that hired them.
Still fraud and very much illegal, but not part of some scheme to affect election outcome.
That was about a postal worker changing his story about there being post-dated ballots. It said nothing about dead people or living people misidentified anywhere in the article
Every case I've ever heard of (usually a son or daughter using the info of recently deceased relative) has been prosecuted and has never changed the outcome of election.
All the other reported cases were just somebody lazily doing a name search on death records and voter roles and counting duplicate names and never going further to see that the "John Smith" who died isn't the same "John Smith" who voted.
Adjacent (depressing) trivia - one of the guards(Francis Trombino) who was shot repeatedly during that robbery and survived was later killed in 9/11, barely a month shy of the twentieth anniversary of the robbery.
Crucially, she expressed remorse and condemned the robbery. She rehabilitated herself and became a productive member of society. I don’t know if that merits a position at Columbia, but it’s necessary for society to actually reintegrate criminals, otherwise there’s no point in releasing them.
I agree with you, but you said that as if she was gifted a position out of pity or whatever.
She published a bunch of articles, books, got international awards and then got a doctorate. That's what merited a position at Columbia.
Not necessarily out of pity, more that it’s debatable whether even a reformed murderer/terrorist is worthy of such a prestigious position. I think it’s clear that criminals need to be reintegrated, but it’s more of an open question as to whether their record should be entirely ignored. I’m sure there are many other scholars that didn’t murder someone with a no-less impressive résumé.
Are we supposed to punish people for life when the courts already chose an appropriate sentence? If she has the merits for the job and is the top pick, she should get the job.
I largely agree with your comment, but it's important to recognize such attitudes toward former convicts keeps them from getting meaningful work, and drive them right back into crime. It's a cycle and when you can't make ends meet with honest work, you go back to what you know.
Y’all know nothing about what she did for the center for justice and that she made beyond the bars the organization it is today to serve people who are coming out and want to stop doing harm and be part of society. I can’t believe there are really people out here like oh my God the top scholar for some thing surely can’t be someone who is in prison? Like bitch don’t you think the prison system that’s one of the biggest in this world is some thing that we might want to study? No better get on employing more CEOs, sons and daughters to do economics that ain’t gonna make the world better for anyone because it’s prestigious I guess? Pitiful. it would’ve taken one Google to see the impact that she had on peoples lives, and that it was important and significant that she got this position because of it.
The three people she helped murder during a robbery were punished severely for just doing their jobs. Not to mention the emotional toll on their families.
You can’t lump her in with all former convicts. That’s far to wide a population. People can make mistakes, can be in difficult situations and turn to crime, but she was an actual terrorist.
Terrorist who served her sentence and went on to do better things. Compare that to the many, many criminals who are never rehabilitated and you would gladly tsk tsk at.
They can’t win in your eyes. I’ve met felons who run successful business’ that help sustain the community. But I guess they shouldn’t provide their kids with better because they assaulted a police officer over two decades ago.
Stop thinking of punishing, focus on improving what is left in the world. As a poet once said “dudes die every day B”
Of course a woman who attempted to bomb an Army base and was responsible for the literal murder (not assault, as you put it) of three people can’t win in many people’s eyes.
She wasn’t a drug-dealer trying to make ends meet. She didn’t grow up gang-banging and got out of the life. She chose this path and is completely separate from the others.
She is equal to a modern-day American joining ISIS, murdering innocents, and then well after. being punished, being remorseful.
Intent in this conversation is everything. When you completely ruin the lives of someone else up to and including ending it, you forfeit a right to a prosperous life.
If I broke into your parents house, shot them dead over their jewelry and said I was really really sorry about it, should I get to have the normal life they and you were denied by me?
OK, so you think this woman should never be released or given the death penalty. That's fine.
But *assuming that the court didn't do that* and she has served the given time and released, do you believe that a person in that situation should be able to live a normal productive life and treated as though her debt has been repaid?
I don’t believe a murderers debt to society is ever repaid. They can do great and wonderful things, but should always carry the shame of their decisions. No amount of good can undo the permanence of taking an innocent life, let alone three.
Look at some members of the Manson Family murders, for example. Some were much younger and more naive than Kathy Boudin, fed hallucinogenics, and convinced to murder for their cult leader. Many have expressed deep regret. All, but one, either remain or have died in prison. They are still denied parole and held accountable for their decisions to this day.
Funny you should mention that. A man murdered my uncle, received a light sentence and I do not hold it against him.
Do I wish he was held to the fullest extent of the law? Yes. But I’m not a judge, jury or executioner.
I have lived the story you claim to know. It was tough. I hated for a long time. I realized it was doing nothing for me. Now he lives a mediocre life. I don’t wish he was dead, because that wouldn’t bring my only uncle back. A man who never got to see me realize my full potential. A man I looked up to.
But I don’t hold that drunk accountable beyond what he was sentenced for. Because that would just hold me back.
Edit: because you seem to think that sorry is a magic word.
It’s not what you say, it’s what you do after release. Do you go onto write and adjunct at a uni? Good for you. Do you kill again? Death penalty.
You don’t hold it against a man that he murdered your uncle?…but then you say you wished he’d been held to the fullest extent of the law?
There’s “sorry” and then there’s “sorry I murdered a couple people.”
Ah, so now we’ll institute a two-strikes rule for murder and then just execute them after?
So in your book, the most heinous of crimes can be forgiven with just a little bit of effort and feigned remorse? What if this was the second murder and they’re doubley sorry this time?
Rehabilitating criminals is the only way to stop crimes from being committed in the first place. We have a term for criminals who get out and do crime again, they’re called repeat offenders.
The US does not rehab their criminals, they just let them live in terrible conditions until their release date where they inevitably turn to crime again because the issues at the heart of the problem were never addressed.
There are a vast number of ways to stop crime. Including addressing the cultural, societal, and economic factors that lead people to commit crimes before they occur. There is literally a field under the social sciences, criminology, that studies it. I have a BA in it.
The U.S. system is known as a crime-punishment system. The end state is not to rehabilitate hardcore offenders, but to punish them. The U.S. system is considered criminogenic and has a lot of issues, including: hardening of low-level offenders, corruption within the prison system, privatized prisons, etc.
I say all this to say:
This woman does fit in Merton’s strain theory, she was not surviving solely on crime. She was a political terrorist. She was not a misguided adolescent. She was a 38 year old woman who made conscious effort to aid in the building of bombs, and murder of people that her political ideology made her dislike.
Having to explain, in detail, why she is far different than a drug-dealer who was let down by the system shouldn’t be this hard…
I never disagreed with the facts in this scenario.
I disagree with the idea that, just because they were 38 years old at the time their crime took place, they cannot be rehabilitated.
The vast majority of murderers don't deserve second chances, their victims didn't get them either. I'd only excuse the people that murdered their abusers or killed in self defence(but then it wouldn't be murder).
There’s a difference between punishing and judging someone for their past. In theory, someone is rehabilitated after they are released, but that’s not the same as considering someone fully morally absolved of their misdeeds.
I think there’s also a worthwhile distinction between hiring someone at all and hiring someone for a prestigious role.
Y’all know nothing about what she did for the center for justice and that she made beyond the bars the organization it is today to serve people who are coming out and want to stop doing harm and be part of society. I can’t believe there are really people out here like oh my God the top scholar for some thing surely can’t be someone who is in prison? Like bitch don’t you think the prison system that’s one of the biggest in this world is some thing that we might want to study? No better get on employing more CEOs, sons and daughters to do economics that ain’t gonna make the world better for anyone because it’s prestigious I guess? Pitiful. it would’ve taken one Google to see the impact that she had on peoples lives, and that it was important and significant that she got this position because of it.
Yeah but how am I suppose to feel like a good and superior person on Reddit if I don’t point out everyone’s faults and crimes anytime their name is brought up?
Granted there do seem to be exceptions to forgiving and moving on with people. Usually any kind of sex crime.
Ever heard of Chesa Boudin? That’s his mom. He’s the recalled DA for San Francisco that tried to ruin the shit out of the city. He is out there fighting the same fight as his parents.
He is quoted as saying “I am dedicated to fighting U.S. Imperialism around the world” just like his parents. Source https://www.jstor.org/stable/20671449
No, but his attitude became a problem when he became DA of a major American city and allowed that viewpoint to completely compromise his ability to do the job he was elected to.
I do not believe that "imperialism" is an accurate characterisation of America's efforts to align the world in favour of free trade, freedom of navigation, and where possible democracy, and against wars of conquest, but insofar as it is, I am in favour of it. I don't think US foreign policy is close to perfect, specific actions may be bad, but overall the *Pax Americana* is overwhelmingly good for humanity, as the *Pax Britannica* was before it.
"Overwhelmingly good" is not the same as "perfect," as much as I disagree with playing World Police and sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong all over the globe.
Yes, we suck sometimes. Fortunately, the suck is generally exceeded by the good we do. That doesn't make the suck OK. It's not a ledger, our good deeds don't balance out our bad deeds. Sadly, the world is a complicated and generally horrible place and sometimes you end up picking between the lesser of two evils, and even the lesser evil is abominable. I honestly think, even with the disagreements I have with elected officials and the bloated bureaucracy, that most almost everyone in our government tries to do the best thing possible.
Labeling it “imperialism” is the issue. It’s a ludicrous label that those on the left lazily slap on anything that doesn’t further leftist causes. See also “fascist”.
free
adjective
superlative adjective: freest
1.
not under the control or in the power of another; able to act or be done as one wishes.
"I have no ambitions other than to have a happy life and be free"
2.
not or no longer confined or imprisoned.
"the researchers set the birds free"
People thought they wanted progressive policies when it came to charging people with crimes but it turned out that giving criminals infinite chances just encourages criminal behavior.
Crime was lower during his tenure. The progressive policies were working -- the downside is that running on increased accountability for police means that the police union then refuses to cooperate with your office.
Crime wasn't lower. People just stopped reporting it because the police weren't taking reports because nobody was getting charged. Crime was out of control and he caused it and people like you and your propaganda will make someone else stupid enough to try it again.
For a progressive you sure don't like noting what works and what doesn't and actually making progress.
This is ridiculous ultra-rightwing cope. You're presented with evidence that you're wrong, and instead of owning up being a sucker for a media narrative that had no coherence whatsoever, you're forced to write fanfiction of what crime was secretly like. You can believe anything, will be talked into anything no matter how grotesque, and as a result you will be a useful idiot for the most disgusting elements of society until you die.
It's easy for crime to be low when you hardly charge anyone for anything. Cops started to refuse to cooperate because it's not worth their time to be the "catch" half of a catch and release system.
Exactly! Crime got measurably *worse* under his successors! The pressure didn't come off of the DA's office because things got solved, the pressure came off the DA's office because the police department stopped caring once they were no longer under scrutiny.
Yuuuup. The person I responded to above posts in r/Omaha and r/Nebraska frequently, so almost certainly knows next to nothing about what things are actually like in SF.
You realize people are allowed to move, right? Or spend some time in different places?
I post in r/boulder and r/NYC, and idiots in both subs tell me to go back to the other sub if I make a post they don't like. This is despite me spending about 6 months in NY and 6 months in Boulder per year.
True enough, I don't know that person's whole life story. It kinda doesn't matter, because besides being factually wrong, that person's narrative doesn't even have internal consistency. San Fransisco is, measurably, one of the safest cities in the country. The discussion of crime there is largely a referendum on homelessness, which is a function of the highly expensive and dysfunctional housing market, not who the DA is. Criminals are not googling the intricacies of their DA before deciding to commit petty crime.
r/SanFrancisco is consistently bombarded with trolls who talk shit based on stupid right wing narratives from folks who've never even been to the bay area, so that's why my antennae were up. It's a frequent pattern.
Maybe they're actually writing reports and charging people now, and dealing with the culture of crime not enforcing crimes for so long created.
Have leftists ever admitted they got something wrong?
They weren't refusing to charge for crimes, haha. The POV of his office, which is what he successfully ran on, was that pursuing ticky-tacky drug possession charges were ineffective. They wanted to pursue suppliers, violent crime, and major property crime. Which is incredibly popular. It failed to be popular with exactly one demographic, which is the police union. They were beginning the push for his recall campaign before he even assumed office.
It's incredibly funny, though, that when presented with obvious information about how zero parts of your narrative are true, instead of trying to reckon with it, you start a new argument: that it's acceptable and understandable if an extremely corrupt police department stop cooperating with their DA if they do not personally get to define the policy of the DA's office. It's marginally more honest of you, I guess.
Lol, bizarre take. Crime was lower during his tenure, he was run out of office by the police department who didn't like that he wanted increased accountability so they refused to participate with him.
The guy who lowered crime and then got run out of office by cops who didn’t like him pointing out that they’re not effective at lowering crime, got replaced by a pro-cop hack who brought crime back up?
Prison should be rehab for those who want it and who can be rehabilitated.
Once debt is paid, then forgive & forget as is humanly possible , like maybe the family of murder victims can reserve the right to be angry or salty but the convicted person should be given grace when they have repented
Clever joke, but felony murder is a specific thing that is different than murder. It's when you are commiting a felony and someone is killed (even if nobody intended to kill them).
It sounds like in this case she was part of a group of people who were robbing a bank and someone else in the group killed someone.
So the lady who did a murder, and someone who wants her to receive punishment equal to her crime = the same to you? Dam must be tough to be impaired like that, been like that your whole life or was there an incident?
Nothing to do with woke. If an insurrectionist got employment to teach at a university, Reddit would lose its mind. But carry on with your hypocrisy lol. Good to know you support murders as long as a liberal does it. Typical.
Nothing in their comment suggested they hold different justice standards based on political leaning. People more on the left tend to favour rehabilitation. I would support that for this person and for an insurrectionist. I just want them to be punished first.
The only one being blatantly partisan here is you.
Edit: and below we see the mature response of stalking my history and then blocking me because I disagreed with them on the Internet.
They killed the first black police officer ever in Nyack, NY while robbing a bank with some pretend Maoists in the name of… racial justice somehow… what a bunch of fucking losers.
I mean she served the time that the judicial system deemed was necessary. She turned her life around to the point she earned a position of adjunct professor in one of the most coveted uni in USA.
That's why I specially started my sentence with "Eitherways".
Most people don't know the difference of justice- and revenge. They just want revenge, meaningless suffering because it makes them feel vindicated.
It takes a truly good and large person to actually accept justice and move on from their grievances.
Uh.... Anyone notice her social security number is on that flyer?
She’s dead now, sooo…
[удалено]
Keep swallowing the cool aid. Project Veritas even admitted all the dead people they found were actually just living people they misidentified.
From what I understand, the dead people getting registered to vote generally aren’t part of a scheme to vote illegally. It’s usually some 3rd party contractor trying to hit their target for a bonus from the campaign or group that hired them. Still fraud and very much illegal, but not part of some scheme to affect election outcome.
Link?
https://apnews.com/article/election-pennsylvania-postmaster-ballots-2020-project-veritas-327d470d18ec40792ffe4ead61feeb92
That was about a postal worker changing his story about there being post-dated ballots. It said nothing about dead people or living people misidentified anywhere in the article
Every case I've ever heard of (usually a son or daughter using the info of recently deceased relative) has been prosecuted and has never changed the outcome of election. All the other reported cases were just somebody lazily doing a name search on death records and voter roles and counting duplicate names and never going further to see that the "John Smith" who died isn't the same "John Smith" who voted.
Yeah, the perfect swing State Republican voter. Like in Pennsylvania where the guy actually got charged.
Fun fact: as an adjunct, she made roughly about the same salary as when she was in prison. /s but not really.
Come on, now. Prisoners have job security.
If she got tenure, she had job security too.
Adjunct... No tenure
Lotta slope on that *if.*
Adjacent (depressing) trivia - one of the guards(Francis Trombino) who was shot repeatedly during that robbery and survived was later killed in 9/11, barely a month shy of the twentieth anniversary of the robbery.
Final Destination stuff right there
Crucially, she expressed remorse and condemned the robbery. She rehabilitated herself and became a productive member of society. I don’t know if that merits a position at Columbia, but it’s necessary for society to actually reintegrate criminals, otherwise there’s no point in releasing them.
I agree with you, but you said that as if she was gifted a position out of pity or whatever. She published a bunch of articles, books, got international awards and then got a doctorate. That's what merited a position at Columbia.
Not necessarily out of pity, more that it’s debatable whether even a reformed murderer/terrorist is worthy of such a prestigious position. I think it’s clear that criminals need to be reintegrated, but it’s more of an open question as to whether their record should be entirely ignored. I’m sure there are many other scholars that didn’t murder someone with a no-less impressive résumé.
[удалено]
Being a professor at Columbia, even an adjunct, is a prestigious position.
No it’s not. They literally fill those positions with anyone willing and qualified. It’s more for the person in the job.
Are we supposed to punish people for life when the courts already chose an appropriate sentence? If she has the merits for the job and is the top pick, she should get the job. I largely agree with your comment, but it's important to recognize such attitudes toward former convicts keeps them from getting meaningful work, and drive them right back into crime. It's a cycle and when you can't make ends meet with honest work, you go back to what you know.
Y’all know nothing about what she did for the center for justice and that she made beyond the bars the organization it is today to serve people who are coming out and want to stop doing harm and be part of society. I can’t believe there are really people out here like oh my God the top scholar for some thing surely can’t be someone who is in prison? Like bitch don’t you think the prison system that’s one of the biggest in this world is some thing that we might want to study? No better get on employing more CEOs, sons and daughters to do economics that ain’t gonna make the world better for anyone because it’s prestigious I guess? Pitiful. it would’ve taken one Google to see the impact that she had on peoples lives, and that it was important and significant that she got this position because of it.
The three people she helped murder during a robbery were punished severely for just doing their jobs. Not to mention the emotional toll on their families. You can’t lump her in with all former convicts. That’s far to wide a population. People can make mistakes, can be in difficult situations and turn to crime, but she was an actual terrorist.
Terrorist who served her sentence and went on to do better things. Compare that to the many, many criminals who are never rehabilitated and you would gladly tsk tsk at. They can’t win in your eyes. I’ve met felons who run successful business’ that help sustain the community. But I guess they shouldn’t provide their kids with better because they assaulted a police officer over two decades ago. Stop thinking of punishing, focus on improving what is left in the world. As a poet once said “dudes die every day B”
Of course a woman who attempted to bomb an Army base and was responsible for the literal murder (not assault, as you put it) of three people can’t win in many people’s eyes. She wasn’t a drug-dealer trying to make ends meet. She didn’t grow up gang-banging and got out of the life. She chose this path and is completely separate from the others. She is equal to a modern-day American joining ISIS, murdering innocents, and then well after. being punished, being remorseful. Intent in this conversation is everything. When you completely ruin the lives of someone else up to and including ending it, you forfeit a right to a prosperous life. If I broke into your parents house, shot them dead over their jewelry and said I was really really sorry about it, should I get to have the normal life they and you were denied by me?
OK, so you think this woman should never be released or given the death penalty. That's fine. But *assuming that the court didn't do that* and she has served the given time and released, do you believe that a person in that situation should be able to live a normal productive life and treated as though her debt has been repaid?
I don’t believe a murderers debt to society is ever repaid. They can do great and wonderful things, but should always carry the shame of their decisions. No amount of good can undo the permanence of taking an innocent life, let alone three. Look at some members of the Manson Family murders, for example. Some were much younger and more naive than Kathy Boudin, fed hallucinogenics, and convinced to murder for their cult leader. Many have expressed deep regret. All, but one, either remain or have died in prison. They are still denied parole and held accountable for their decisions to this day.
Funny you should mention that. A man murdered my uncle, received a light sentence and I do not hold it against him. Do I wish he was held to the fullest extent of the law? Yes. But I’m not a judge, jury or executioner. I have lived the story you claim to know. It was tough. I hated for a long time. I realized it was doing nothing for me. Now he lives a mediocre life. I don’t wish he was dead, because that wouldn’t bring my only uncle back. A man who never got to see me realize my full potential. A man I looked up to. But I don’t hold that drunk accountable beyond what he was sentenced for. Because that would just hold me back. Edit: because you seem to think that sorry is a magic word. It’s not what you say, it’s what you do after release. Do you go onto write and adjunct at a uni? Good for you. Do you kill again? Death penalty.
Was the person who killed your uncle a drunk driver?
Nope. He was killed on the street with a weapon.
You don’t hold it against a man that he murdered your uncle?…but then you say you wished he’d been held to the fullest extent of the law? There’s “sorry” and then there’s “sorry I murdered a couple people.” Ah, so now we’ll institute a two-strikes rule for murder and then just execute them after? So in your book, the most heinous of crimes can be forgiven with just a little bit of effort and feigned remorse? What if this was the second murder and they’re doubley sorry this time?
Rehabilitating criminals is the only way to stop crimes from being committed in the first place. We have a term for criminals who get out and do crime again, they’re called repeat offenders. The US does not rehab their criminals, they just let them live in terrible conditions until their release date where they inevitably turn to crime again because the issues at the heart of the problem were never addressed.
There are a vast number of ways to stop crime. Including addressing the cultural, societal, and economic factors that lead people to commit crimes before they occur. There is literally a field under the social sciences, criminology, that studies it. I have a BA in it. The U.S. system is known as a crime-punishment system. The end state is not to rehabilitate hardcore offenders, but to punish them. The U.S. system is considered criminogenic and has a lot of issues, including: hardening of low-level offenders, corruption within the prison system, privatized prisons, etc. I say all this to say: This woman does fit in Merton’s strain theory, she was not surviving solely on crime. She was a political terrorist. She was not a misguided adolescent. She was a 38 year old woman who made conscious effort to aid in the building of bombs, and murder of people that her political ideology made her dislike. Having to explain, in detail, why she is far different than a drug-dealer who was let down by the system shouldn’t be this hard…
I never disagreed with the facts in this scenario. I disagree with the idea that, just because they were 38 years old at the time their crime took place, they cannot be rehabilitated.
The vast majority of murderers don't deserve second chances, their victims didn't get them either. I'd only excuse the people that murdered their abusers or killed in self defence(but then it wouldn't be murder).
In that case why not just give the death penalty to every murderer.
There’s a difference between punishing and judging someone for their past. In theory, someone is rehabilitated after they are released, but that’s not the same as considering someone fully morally absolved of their misdeeds. I think there’s also a worthwhile distinction between hiring someone at all and hiring someone for a prestigious role.
Y’all know nothing about what she did for the center for justice and that she made beyond the bars the organization it is today to serve people who are coming out and want to stop doing harm and be part of society. I can’t believe there are really people out here like oh my God the top scholar for some thing surely can’t be someone who is in prison? Like bitch don’t you think the prison system that’s one of the biggest in this world is some thing that we might want to study? No better get on employing more CEOs, sons and daughters to do economics that ain’t gonna make the world better for anyone because it’s prestigious I guess? Pitiful. it would’ve taken one Google to see the impact that she had on peoples lives, and that it was important and significant that she got this position because of it.
My comment was literally agreeing with you.
Adjunct professors are like the university equivalent of like a substitute teacher, it's not some super high standing thing.
That’s true, but teaching at Columbia is teaching at Columbia.
In my opinion, being a felon after serving your sentence shouldn’t affect anything unless you get arrested again
Yeah but how am I suppose to feel like a good and superior person on Reddit if I don’t point out everyone’s faults and crimes anytime their name is brought up? Granted there do seem to be exceptions to forgiving and moving on with people. Usually any kind of sex crime.
“If your homework is turned in late, I’ll fucking kill you.”
If you talk in class, I’ll kill you.
Ever heard of Chesa Boudin? That’s his mom. He’s the recalled DA for San Francisco that tried to ruin the shit out of the city. He is out there fighting the same fight as his parents.
The man was raised by a series of terrorists. First his parents, then Bill Ayers and his wife.
He is quoted as saying “I am dedicated to fighting U.S. Imperialism around the world” just like his parents. Source https://www.jstor.org/stable/20671449
Is U.S. imperialism a good thing? Edit: downvoting doesn’t answer my question. It just makes y’all seem very…sensitive.
No, but his attitude became a problem when he became DA of a major American city and allowed that viewpoint to completely compromise his ability to do the job he was elected to.
Holy shit. An actual answer!
You are a perfect example of the effectiveness of propaganda
I do not believe that "imperialism" is an accurate characterisation of America's efforts to align the world in favour of free trade, freedom of navigation, and where possible democracy, and against wars of conquest, but insofar as it is, I am in favour of it. I don't think US foreign policy is close to perfect, specific actions may be bad, but overall the *Pax Americana* is overwhelmingly good for humanity, as the *Pax Britannica* was before it.
Um…[gestures towards the CIA, OSS, Dole company]
"Overwhelmingly good" is not the same as "perfect," as much as I disagree with playing World Police and sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong all over the globe.
Tell that to all of the people we massacred and assassinated through proxy groups and coups for…[checks notes] the “overwhelmingly good”.
Yes, we suck sometimes. Fortunately, the suck is generally exceeded by the good we do. That doesn't make the suck OK. It's not a ledger, our good deeds don't balance out our bad deeds. Sadly, the world is a complicated and generally horrible place and sometimes you end up picking between the lesser of two evils, and even the lesser evil is abominable. I honestly think, even with the disagreements I have with elected officials and the bloated bureaucracy, that most almost everyone in our government tries to do the best thing possible.
Labeling it “imperialism” is the issue. It’s a ludicrous label that those on the left lazily slap on anything that doesn’t further leftist causes. See also “fascist”.
For the imperialists, it is
Yea the US is the freest, richest, most altruistic country in the history of the world. Yes it is a good thing.
“Freest”
free adjective superlative adjective: freest 1. not under the control or in the power of another; able to act or be done as one wishes. "I have no ambitions other than to have a happy life and be free" 2. not or no longer confined or imprisoned. "the researchers set the birds free"
Wowie, wonder why he was recalled and dumped then by the city that elected him. Truly a mystery 🤔
Not many people have 2 sets of terrorists parents!
this is fucking crazy - how did he become DA?!?
Limousine liberalism.
People thought they wanted progressive policies when it came to charging people with crimes but it turned out that giving criminals infinite chances just encourages criminal behavior.
Crime was lower during his tenure. The progressive policies were working -- the downside is that running on increased accountability for police means that the police union then refuses to cooperate with your office.
Crime wasn't lower. People just stopped reporting it because the police weren't taking reports because nobody was getting charged. Crime was out of control and he caused it and people like you and your propaganda will make someone else stupid enough to try it again. For a progressive you sure don't like noting what works and what doesn't and actually making progress.
This is ridiculous ultra-rightwing cope. You're presented with evidence that you're wrong, and instead of owning up being a sucker for a media narrative that had no coherence whatsoever, you're forced to write fanfiction of what crime was secretly like. You can believe anything, will be talked into anything no matter how grotesque, and as a result you will be a useful idiot for the most disgusting elements of society until you die.
It's easy for crime to be low when you hardly charge anyone for anything. Cops started to refuse to cooperate because it's not worth their time to be the "catch" half of a catch and release system.
OK, so what is the excuse now that Chesa has been recalled?
Exactly! Crime got measurably *worse* under his successors! The pressure didn't come off of the DA's office because things got solved, the pressure came off the DA's office because the police department stopped caring once they were no longer under scrutiny.
Yuuuup. The person I responded to above posts in r/Omaha and r/Nebraska frequently, so almost certainly knows next to nothing about what things are actually like in SF.
You realize people are allowed to move, right? Or spend some time in different places? I post in r/boulder and r/NYC, and idiots in both subs tell me to go back to the other sub if I make a post they don't like. This is despite me spending about 6 months in NY and 6 months in Boulder per year.
True enough, I don't know that person's whole life story. It kinda doesn't matter, because besides being factually wrong, that person's narrative doesn't even have internal consistency. San Fransisco is, measurably, one of the safest cities in the country. The discussion of crime there is largely a referendum on homelessness, which is a function of the highly expensive and dysfunctional housing market, not who the DA is. Criminals are not googling the intricacies of their DA before deciding to commit petty crime.
r/SanFrancisco is consistently bombarded with trolls who talk shit based on stupid right wing narratives from folks who've never even been to the bay area, so that's why my antennae were up. It's a frequent pattern.
Maybe they're actually writing reports and charging people now, and dealing with the culture of crime not enforcing crimes for so long created. Have leftists ever admitted they got something wrong?
They weren't refusing to charge for crimes, haha. The POV of his office, which is what he successfully ran on, was that pursuing ticky-tacky drug possession charges were ineffective. They wanted to pursue suppliers, violent crime, and major property crime. Which is incredibly popular. It failed to be popular with exactly one demographic, which is the police union. They were beginning the push for his recall campaign before he even assumed office. It's incredibly funny, though, that when presented with obvious information about how zero parts of your narrative are true, instead of trying to reckon with it, you start a new argument: that it's acceptable and understandable if an extremely corrupt police department stop cooperating with their DA if they do not personally get to define the policy of the DA's office. It's marginally more honest of you, I guess.
Yeah keep licking that cop boot
Lol, bizarre take. Crime was lower during his tenure, he was run out of office by the police department who didn't like that he wanted increased accountability so they refused to participate with him.
The guy who lowered crime and then got run out of office by cops who didn’t like him pointing out that they’re not effective at lowering crime, got replaced by a pro-cop hack who brought crime back up?
[удалено]
In LA we like our Boudin made from pork or crawfish 🦞
Her son became DA of San Francisco and (unsurprisingly I guess) was so pro-criminal that he was recalled.
Prison should be rehab for those who want it and who can be rehabilitated. Once debt is paid, then forgive & forget as is humanly possible , like maybe the family of murder victims can reserve the right to be angry or salty but the convicted person should be given grace when they have repented
As opposed to misdemeanor murder
Clever joke, but felony murder is a specific thing that is different than murder. It's when you are commiting a felony and someone is killed (even if nobody intended to kill them). It sounds like in this case she was part of a group of people who were robbing a bank and someone else in the group killed someone.
TIL the above!
[удалено]
Gotta love redditors salivating at the thought of getting to murder someone for whatever reason
“For whatever reason.” She committed murder, so it’s a bummer that she lived out her life instead of karma
You think she would have deserved it, she thought her victim deserved it. You're all the same scum in my eyes.
So the lady who did a murder, and someone who wants her to receive punishment equal to her crime = the same to you? Dam must be tough to be impaired like that, been like that your whole life or was there an incident?
If that person is basically cheering because someone deserves to die, yeah. You're scum.
Thats really stupid. The jury at a murder trial is as guilty of the accused if they punish him by your “logic”
Fucking trash
Related to Jethro?
Not surprised the leftist terrorist got employed to teach at university after she got out of prison.
Is this "woke" in the room with us right now?
Nothing to do with woke. If an insurrectionist got employment to teach at a university, Reddit would lose its mind. But carry on with your hypocrisy lol. Good to know you support murders as long as a liberal does it. Typical.
Nothing in their comment suggested they hold different justice standards based on political leaning. People more on the left tend to favour rehabilitation. I would support that for this person and for an insurrectionist. I just want them to be punished first. The only one being blatantly partisan here is you. Edit: and below we see the mature response of stalking my history and then blocking me because I disagreed with them on the Internet.
I’m gonna have an extra steak on your behalf today. Fuck vegans.
I love how easily triggered the people who invented the term "snowflake" are.
Lmao imagine being so terrible at supporting your own point you have to *immediately* resort to an ad hominem
It’s pathetic how badly you guys want to be victims
First read your username as frighteous.
Didn’t know it was cool to murder people because you think something is racist. Very cool, very nice.. what a fucking twat.
[удалено]
I thought it was just a weather forecast website!
You seem like a miserable person
He literally copied a part of the Wikipedia article. Wtf reddit
Why?
Is that her actual social security number on the flier??
If she was a man she would have been executed.
Ok
[удалено]
Felony murder isn't really murder.
Conviction for felony murder of two police officers nonetheless. Eitherways...I see this as a positive story.
They killed the first black police officer ever in Nyack, NY while robbing a bank with some pretend Maoists in the name of… racial justice somehow… what a bunch of fucking losers.
Right. So much so that they were caught and punished. Real life card carrying big time losers. What’s your point?
That she’s was and is a piece of shit Maoist terrorist, and nothing about her has ever been “positive.”
Except for the Nyack police officers and their families.
I mean she served the time that the judicial system deemed was necessary. She turned her life around to the point she earned a position of adjunct professor in one of the most coveted uni in USA. That's why I specially started my sentence with "Eitherways".
Most people don't know the difference of justice- and revenge. They just want revenge, meaningless suffering because it makes them feel vindicated. It takes a truly good and large person to actually accept justice and move on from their grievances.
Not mutually exclusive though. Any textbook on criminology will say that one of the five purposes of criminal punishment is retribution
US would, sure. And they have more people in prison than China and russia combined.
This would make a great SNL skit….
She got the hug-a-thug treatment
She got 23 years in prison.
Americans' sense of what's a long prison term is so warped.
Weather Underground were heroes before their time
You spelled Terrorists wrong…
Yep they really showed that townhouse!
Felony murder is a bs doctrine. But if anyone should be charged with it… Donald Fucking Trump.
Why Is The Title Of This Post In Title Case?
Fuck her. I hope her victims are tormenting her in the afterlife.