President Trump supports prison reform

[SamSpade]

That's another thing I'd change. No more "life sentences".

This is going to sound weird - but - let me back it up a bit. One year in high school, the resolution for the next year's debate was about prison sentencing and reform.
I spent the better part of a summer reading about the death penalty - or its alternative, life sentence.
Fortunately for me, one of the judges was on my paper route and lived about a quarter mile from my house.
I went to his office at the courthouse - and he had a stack of papers this high to read for the summer.
The 15 mile trek home on the public bus - and the long walk from the stop to where I lived - whew.
It's one subject that, at least, by junior year - I knew a lot about.

What I learned was that - unless you make a galactic, colossal change in the way things are done regarding the death penalty -
it's actually cheaper to sentence them to life. Why? Freaking endless appeals. Legal fees and so on.
And sometimes, the prisoner just plain says, get it over with already, I'm tired of the endless torment.
Such is the idiocy of our legal system - people tend to languish on death row - the current *AVERAGE* is about 15 years.
You can look it up - seems illogical but life without parole can actually cost LESS.

The other issue is something I don't think you'd get on board with, but I will bring it up.
The argument is always, why do we have a prison system at all? I get the point for execution - but why prison?
Is it deterrence? For some, it's not a deterrent at all - it's a deterrent for people like you and me who are
typically law-abiding. But not for many.

Is it rehabilitative? I mean, the old saw about destroying your enemy by making them a friend - don't you end crime
by undoing his criminality? There are many who argue and believe the purpose of the prison system is to set them straight.
Persuade them that - this is sheer hell and you never want to come back here.

Lastly - and I think this is where most people at least *FEEL* - it's punishment. Do the crime, do the time.
Justice is getting what you deserve and we serve it up here. If that guy who beat and raped my sister went to jail -
I don't care if he gets rehabilitated. I hope he got poked daily while in there. I hope he got what he deserved.

About 2% of the prison population is serving life without parole. Keeping them, executing them, economically it doesn't matter.
Maybe while serving, they can be pumped for information.

 

[black dog]

We should bring back the prison farms, not so long ago the substantial farms at Indianas State prisons we're a positive money flow. Surplus raised at the farms were sold along with the goods the prisoners manufactured.
It's gone and the ground is tilled by farmers now, and the animal barns are empty.

 

[vraiblonde]

Such is the idiocy of our legal system

Amen to that.

The argument is always, why do we have a prison system at all? I get the point for execution - but why prison?

Prison should be like a "time out" for adults. They broke the law, but nobody got hurt, so we're going to stick them in the corner for awhile so they can think about what they did, and how they might modify that behavior in the future.

Capital punishment is the ass beating because they don't seem to learn.

Persuade them that - this is sheer hell and you never want to come back here.

That's what prison should be, but for many of these guys it's a homie reunion. And a lot of them have it better in prison than at home, so there's no real incentive to walk the straight and narrow. We're never going to get rid of lawlessness and petty crime - it's just our human nature. But violent criminals, we can make sure that that particular one doesn't re-offend.

Honestly, I'd strap someone to the chair because they didn't pick up their dog's poop. Civilized social behavior isn't rocket surgery and anyone with at least a tiny gray cell or two should be able to accomplish it without a lot of effort. I don't understand why it's such a problem for some people.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

Defense lawyers and state's attorneys will just have to be more selective and judicious about which cases they take. If they know damn good and well their client did indeed commit the crime in question, they shouldn't take the case. How can someone live with themselves if they help get a lenient sentence or complete exoneration of a child rapist, who then goes on to prey on other children?

Or, how about this? If the ####bag in question goes on to commit another similar crime, the defense lawyer AND the judge/jury who either let him go or handed down the spanky ALL get the needle. I'll bet you'd see an abrupt end to all these criminal rights that are somehow more important than the victim's rights.

You realize that many lawyers get assigned cases and have to represent those defendants much like you have to do jury duty.

In most public defender cases lawyers are assigned cases and must put forth the best effort that they can, that is the law. The instant someone doesn't get proper representation for their trial that person will get off on a "technicality".

 

[vraiblonde]

You realize that many lawyers get assigned cases and have to represent those defendants much like you have to do jury duty.

In most public defender cases lawyers are assigned cases and must put forth the best effort that they can, that is the law. The instant someone doesn't get proper representation for their trial that person will get off on a "technicality".

Such is the idiocy of our legal system

I mean, obviously someone should get legal representation when accused of a crime, and I have no problem with that. But when it's their second and third and fourth etc time, at what point do we call enough?

If you've a mind, get the old Hill Street Blues series on Amazon. I lost count of how many times I wanted to punch Joyce Davenport in the throat. I was more of a Lucy Bates fan.

 

[Kyle]

You realize that many lawyers get assigned cases and have to represent those defendants much like you have to do jury duty.

In most public defender cases lawyers are assigned cases and must put forth the best effort that they can, that is the law. The instant someone doesn't get proper representation for their trial that person will get off on a "technicality".

Getting fair and proper representation is one thing.

Modern lawyers mantra of getting the guilty sprung any way possible is bs.

 

[Rommey]

Instead of trying to keep out all the illicit drugs out of prisons, maybe they should just make as much available in the hopes some of the prison population takes care of the overcrowding problem.

 

[Hijinx]

My plan has always been in Capitol cases we take due care to have a fair trial.
If the person has murdered someone and the jury says execute, we have another trial exactly 6 months later.
New trial ,new prosecutor ,new defense.
The second time the jury comes back and say execute give them 24 hrs to say goodbye to the family and get it done.

No death soup of drugs, no electric chair, two 45 caliber bullets to the temple. AMF.

 

[vraiblonde]

Modern lawyers mantra of getting the guilty sprung any way possible is bs.

Yep. Getting a "win" no matter what the cost to society.

 

[vraiblonde]

My plan has always been in Capitol cases we take due care to have a fair trial.
If the person has murdered someone and the jury says execute, we have another trial exactly 6 months later.
New trial ,new prosecutor ,new defense.
The second time the jury comes back and say execute give them 24 hrs to say goodbye to the family and get it done.

No death soup of drugs, no electric chair, two 45 caliber bullets to the temple. AMF.

We should also have professional juries, not random dumbasses off the street who bring their own biases and proclivities into play. In capitol cases, jury members are well-known to vote not guilty because they don't want to have someone's death on their conscience.

 

[BOP]

Two obvious points:

1. You didn't read the points our incompetent President made.

2. You REALLY don't have the first clue about how our govt or society works do you?

At least you admit that he's your President too. Baby steps, little tranny; baby steps.

 

[Hijinx]

We should also have professional juries, not random dumbasses off the street who bring their own biases and proclivities into play. In capitol cases, jury members are well-known to vote not guilty because they don't want to have someone's death on their conscience.

Better the death of a killer on my conscience than the deaths of his victims.
There is no known case on record where an executed killer ever killed again.

 

[BOP]

Defense lawyers and state's attorneys will just have to be more selective and judicious about which cases they take. If they know damn good and well their client did indeed commit the crime in question, they shouldn't take the case. How can someone live with themselves if they help get a lenient sentence or complete exoneration of a child rapist, who then goes on to prey on other children?

Or, how about this? If the ####bag in question goes on to commit another similar crime, the defense lawyer AND the judge/jury who either let him go or handed down the spanky ALL get the needle. I'll bet you'd see an abrupt end to all these criminal rights that are somehow more important than the victim's rights.

Let's ask Hillary, since she has first hand experience.

 

[awpitt]

Has anyone here read the President's proposals?

In all of this thread, I haven't seen anyone post reactions to what Vrai posted.... https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...ative-action-reduce-recidivism-prison-system/

 

[MiddleGround]

I know how it works, bebe; I'm discussing how it *should* work.

Quite obviously, you DO NOT if you said this:

Defense lawyers and state's attorneys will just have to be more selective and judicious about which cases they take. If they know damn good and well their client did indeed commit the crime in question, they shouldn't take the case. How can someone live with themselves if they help get a lenient sentence or complete exoneration of a child rapist, who then goes on to prey on other children?

Or, how about this? If the ####bag in question goes on to commit another similar crime, the defense lawyer AND the judge/jury who either let him go or handed down the spanky ALL get the needle. I'll bet you'd see an abrupt end to all these criminal rights that are somehow more important than the victim's rights.

Yuo do know that PDs are in a pool and do not really have a choice over which cases they get.. right?

Of course you do. You NEVER make comments or post "opinions" without proper research. That, and your extensive experience when you interned.. right?

 

[MiddleGround]

I mean, obviously someone should get legal representation when accused of a crime, and I have no problem with that. But when it's their second and third and fourth etc time, at what point do we call enough?

If you've a mind, get the old Hill Street Blues series on Amazon. I lost count of how many times I wanted to punch Joyce Davenport in the throat. I was more of a Lucy Bates fan.

Nice attempt at walking back your mistake

Watching 6 seasons of Hill street Blues does not constitute an internship in the legal system BTW.

 

[PsyOps]

Please point out where I said that. Or let me know if you're just looking for an argument so I can put you on Ignore for the day.

Are you trying to say that defense lawyers don't know whether or not their client is likely guilty or innocent? Because I can assure you that they most certainly do.

You didn't outright say that, that's why I asked. But, how do we try these criminals if they don't have defense lawyers? Someone has to take the job. Yet you want to put them to death? Come on Vrai... sometimes I think you post things just to be provocative. You know our constitution demands that everyone charged with a crime has a right to a defense and a speedy trial.

 

[vraiblonde]

Has anyone here read the President's proposals?

In all of this thread, I haven't seen anyone post reactions to what Vrai posted.... https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...ative-action-reduce-recidivism-prison-system/

I think it's sweet, I really do.

Unrealistic, but sweet.

I'm all for helping people get their chit together and put them on the path toward a productive life, and I do like the idea of separating the prisoners by criminal proclivities and attitude. But I think The Donald is living in a dream world. A lot of those guys make more money in prison than they did on the outside, so dangling extra commissary money in front of them isn't much of an incentive.

Something needs to be done about our drug problem in this country, and we need to get a better handle on our mentally ill. I'm not sure what actions would be popular enough with the bleeding hearts that it could be implemented (nobody ever likes my ideas, although they would surely be effective ).

 

[vraiblonde]

You didn't outright say that, that's why I asked. But, how do we try these criminals if they don't have defense lawyers? Someone has to take the job. Yet you want to put them to death? Come on Vrai... sometimes I think you post things just to be provocative. You know our constitution demands that everyone charged with a crime has a right to a defense and a speedy trial.

Meh, I just tossed it out there. I was more thinking about the lawyers who know damn good and well that their client committed an atrocious crime, yet go to the mat defending them in every way possible to get a "win" under their belt. So many of these ####bag criminals, it's not their first rodeo - judges see their asses over and over - and yet they still walk away with a spanky. We see that ALL THE TIME in the MD Judiciary case search.

 

[GURPS]

If they know damn good and well their client did indeed commit the crime in question, they shouldn't take the case. How can someone live with themselves if they help get a lenient sentence or complete exoneration of a child rapist, who then goes on to prey on other children ..

because EVERYONE is Entitled to Defense