Thunderdome 2015 » Printable Version of Topic

Forum: Internet Links
Topic: should he serve time
started by: Malcolm

Posted by Malcolm on May 05 2014,10:19

< Read >.

Dude convicted of armed robbery in 2000, manages not to head to jail due to a clerical error. Judge says that since he's turned his life around that he doesn't have to serve any time.

Two things:

1) Should he be required to serve the sentence?
2) Would he have ended up as he is now had he gone to prison? Would he be better or worse?

Posted by TPRJones on May 05 2014,10:24

I don't think so, no.

1) It comes down to the question of "What is the purpose of jailing criminals?" If you look at the purpose as just raw punishment, then yes he should go to jail. But I don't think so. The purpose of jail is to protect society from people that do bad things, with the period of time roughly based on the seriousness of the crime they committed. At this point society needs no protection from this man, and in fact would be a bit lessened by his removal from his community. So at this point it would be unjust to send him to jail.

2) Probably not, he'd probably be much worse. Or at best even if he didn't grow bitter in prison, he'd have just gotten out last year and still be trying to put a life together.

Posted by TheCatt on May 05 2014,10:30

1) No. If this were murder or something more serious, I might feel differently. If it were a civil issue, and he had not made restitution, etc, I would feel that he should (up to the victim)
2) Probably worse, from what I hear about prison.

Posted by Malcolm on May 05 2014,10:45

QUOTE

The purpose of jail is to protect society from people that do bad things, with the period of time roughly based on the seriousness of the crime they committed.

The US legal system vehemently disagrees. But the legal system of the US and all the states underneath it are double plus retarded. I assume that since a judge had to step in and put a stop to this shit, the status quo is "jail the fucker unless his lawyer's good enough." I'd argue the legal system has mutated to the point where it is entirely about punishment. Any talk about "rehabilitation" is bullshit and half-truths.

QUOTE

2) Probably not, he'd probably be much worse.
...
2) Probably worse, from what I hear about prison.

If prison would've made him worse and releasing him to his own recognizance improved him, WHY THE FUCK is the legal system so quick to toss dudes like this in prison? It shouldn't take a chance clerical error.

QUOTE

Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster said in a statement that the outcome was "appropriate."

Go fuck yourself, Chris. Your douchebag officers took over a decade to bring him in and when they did, he was pretty much harmless. If you'd not rejailed him in the first place, I might believe you.

Posted by TPRJones on May 05 2014,11:03

QUOTE

I'd argue the legal system has mutated to the point where it is entirely about punishment.

I disagree. The system has mutated to the point where it is entirely about jailing as many people as possible for any possible excuse so as to make as much money for the prison industry as possible. Not that there's a conspiracy, just that police are encouraged to jail everyone, prosecutors are encouraged to prosecute everyone, judges are encouraged to rubber stamp it all, and the prison industry is getting fat sucking down our tax dollars to pay for it all. Because 9/11 Just Say No Three Strikes Tough On Crime!

Posted by Malcolm on May 05 2014,11:12

QUOTE

The system has mutated to the point where it is entirely about jailing as many people as possible for any possible excuse so as to make as much money for the prison industry as possible.

That's theft of my cash and\or time. How is that not punishment? Because they're not physically beating the shit out of someone?

Posted by TPRJones on May 05 2014,11:19

Punishment is purely accidental at this point - a byproduct of cost efficiency and long-term revenue stability policies - and not at all the main purpose.

Posted by Malcolm on May 05 2014,11:23

(TPRJones @ May 05 2014,13:19)

QUOTE

Punishment is purely accidental at this point - a byproduct of cost efficiency and long-term revenue stability policies - and not at all the main purpose.

Ah, accidental douchebaggery.

Posted by Cakedaddy on May 05 2014,11:32

(TPRJones @ May 05 2014,14:03)

QUOTE

I'd argue the legal system has mutated to the point where it is entirely about punishment.

That's a broad, and in some cases, incorrect assessment. I've had experience with two jails (as a contractor, not a guest!) and in both cases, the jails were over crowded, the guards/staff were under paid, the buildings were under maintained. They don't have money to effectively do their job. Who's getting all this money? Who are the 'fat cats' of the jail industry? I agree that jails cost a TON of money. But, they would need more to be . . . correct. I felt SO bad for the guards. VERY high level of respect for them working in the conditions they do. Common saying from guards to inmates "At least you have an out date". I could not imagine working in the conditions they do. But, someone has to do it and I respect them a LOT for volunteering for the job. Anyway, who's getting rich?

And you can site all the Just Say No, etc with your sarcasm. But I didn't meet anyone in jail that didn't belong there. Animals. Best way to describe them. Or savages.

Posted by Leisher on May 05 2014,11:56

There are indeed men who belong in jail. This guy is not one of them.

Posted by Malcolm on May 05 2014,11:56

QUOTE

That's a broad, and in some cases, incorrect assessment.
...
But I didn't meet anyone in jail that didn't belong there. Animals. Best way to describe them. Or savages.

No generalizations there.

QUOTE

Common saying from guards to inmates "At least you have an out date".

Guards can leave any time they want. No one forced them to take that job or go into that field against their will.

QUOTE

Who are the 'fat cats' of the jail industry?

The construction companies that build these places and the politicians that receive kickbacks. The judges and prosecutors who get to claim they're "tough on crime."

QUOTE

But, someone has to do it...

There's absolutely no reason, besides sloth or incompetence, for US penal system to be as mind-numbingly stupid and biased as it is. I suppose those are some pretty big reasons.

Posted by TPRJones on May 05 2014,12:06

QUOTE

They don't have money to effectively do their job. Who's getting all this money? Who are the 'fat cats' of the jail industry

Well, duh, of course they are underfunded. That's called "cost efficiency". Did you seriously think I was referring to the guards? Touring a prison and expecting to get at the heart of what is going on in the prison industry is like touring the slaughterhouse to get a feel for what McDonald's is like. That's just the ugly end of the operation, not the important part.

No, it's people like < Robert Marquardt > and his < cronies > that are getting rich. Not to mention all their lobbyists and the politicians that take their bribes. And all the other companies just like MTC.

Posted by Malcolm on May 05 2014,12:39

Here are < more > < assholes > cashing in on the facade that "more prisons make citizens safer." That first company has had its revenue go up by 500% in the past two decades. Wow ... what < batshit insanity > was going on at the time that caused the administration back then to < double down on dumb-assery >? Thanks, Ronnie.

Posted by Cakedaddy on May 05 2014,13:53

1. I'm not generalizing. I didn't say all, or even most. I said the ones I met. The ones I had personal contact with. The ones I personally observed. How is that a generalization when I'm talking about a specific group that I had actual exposure to?

2. Um, duh? What's your point? Because it seems like you are telling a vet "I don't care that you lost your legs. Shouldn't have signed up, dumbass.".

3. I don't know enough about the number of jails being built. How do judges profit from sending people to jail?

4. I don't know what your point is here, either.

Posted by Malcolm on May 05 2014,14:03

QUOTE

2. Um, duh? What's your point? Because it seems like you are telling a vet "I don't care that you lost your legs. Shouldn't have signed up, dumbass.".

You can't walk away from being a para. You can get another job.

QUOTE

3. I don't know enough about the number of jails being built. How do judges profit from sending people to jail?

< Example >. Mostly through rampant and unchecked corruption.

Posted by Cakedaddy on May 05 2014,14:29

(Malcolm @ May 05 2014,17:03)

QUOTE

2. Um, duh? What's your point? Because it seems like you are telling a vet "I don't care that you lost your legs. Shouldn't have signed up, dumbass.".

You can't walk away from being a para. You can get another job.

QUOTE

3. I don't know enough about the number of jails being built. How do judges profit from sending people to jail?

< Example >. Mostly through rampant and unchecked corruption.

2. So no one should be prison guards?

Posted by TPRJones on May 05 2014,14:36

Really, the guards are just as much victims of the system as the inmates.

Well, they can quit and go become male prostitutes or something, so they do have some choice. But this system is feeding off of guards, not enriching them.

Posted by Malcolm on May 05 2014,15:22

If the job is underpaid and involves working with the animals/savages of society in overcrowded conditions, then that system is so fucked up and ineffective that support should not be given to it. Someone out there has a better way to do this. Find them. Fund them. Let's see this capitalism, free market, and innovation at work.

Do you need some system of order, crime, and punishment? Probably. But this sure as shit ain't it or anywhere near it. It's worse than a mockery of a joke. I almost prefer medieval trial by ordeal.

Posted by TPRJones on May 05 2014,16:11

QUOTE

Let's see this capitalism, free market, and innovation at work.

That would be nice if we were talking about a capitalistic free market. But we are not. This is pure cronyism to it's very core. Your government dollars at work.