Forums | MacLife

Anonymous Delivers! wrote:

Within reason.

Ta-da.

Ok, smarty, look at it the other way. Do you think paying $10 for stealing $5 is enough punishment? Sounds link a low-risk way to perfect your pick-pocketing skills.

[Edit] Oh yeah, and another thing. By adding "within reason", are you admitting that your original unadorned prescription of a 2x fine is not reasonable?

Last edited by mackerm (2009-11-08 1:07 pm)

MysticCow wrote:

resedit wrote:

MysticCow wrote:

I don't think standing in front of the courthouse is punishment enough.  Maybe a place where more people congregate would be better.

Yeah, but the porn store complained it would be bad for business.

I giggled a little at this.

Anyhoo, these people weren't embarrassed ENOUGH, imo.  Put them on the news for a week and make them admit it every day.  Then force them to work off 25 times the debt in the store.  THEN make them parade around with the sign.

If you ask me, they didn't get a harsh enough sentence and I don't give a damn that it was just a little trinket stolen.  Make an example out of them.

Christ.

The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America wrote:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Public humiliation is certainly unusual in this day and age.  Your suggestion is excessive in fines, cruel, and unusual.

Read the damn Constitution, people.  Stop letting your thirst for vengeance motivate your life.  It is unhealthy to revel in the pain of others.  Criminals need rehabilitation, not draconian punishment for punishment's sake.

A punishment to that degree (getting stuck on the news for a week) should be restricted to crimes that actually have made a difference, and that's assuming the convicted actually cares...

Nobody is going to put someone on the news for a week for stealing a gift card. It's just not practical. In regards to the street dealio, even if they're marked as thieves, only the people that saw them are going to know, they could restart their lives in another state, or even another town..

Hippie Daniel wrote:

Prison isn't the solution.  Rehabilitation is.  Counseling.  This country, thanks to people with attitudes like yours, has overflowing prisons thanks to the "lock 'em up and throw away the key" mentality.

Ooh, I can change someone's nick also!!!

Then how much therapy should this idiot get for stealing?  Go ahead, sentence her.  Tell me how many therapy sessions she needs to get.

On the other hand, things like jail are supposed to be deterrents.  It isn't working, considering the prison populations.  So for a smaller crime like this, make them work the hell out of their sentences in the store.

Last edited by MysticCow (2009-11-09 4:01 pm)

Anonymous Delivers! wrote:

mackerm wrote:

Anonymous Delivers! wrote:

Within reason.

Ta-da.

Ok, smarty, look at it the other way. Do you think paying $10 for stealing $5 is enough punishment? Sounds link a low-risk way to perfect your pick-pocketing skills.

Whereas the other extreme is to lop people's hands off? That's a fine model of government right there!

No, the other extreme is standing outside a courthouse with a sign saying you stole a gift card from a 9 year-old girl on her birthday.

[Edit] Oh yeah, and another thing. By adding "within reason", are you admitting that your original unadorned prescription of a 2x fine is not reasonable?

No. Certainly gives a reason to still have judges discern the varying degrees of a crime.

I don't exactly get what you're saying "no" to since you felt the need to add "within reason," but your proposal now seems radically from what you originally said:

Anonymous Delivers! previously wrote:

Force a double repayment of theft, garnished wages if not willfully paid, temporary restraining order, send everyone on their way.

I hope it's not simply to tell people to act with reason and discernment.

MysticCow wrote:

On the other hand, things like jail are supposed to be deterrents.  It isn't working, considering the prison populations.  So for a smaller crime like this, make them work the hell out of their sentences in the store.

So you've answered your own question. Throwing people in prison for ever increasing sentences isn't working. The "get tough on crime" solution isn't working. Recidivism is still rather high. Many people have no clue how to function when they try to reintegrate into society and nobody bothers to teach them. Also, due to funding cuts and a lack of universal health care, many folks who are mentally ill wind up in prison as well. They don't get treatment and the cycle continues.

They swiped a gift card to WalMart which was probably only worth $25 or so. This is petty theft at best. They should pay a fine and do community service.

I agree in rehabilitation- rather than revenge-driven justice -- it's more effective to address why people commit crimes than to simply remove them from society -- but unless these people are habitual thieves, even that seems a bit over-the-top with this simple case.

radarman wrote:

Sternum wrote:

They swiped a gift card to WalMart which was probably only worth $25 or so. This is petty theft at best. They should pay a fine and do community service.

I agree in rehabilitation- rather than revenge-driven justice -- it's more effective to address why people commit crimes than to simply remove them from society -- but unless these people are habitual thieves, even that seems a bit over-the-top with this simple case.

They did do community service. They told everyone in the community that they were petty thieves, warning anyone who saw them to keep their purse/wallet tight when they come near.

I think the punishment was completely appropriate, especially since it was voluntary in lieu of jail time.

Voluntary, ya right. An agreement arrived at with coercion is not voluntary.
I would imagine the deal was something along the lines of hold the sign for an afternoon or serve the maximum legally allowed sentence. A Max sentence no one is given.

Hey, maybe they deserved it, I don't know or care. But what I do know for a fact is that plea agreements are primarily used to railroad the innocent into pleading guilty.
Perhaps it's time for me to post a retelling of how I spent 2 years fighting off a DA over something he had no case to convict.

Pariah wrote:

radarman wrote:

Sternum wrote:

They swiped a gift card to WalMart which was probably only worth $25 or so. This is petty theft at best.

I think the punishment was completely appropriate, especially since it was voluntary in lieu of jail time.

Voluntary, ya right. An agreement arrived at with coercion is not voluntary.

This isn't coercion.  It was an alternative sentencing that they had the choice between.  Everybody's saying that they should have done time, and they had that option.  They chose the public service instead.  I don't see a problem here.

Pariah wrote:

Hey, maybe they deserved it, I don't know or care. But what I do know for a fact is that plea agreements are primarily used to railroad the innocent into pleading guilty.
Perhaps it's time for me to post a retelling of how I spent 2 years fighting off a DA over something he had no case to convict.

Please do, I've somehow missed that story but I concur with your assessment of the purpose of plea agreements.