Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Due process? How about "don't process" ?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

    Originally posted by Blueintheface View Post
    Kinda hard to doctor 19 videos in such a way as to have them all agree with each other.
    I don't get the joke.
    What crime has ever been videoed in such a manner?
    In fact, why does security film come out shittier than my iPhone?

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #32
      Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

      You made the first mention of video.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #33
        Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

        Originally posted by Blueintheface View Post
        You made the first mention of video.
        The seemingly most valid evidence can be doctored so a lack of investigation can result in a terrible miscarriage of justice.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #34
          Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

          Originally posted by Blueintheface View Post
          As opposed to $2M to $3M in expenses for each death sentence carried out. Or $35K/yr to keep a prison inmate. There is a floating pile of garbage in the Pacific we could get cheap.
          Oh it's cheaper because you say it is. Convincing argument.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #35
            Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

            Death Penalty Information Center

            How much does the
            death penalty cost?
            There are many ways to approach the
            question of how much the death penalty costs. One
            could calculate the cost of each individual step in
            a death penalty case, such as the investigation, the
            trial, and the appeals, though this approach focuses
            only on the distinct minority of cases that go through
            the whole system. Another approach would be to
            measure the extra cost to the state of arriving at one
            death sentence or one execution, a cost that must
            include the many potential death penalty cases that
            failed to produce such a result. Finally, one could
            assess the total extra costs to the state for maintaining
            the death penalty system instead of a system in which
            life in prison was the maximum sentence, on a yearly
            or multi-year basis. In recent years, studies have been
            conducted not just to determine the bottom line
            in dollars and cents for this system, but as a way of
            evaluating whether the death penalty is justified in
            comparison to other pressing state needs.
            There is no national figure for the cost of the
            death penalty. Every state study is dependent on
            that state’s laws, pay scales, and the extent to which it
            uses the death penalty. Studies have been conducted
            by research organizations, public defender offices,
            legislative committees, and the media. Researchers
            have employed different approaches, using different
            assumptions. However, all of the studies conclude
            that the death penalty system is far more expensive
            than an alternative system in which the maximum
            sentence is life in prison.
            The high costs to the state per execution
            reflect the following reality: For a single death penalty
            trial, the state may pay $1 million more than for a
            non-death penalty trial.
            36
            But only one in every three
            capital trials may result in a death sentence,
            37
            so the
            true cost of that death sentence is $3 million. Further
            down the road, only one in ten of the death sentences
            handed down may result in an execution.
            38
            Hence,
            the cost to the state to reach that one execution is $30
            million. Sums like these are causing officials to rethink
            the wisdom of such expenditures.
            Although arriving at the actual cost of the
            death penalty in a state is complicated, in some
            states $30 million per execution is a very conservative
            estimate:
            • In 2008, the California Commission on
            the Fair Administration of Justice released an
            exhaustive report on the state’s capital punishment
            system, concluding that it was “dysfunctional”
            and “broken.” The report found that the state was
            spending $137 million per year on the death penalty.
            The Commission estimated a comparable system
            that sentenced the same inmates to a maximum
            punishment of life without parole would cost
            only $11.5 million per year.
            39
            Since the number
            of executions in California has averaged less than
            one every two years since the death penalty was
            reinstated in 1977, the cost for each execution is over
            $250 million. The state has also indicated it needs
            another $400 million to construct a new death row.
            • In New York and New Jersey, the high costs
            of capital punishment were one factor in those states’
            recent decisions to abandon the death penalty. New
            York spent about $170 million over 9 years and had
            no executions.
            40
            New Jersey spent $253 million over
            a 25-year period and also had no executions.
            41
            In
            such states the cost per execution obviously cannot
            be calculated, but even assuming they eventually
            DP4.indd 14 10/17/09 9:45 AMRECONSIDERING THE DEATH PENALTY IN A TIME OF ECONOMIC CRISIS
            15
            reached one execution every other year, and
            continued the annual expenditures indicated in their
            studies, the cost per execution would be in the $20-
            to-$40 million range.
            • In Maryland, where a legislative commission
            recently recommended abolishing the death penalty,
            a comprehensive cost study by the Urban Institute
            estimated the extra costs to taxpayers for death
            penalty cases prosecuted between 1978 and 1999 to
            be $186 million.
            42
            Based on the 5 executions carried
            out in the state, this translates to a cost of $37 million
            per execuion.
            It is important to emphasize the high
            costs per execution do not mean that executions
            themselves are expensive, or that pursuing one
            execution will cost tens of millions of dollars. Rather,
            these costs reflect the reality that most capital
            prosecutions never result in a death sentence, and
            most death sentences do not result in an execution.
            The extra expenses begin mounting as soon as
            counsel are appointed in a potential death penalty
            case.
            I worked in correctionsfor
            30 years. . . I came to believe that the
            death penalty should be replaced
            with life without the possibility of
            parole. I didn’t reach that conclusion
            because I’m soft on crime. My No. 1
            concern is public safety. I wish the
            public knew how much the death penalty affectstheir
            wallets.
            California spends an additional $117 million each year
            pursuing the execution of those on death row. Just
            housing inmates on death row costs an additional
            $90,000 per prisoner per year above what it would cost
            to house them with the general prison population.
            v
            -Jeanne Woodford, former Warden of San Quentin
            Death Penalty Costs Increasing
            Moreover, the costs per execution are rising.
            In 1988, the Miami Herald estimated that the costs
            of the death penalty in Florida were $3.2 million per
            execution, based on the costs and rate of executions
            at that time.
            43
            But today there are more people on
            death row, fewer executions per year, and higher
            overall costs, all contributing to a significantly higher
            cost per execution. A recent estimate by the Palm
            Beach Post found a much higher cost per execution:
            Florida now spends $51 million a year over what it
            would spend to punish all first-degree murderers
            with life in prison without parole. Based on the 44
            executions Florida carried out from 1976 to 2000, that
            amounts to a cost of $24 million for each execution, a
            significant rise from earlier projections.
            44
            [T]he death penalty is
            inefficient and extravagantly
            expensive. . . . Spending scarce
            public resources on after-school
            programs, mental health care, drug
            and alcohol treatment, education,
            more crime labs and new
            technologies, or on hiring more police officers, would
            truly help create safer communities.
            vi
            -Norm Stamper, 35-Year-Veteran Police Officer;
            Chief of Police, Seattle
            A similar increase appears in California.
            In 1988, the Sacramento Bee found that the death
            penalty cost California $90 million annually beyond
            the ordinary expenses of the justice system, of which
            $78 million was incurred at the trial level.
            45
            But the
            costs have increased sharply since then. According to
            the Los Angeles Timesin 2005, maintaining the death
            penalty system now costs taxpayers more than $114
            million a year beyond the cost of simply keeping the
            convicts locked up for life. This figure does not count
            the millions more spent on court costs to prosecute
            capital cases. The Times concluded that Californians
            and federal taxpayers are paying more than $250
            million for each execution.
            46
            It is also telling to examine the costs of
            specific features of the death penalty system, as
            revealed through state and federal studies:
            DP4.indd 15 10/17/09 9:45 AMRECONSIDERING THE DEATH PENALTY IN A TIME OF ECONOMIC CRISIS
            16
            • In Maryland, the 106 cases in which a death
            sentence was sought but not imposed will cost the
            state $71 million. This extra cost is solely due to the
            fact that the death penalty was pursued, even though
            the ultimate outcome was a life or long-term prison
            sentence.
            47
            • The average cost for the defense at trial in a
            federal death case is $620,932, about 8 times that of a
            non-capital federal murder case.
            48
            • In Kansas, the trial costs for death cases
            were about 16 times greater than for non-death
            cases ($508,000 for death case; $32,000 for non-death
            case). The appeal costs for death cases were 21 times
            greater.
            49
            • In California, the cost of confining one inmate
            to death row is $90,000 per year more than the costs
            of incarcerating the same inmate in a maximumsecurity prison. Death row inmates require higher
            security, often in single cells, where meals and other
            essentials are brought to them daily. This is a very
            inefficient means of confinement. With California’s
            current death row population of 670, that amounts
            to over $60 million annually.
            50
            And a new death row
            is being planned, at a cost of about $400,000 per
            inmate.
            It’s hard to imagine that any of the 89 Kansas
            lawmakers who voted in 1994 to revive the death
            penalty for the “the worst of the worst” criminals
            anticipated it would still be unused come 2007. Each
            yearsends more men to Kansas’ death row, nine in all
            currently, but the legal challengesto theirsentences
            continue at a glacial pace. Then there isthe cost to
            taxpayers, averaging $1.2 million each by one tally.
            Atsome point, given the legal problems and the lack
            of executions, a death penalty stops making sense for
            Kansas.
            vii
            -Editorial, (Kansas) Wichita Eagle
            O

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #36
              Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

              Here is an island for only $20M

              http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com...67927507985907

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #37
                Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

                Originally posted by Blueintheface View Post
                The recent headlines compel this question to come up.

                I'm beginning to warm up to the idea of taking the next "shooter" that randomly commits mass murder, such as Seung-Hui Cho, Nidal Hasan, and James Eagan Holmes as examples and just skipping the whole rule of law thing and marching them straight to the firing squad. We do have a debt crisis to consider.

                We have all thought about it. some of us dismiss the beginnings of ideas where something could be implemented to accomplish it but are discouraged for one fear or another. I'll bet others of us are already on board.

                Is it a good idea?
                What have you thought?
                Absolutely not. Just considering the thought and ignoring the obvious constitutional challenges, it would be the beginning of a trend where political whim would dictate who does and does not have Due Process. Then the precedent would move from the 5th Amendment and the 6th Amendment to perhaps the 4th Amendment where we could decide who does and does not get Constitutional protection from unreasonable search and seizure. If you think about it, that is already under attack on other fronts. Then you can move onto the 1st Amendment and others. The result would go a long way into ensuring this country falls to government dictation over an enslaved society with selective (if any) rights.

                Probably making your idea the worst offered in some time...

                Originally posted by Blueintheface View Post
                Why would or wouldn't it work?
                It is not a matter of it working or not as such, it is the probable effect of government playing who does and does not have basic Constitutional rights in some vain effort to deal with a select few (at start.) It is a matter of an illusion that this will do something about the mass murders we have.

                Originally posted by Blueintheface View Post
                Does your idea involve capital punishment or a penal island?
                I am ok with Capital Punishment, always have been but that is another matter as we are talking about the process to get to that point. Would love to see it extended to any violent or sexual crimes against kids. But that is just me, another subject, and I am sure the far left and civil libertarians will get all upset about that point.

                Originally posted by Blueintheface View Post
                How can it be controlled so we don't get summary executions for traffic violations?
                It can't. There is no way to control the selective removal of rights and hope down the road Government whim does not fuck it all. You start this trend and it is done, probably very difficult to get back. Political whim is too wild and too interested in removal of rights under the illusion of safety these days as it is now anyway. You add in legislated rights removal for some and it will not be long before the pool of people without rights becomes quite large. There is a core and good reason why we all have rights and at least on paper to some degree of equality.

                There is zero logical merit (especially when considering precedent) to suggesting selective rights removal solves a problem, none. Don't get me wrong, we all (well, most of us) get pretty upset and concerned about dealing with mass murderers, crimes against kids, etc. We probably all have some degree of concern about the criminal justice system as a whole but selective rights removal is just a terrible idea even in concept.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #38
                  Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

                  Originally posted by Sluggo View Post
                  It can't. There is no way to control the selective removal of rights and hope down the road Government whim does not fuck it all. You start this trend and it is done, probably very difficult to get back. Political whim is too wild and too interested in removal of rights under the illusion of safety these days as it is now anyway. You add in legislated rights removal for some and it will not be long before the pool of people without rights becomes quite large. There is a core and good reason why we all have rights and at least on paper to some degree of equality.
                  That's what has me thinking. Are we as a society capable of moderation? Does everything have to be at one extreme? Is there a balanced approach to justice? Do we have unlimited rights? We know we don't. Do we have unlimited rights to justice no matter how badly we act? Is there such thing as unlimited justice? Is that what we are attempting to create when we take 3 to 5 years to try someone who's guilt is as proven as fact as true and inescapable as the death they caused?

                  Due process is a sacred cow. I get that. But everything in life is best consumed in balance. The only thing I want my government to do is to protect me from those who would harm me. Not provide my healthcare, decide who I can marry or what I can drink and smoke. Get out of my wallet and out of my bed. If they would focus as much energy in the skillful application of justice as they do debating steroids and gay marriage I think I could trust them to allow as much or as little due process as the circumstances indicate. Not by whim, but buy law. Not dictated by by government but mandated by the people. There is nothing to gain from watching some crazy red haired asshole sit in court for the next half decade.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #39
                    Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

                    Originally posted by Blueintheface View Post
                    That's what has me thinking. Are we as a society capable of moderation? Does everything have to be at one extreme? Is there a balanced approach to justice? Do we have unlimited rights? We know we don't. Do we have unlimited rights to justice no matter how badly we act? Is there such thing as unlimited justice? Is that what we are attempting to create when we take 3 to 5 years to try someone who's guilt is as proven as fact as true and inescapable as the death they caused?

                    Due process is a sacred cow. I get that. But everything in life is best consumed in balance. The only thing I want my government to do is to protect me from those who would harm me. Not provide my healthcare, decide who I can marry or what I can drink and smoke. Get out of my wallet and out of my bed. If they would focus as much energy in the skillful application of justice as they do debating steroids and gay marriage I think I could trust them to allow as much or as little due process as the circumstances indicate. Not by whim, but buy law. Not dictated by by government but mandated by the people. There is nothing to gain from watching some crazy red haired asshole sit in court for the next half decade.
                    An effort of this sort very well may start in moderation and depending upon the subject may stay in moderation for a some period of time. But there is no evidence that political whim and extremism in this country will allow it to remain in moderation over the long term. Simply put, you start this ball down the hill and you will not be able to stop it.

                    The balance you speak of would not exist with selective rights removal, it is just playing into the hands of mob mentality. It is not about unlimited rights as we do not have unlimited rights now. Take search and seizure for a moment, you really think we have that right as an absolute? Take freedom of speech, can you really yell "fire!" in a crowded theater when there is no fire without possible consequence? We already have plenty of limits on rights and anything but association with unlimited rights.

                    As people we should always mandate rights for everyone on some level of equality but not as absolutes. It will never work any more than the inverse which is no rights (the end game once selective rights removal is started.) When you introduce government manufactured inequality, no matter how well intentioned, bad things happen. It could not be selective rights removal at the hands of the people, it would be all emotion decision making with a total lack of acting within reason. Mob mentality would take over, it has happened before. It is a view into human history to look at what happens when extreme acts are left to the masses to handle themselves on the fly with no order or intent. There are plenty of instances of the same lesson that should be learned, trading freedoms for security does not work overall.

                    Imagine for a moment what would have happened if the police just arbitrarily handed over James Holmes after the murders at the movie theater and said "this one has no rights, he is yours." Some may like the idea probably acting on emotional reactions wanting harsh revenge over the logic associated with why we have a system of law and order (even with all of it's flaws.) There is no good outcome for mob mentality dictated rights removal, and we are seeing what happens already when the government inches further into the rights they claim we have now.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #40
                      Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

                      Ignoring the rights of others is seldom done in moderation.
                      Speedier trials are a great idea but non-judicial detainment/deportation is simply un-american.

                      Patrolling $20 million dollar islands also isn't free.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #41
                        Re: Due process? How about &amp;quot;don't process&amp;quot; ?

                        Originally posted by Sluggo View Post
                        As people we should always mandate rights for everyone on some level of equality but not as absolutes. It will never work any more than the inverse which is no rights (the end game once selective rights removal is started.)
                        That was a great, level headed response and I thank you! This one line from your post speaks to gays and pot smokers, atheists and prostitutes, gun owners, gamblers pregnant rape victims, children of aliens and anyone else who suffers from selective rights.

                        I don't want to see any erosion of the rights of the accused. But accused is a poor term for the likes of Hasan and Holmes. They are guilty. No further proof is possible. Call up a grand jury with the authority to say (maybe by unanimous vote) that the case qualifies for immediate sentencing. but that's it!

                        - - - Updated - - -

                        Originally posted by JDJarvis View Post
                        Ignoring the rights of others is seldom done in moderation.
                        Speedier trials are a great idea but non-judicial detainment/deportation is simply un-american.

                        Patrolling $20 million dollar islands also isn't free.
                        Please, I never said free.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #42
                          Re: Due process? How about &quot;don't process&quot; ?

                          Bet if the constitution mentioned horse and buggy anywhere we wouldn't have cars.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?

                          Working...
                          X