Mandatory Sentencing
-
I do. Even under the worst reading of what he's done he's still not done anything terribly serious, and certainly nothing worth ruining his life for. But that's what we do in the name of "getting tough on drugs." We ruin lots of lives.
And yes, I think a street corner heroin dealer deserves a stiff fine and no jail time for a first offense. If there's no violence involved, and you're not caught selling to minors, it should not land you in jail. You should be fined and put on probation.
I'm pretty sure that already happens. The prisons are already overcrowded as are the jails. In Cleveland and I'm sure LA the police won't even put you in jail or enforce a misdemeanor warrant. Only felonies. No room or they have to use a suburban jail and pay for it.
I'm pretty sure that already happens. The prisons are already overcrowded as are the jails. In Cleveland and I'm sure LA the police won't even put you in jail or enforce a misdemeanor warrant. Only felonies. No room or they have to use a suburban jail and pay for it.
Well, here are the Ohio drug laws. See if you can find what you're looking for in here. I tried to post it but it wouldn't let me. Said I was using too many emoticons.
Seriously, start reading in there and try not to imagine you're in a Joseph Heller novel.
-
REACT: Megyn Kelly, Michelle Malkin Take On Columbia for Hiring Ex-Radical Kathy Boudin as Professor
Twitter
26
Share
128
Columbia University has sparked outrage by giving a prestigious professorship to a former Weather Underground radical who spent 22 years in prison for a 1981 robbery that left three people dead.
Kathy Boudin, 69, now holds an adjunct professorship at Columbia University’s School of Social Work, The New York Post reported today. She apparently teaches courses on convicts re-entering society.
A movie by Robert Redford, “The Company You Keep,” also starring Susan Sarandon, is loosely based on the $1.6 million heist and will be released in a week. Two police officers and a Brinks security guard were killed in the robbery.
Megyn Kelly discussed the latest controversy surrounding an American university with Fox News contributor Michelle Malkin, who said colleges in this country are increasingly turning into “cesspools of tenured radicalization and rationalization for left-wing domestic violence.”
She said people need to take notice of how colleges and Hollywood are “whitewashing” the violent acts of the Weather Underground and other left-wing groups.
Megyn pointed out that O.J. Simpson and Casey Anthony were acquitted of murder, but punished in the court of public opinion, while Boudin is now teaching Ivy League students.
“She can admit to killing three law enforcement officers, serve 22 years in prison for it, and Columbia University gives her a prestigious job!” said Kelly.
-
Haha. Yes, the crank always thinks he's right. That's part of what makes him a crank.
I can't remember the last time I thought you were right or insightful about anything. You're just a really poor summarizer with a knack for logical fallacies. It's tough to be right when your assumptions are always wrong.
Haha. Yes, the crank always thinks he's right. That's part of what makes him a crank.
I can't remember the last time I thought you were right or insightful about anything. You're just a really poor summarizer with a knack for logical fallacies. It's tough to be right when your assumptions are always wrong.
Well seeing as how you have been reduced to nothing more than ad hominem attacks I guess I'm not all that crushed.
Bite my crank matey.
WSS
-
Oh, dear God. That's not an example of an ad hominem attack. But I guess the guy who includes a logical fallacy in just about every post wouldn't know one when he sees one.
Go back and find any the dozens of "Of course you would say that because you're an Obama bootlicker" posts.
There. That's the ad hominem fallacy.
Someone who takes every thread about the legal system and brings it back to a bitch about trial lawyers and liberal judges; who takes every every discussion about voting rights and takes it back to illiterate blacks on welfare, food stamp, and drugs; who takes every thread about global warming and brings it back to Al Gore; who took a thread about income inequality and suggested liberals want everyone to make the same amount of money, and I could go on ...yes, this is garden variety Republican crankery.
-
Here are Ohio's drug sentencing guidelines, including mandatory sentences.
-
Well I may or may not have used the word buttlicker still I'd say attacking me as a crank or asshole or whatever, (which is usually the height of your wit) , count as an attack on my character.
Lets try this: and that is because you are an arrogant dickhead.
Voila
But I understand your position. you are more angry that heroin dealers get 1 president terms then you are about child killers be released.
I have not seen any polls but I assume child rapists and murderers vote Democrat?
WSS
-
Geez. And you wonder why you never made it big.
-
You do realize that people get sentenced in the absence of mandatory sentencing, right? And that's why your cheap personal attack only makes you look dim?
Cal will like it though. Congrats.
PS - This? "But I understand your position. you are more angry that heroin dealers get 1 president terms then you are about child killers be released." Is a nice example of this.
You are a fucking machine.
-
You do realize that people get sentenced in the absence of mandatory sentencing, right? And that's why your cheap personal attack only makes you look dim?
Cal will like it though. Congrats.
PS - This? "But I understand your position. you are more angry that heroin dealers get 1 president terms then you are about child killers be released." Is a nice example of this.
You are a fucking machine.
You do realize that people get sentenced in the absence of mandatory sentencing, right? And that's why your cheap personal attack only makes you look dim?
Cal will like it though. Congrats.
PS - This? "But I understand your position. you are more angry that heroin dealers get 1 president terms then you are about child killers be released." Is a nice example of this.
You are a fucking machine.
Perhaps Bill is in a state of suspended animation neither technically dead or alive. Far out.
-
You do realize that people get sentenced in the absence of mandatory sentencing, right? And that's why your cheap personal attack only makes you look dim?
Cal will like it though. Congrats.
PS - This? "But I understand your position. you are more angry that heroin dealers get 1 president terms then you are about child killers be released." Is a nice example of this.
You are a fucking machine.
Perhaps Bill is in a state of suspended animation neither technically dead or alive. Far out.
Perhaps Bill is in a state of suspended animation neither technically dead or alive. Far out.
Like Terri Schiavo.
-
You do realize that people get sentenced in the absence of mandatory sentencing, right? And that's why your cheap personal attack only makes you look dim?
Cal will like it though. Congrats.
PS - This? "But I understand your position. you are more angry that heroin dealers get 1 president terms then you are about child killers be released." Is a nice example of this.
You are a fucking machine.
Perhaps Bill is in a state of suspended animation neither technically dead or alive. Far out.
Perhaps Bill is in a state of suspended animation neither technically dead or alive. Far out.
Bill?
WSS
-
Perhaps Bill is in a state of suspended animation neither technically dead or alive. Far out.
Bill?
WSS
Bill?
WSS
Heck's logical fallacy link
-
Oh, dear God. That's not an example of an ad hominem attack. But I guess the guy who includes a logical fallacy in just about every post wouldn't know one when he sees one.
Go back and find any the dozens of "Of course you would say that because you're an Obama bootlicker" posts.
There. That's the ad hominem fallacy.
Someone who takes every thread about the legal system and brings it back to a bitch about trial lawyers and liberal judges; who takes every every discussion about voting rights and takes it back to illiterate blacks on welfare, food stamp, and drugs; who takes every thread about global warming and brings it back to Al Gore; who took a thread about income inequality and suggested liberals want everyone to make the same amount of money, and I could go on ...yes, this is garden variety Republican crankery.
Oh, dear God. That's not an example of an ad hominem attack. But I guess the guy who includes a logical fallacy in just about every post wouldn't know one when he sees one.
Go back and find any the dozens of "Of course you would say that because you're an Obama bootlicker" posts.
There. That's the ad hominem fallacy.
Someone who takes every thread about the legal system and brings it back to a bitch about trial lawyers and liberal judges; who takes every every discussion about voting rights and takes it back to illiterate blacks on welfare, food stamp, and drugs; who takes every thread about global warming and brings it back to Al Gore; who took a thread about income inequality and suggested liberals want everyone to make the same amount of money, and I could go on ...yes, this is garden variety Republican crankery.
So because I unfortunately overestimated your knowledge I went back and looked up ad hominem to make sure I was using it correctly.
Yes indeed attacking my character instead of responding to what I have to say is certainly an ad hominem attack.
So your constant attacks on me being Oh, dim or unsuccessful or a Republican crank or any of the other dozens of nice things you have to say most certainly fall into that category.
And unfortunately the example went over your head, remember the arrogant d******* remark?
Now do you understand?
But I understand it's part of your shtick to be arrogant condescending not only to me but most others.
As far as mandatory sentences Cal is completely right.
It did grow out of the misdeeds of many of your liberal judges.
It occurs to me that a common thread among many conservative shows is pointing out cases of liberal judges letting child molesters out early only to rape and kill again.
So as a society we were forced to institute minimum sentencing. Most people think drugs are a more serious problem than I do. Oh well.
I won't go so far as to say you support that but it is pretty obvious the first time its moved to you to make a post is when a heroin dealer gets a stiffer settings than you think he deserved.
I have yet to hear you speak of those actually innocent people victimized by violent criminals who were let out early at the discretion of the court.
WSS
-
Geez. And you wonder why you never made it big. heckbunker
*********************************************************
I thought you were "mr know-it-all", heckbunker. You're the arrogant twit who always disregards people
you pretend that you can't have "serious conversations with". And yet, you resort to the crap that
the worst on this board, historically, resort to. That is, resorting to twisted, immature bouts of pouting,
unjustified "offense", and cya all over the place.
What, you would like to bite Steve's ear or something?
Or, just throw a rock when we aren't looking? So much for "mr know it all". More like "mr bs it all"
You can't win, you apparently are unable to justify your arrogance, so you go pouty-pouty mode?
Yeesh. You are serious, too.
-
Heck, didn't you get a degree in poli sci or something like that?
-
Yes. One in government and one in economics. But those don't really teach you all that much.
-
And no, Steve, you're not using it correctly. All personal attacks are not ad hominem attacks. Disputing someone's point by substituting a personal attack for a logical refutation is an ad hominem attack. My saying you're a garden variety Republican crank is separate point I'm making based on the evidence I listed in the post - your history of steering every discussion to the same lame Republican boogeymen. So, while it may be a personal attack, it's not an example of the ad hominem fallacy.
And what you're doing here is the fallacy of the false choice, where you suggest that since I'm not for mandatory sentencing, especially out of control mandatory sentencing, as was the point of this thread, I must not be for sentencing people who murder and rape at all, or for doing it very lightly. Nor must I care for innocent victims of murder and rape.
I mean, come on.
-
-
Not bullshit at all:
"A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person making the claim and not the claim itself. The truth value of a claim is independent of the person making the claim. After all, no matter how repugnant an individual might be, he or she can still make true claims.
Not all ad Hominems are fallacious. In some cases, an individual's characteristics can have a bearing on the question of the veracity of her claims. For example, if someone is shown to be a pathological liar, then what he says can be considered to be unreliable. However, such attacks are weak, since even pathological liars might speak the truth on occasion."
-
As I explained earlier, my opinion is that you're a garden variety Republican crank.
Now, I don't know which personal attack of yours you'd like me to respond to, but feel free to let me know so I can give it the due is so obviously deserves. Maybe it's the one about how I don't care when innocent people get raped or murdered because I don't think mandatory sentences set by politicians are such a good idea. Yes, what a point that was. That shouldn't subject you to derision at all.
Mandatory sentencing often results in grave injustices and long, costly sentences that aren't merited by the facts of the case, where a judge and jury could much better weigh the evidence in the case and sentence more accordingly, like in the case pointed out in the article.
This also goes back to what is traditionally a conservative idea - that policy makers must always be aware of the unintended consequences of their legislation. You may be creating bigger problems than you set out to solve. As with, in my opinion, mandatory sentencing.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login