This is why you don't put liberals in charge of law and order

[big dick]

Yeah but if the NRA didn't have such power( gop backed) then we wouldn't have nearly as much crime as we do. Europe is liberal and they have a lot less crime than we do in the u.s.. Why is that? It's because of the bullshit gun laws, and the right wing backs the NRA. So explain that.
That little faggot who killed all those kids should never have had a gun, it's rpetty hard to slaughter 20+ people with a kitchen knife.

Those spree killings are a tiny percentage of all murders in the US.

Most are committed by hardened criminals who would still have accessed to guns, even if totally outlawed.

The US has had a violent crime problem and a violent culture from the start. It's not the same as Europe, and never will be. Try European laws here, and our violent crime issues would get worse, not better.

I am actually for a modification of gun laws to prevent high powered weaponry from landing in the hands of citizens who can use them for murder.

It should also be noted that deranged criminals who want to kill mass people can do so without guns, such as constructing homemade bombs. The Boston Marathon terrorists, for example, committed their crimes without guns (well, until they were already on the run after the crime was committed). The terrorist in Nice committed his crime with a large truck.

It would be a lot harder for criminals to get their hands on guns if gunmakers didn't make a zillion of them a day.The NRA is a shamelsss group of money hungry self serving pigs. Wayne LaPierre should be hung.
Lot harder to put together a homemade bomb than it is to gun down people with a machine gun. Guns don't kill people, people kill people is the stupidest shit i've ever heard. The gun companies are shameful pigs and so is the nra and the political party that gives them such power.The gop is a shit party and I honestly don't know why you support them. Obv im not a bleeding heart liberal but Id take being a liberal over a right wing nut any day of the week. All that bs they feed you guys about less goverment and lower taxes is a bunch of malarkey.
I know guys who make 40k and are diehard republicans,One of my wifes good friend rants and raves about the gop, He makes like $18 bucks an hour, I just laugh in his face sometimes, literally.

[sonatine]

and so dies any chances of Poker Fraud Alert being regarded as anything other than an alt right cesspool.


not with a bang, but with a neo-conservative whimper.

Feel free to chime in with a solution to the problem posed in the OP.

It doesn't make you "alt right" to want to take sentences for serious crimes out of the hands of renegade judges, and ensure proper punishment for horrible deeds which harm other human beings.

Taking an anomaly and re-packaging it as a statistically significant trend to claim that some sort of liberal agenda is conspiring to defang the nations capacity for justice is pure alt-right podcast trollatics 101. The hysteria and hyperbole youre relying on to prop up your assertion and drown out more rational, educated voices is thirsty and boorish.

[sonatine]

Also seriously I cant at any of this thread because Im busy putting my costume together for this:

[Hockey Guy]

Feel free to chime in with a solution to the problem posed in the OP.

It doesn't make you "alt right" to want to take sentences for serious crimes out of the hands of renegade judges, and ensure proper punishment for horrible deeds which harm other human beings.

Taking an anomaly and re-packaging it as a statistically significant trend to claim that some sort of liberal agenda is conspiring to defang the nations capacity for justice is pure alt-right podcast trollatics 101. The hysteria and hyperbole youre relying on to prop up your assertion and drown out more rational, educated voices is thirsty and boorish.

but, but, but, voter fraud is a real problem though.

[Dan Druff]

Feel free to chime in with a solution to the problem posed in the OP.

It doesn't make you "alt right" to want to take sentences for serious crimes out of the hands of renegade judges, and ensure proper punishment for horrible deeds which harm other human beings.

Taking an anomaly and re-packaging it as a statistically significant trend to claim that some sort of liberal agenda is conspiring to defang the nations capacity for justice is pure alt-right podcast trollatics 101. The hysteria and hyperbole youre relying on to prop up your assertion and drown out more rational, educated voices is thirsty and boorish.

Nothing is conspiring to defang the nation's capacity for justice.

Liberals stupidly believe that a judge -- a sole individual with possible biases and other emotional frailties -- should be able to supersede carefully thought out laws and their associated punishments.

It was originally intended to provide leniency cases where mitigating circumstances made the crime much less evil than it appears on paper.

However, it has since been abused by many a renegade judge who simply wanted to give a light sentence to a defendant who deserved much more, because.... well, he felt like it.

We have the conservative interpretation of sentencing which states that everyone should get a mandatory minimum appropriate sentencing for a serious violent felony, regardless of race, social class, and ability to afford good representation.

Then we have the liberal interpretation which says that a judge can decide willy-nilly to give one rapist 6 months in prison because he's lily white and twinkish, while giving 10 years to the scary-looking black dude who did the same thing.

Funny enough, it's the liberals claiming that they are trying to achieve a justice system which is truly blind to color and social class.

Clearly not.

Brock Turner is not the first one to get a ridiculously light sentence for a heinous crime, thanks to a renegade judge. This problem has existed since before we were born, and it will continue to exist.

It will continue to exist for as long as left-wingers such as yourself cast these concerns as "extremist" or "exaggerated anomalies", without looking to the very real and unfair reason these anomalies can occur in the first place.

[limitles]

Taking an anomaly and re-packaging it as a statistically significant trend to claim that some sort of liberal agenda is conspiring to defang the nations capacity for justice is pure alt-right podcast trollatics 101. The hysteria and hyperbole youre relying on to prop up your assertion and drown out more rational, educated voices is thirsty and boorish.

Nothing is conspiring to defang the nation's capacity for justice.

Liberals stupidly believe that a judge -- a sole individual with possible biases and other emotional frailties -- should be able to supersede carefully thought out laws and their associated punishments.

It was originally intended to provide leniency cases where mitigating circumstances made the crime much less evil than it appears on paper.

However, it has since been abused by many a renegade judge who simply wanted to give a light sentence to a defendant who deserved much more, because.... well, he felt like it.

We have the conservative interpretation of sentencing which states that everyone should get a mandatory minimum appropriate sentencing for a serious violent felony, regardless of race, social class, and ability to afford good representation.

Then we have the liberal interpretation which says that a judge can decide willy-nilly to give one rapist 6 months in prison because he's lily white and twinkish, while giving 10 years to the scary-looking black dude who did the same thing.

Funny enough, it's the liberals claiming that they are trying to achieve a justice system which is truly blind to color and social class.

Clearly not.

Brock Turner is not the first one to get a ridiculously light sentence for a heinous crime, thanks to a renegade judge. This problem has existed since before we were born, and it will continue to exist.

It will continue to exist for as long as left-wingers such as yourself cast these concerns as "extremist" or "exaggerated anomalies", without looking to the very real and unfair reason these anomalies can occur in the first place.

Let's take one sentence at a time....

"Liberals stupidly believe that a judge -- a sole individual with possible biases and other emotional frailties -- should be able to supersede carefully thought out laws and their associated punishments."

So all people you define as liberals operate with a common belief. I doubt it, but you follow up with a thought that these bleeding hearts are on board with a judge being above and beyond the law. Keep in mind that these judges have spent a great deal of their lives studying and practicing law, which has at it's foundation a principle of seperating fact from fiction.

To presume a judge is soft on hardened criminals requires some sort of proof, as is required in court. The same applies to accusing a judge of political influence. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but should you decide to pin down a judge with nothing more than rhetoric, you would likely find yourself pleading mercy before the courts.

And think about this. What's in it for a judge to publicy dismiss the law in favour of an accused person. There is no immediate or long term benefit but cerrtainly potential criticism

[Dan Druff]

Nothing is conspiring to defang the nation's capacity for justice.

Liberals stupidly believe that a judge -- a sole individual with possible biases and other emotional frailties -- should be able to supersede carefully thought out laws and their associated punishments.

It was originally intended to provide leniency cases where mitigating circumstances made the crime much less evil than it appears on paper.

However, it has since been abused by many a renegade judge who simply wanted to give a light sentence to a defendant who deserved much more, because.... well, he felt like it.

We have the conservative interpretation of sentencing which states that everyone should get a mandatory minimum appropriate sentencing for a serious violent felony, regardless of race, social class, and ability to afford good representation.

Then we have the liberal interpretation which says that a judge can decide willy-nilly to give one rapist 6 months in prison because he's lily white and twinkish, while giving 10 years to the scary-looking black dude who did the same thing.

Funny enough, it's the liberals claiming that they are trying to achieve a justice system which is truly blind to color and social class.

Clearly not.

Brock Turner is not the first one to get a ridiculously light sentence for a heinous crime, thanks to a renegade judge. This problem has existed since before we were born, and it will continue to exist.

It will continue to exist for as long as left-wingers such as yourself cast these concerns as "extremist" or "exaggerated anomalies", without looking to the very real and unfair reason these anomalies can occur in the first place.

Let's take one sentence at a time....

"Liberals stupidly believe that a judge -- a sole individual with possible biases and other emotional frailties -- should be able to supersede carefully thought out laws and their associated punishments."

So all people you define as liberals operate with a common belief. I doubt it, but you follow up with a thought that these bleeding hearts are on board with a judge being above and beyond the law. Keep in mind that these judges have spent a great deal of their lives studying and practicing law, which has at it's foundation a principle of seperating fact from fiction.

To presume a judge is soft on hardened criminals requires some sort of proof, as is required in court. The same applies to accusing a judge of political influence. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but should you decide to pin down a judge with nothing more than rhetoric, you would likely find yourself pleading mercy before the courts.

And think about this. What's in it for a judge to publicy dismiss the law in favour of an accused person. There is no immediate or long term benefit but cerrtainly potential criticism

So I'm supposed to prove intent for the judge? As I'm not in his head, there's no way to do that.

However, we have a judge who was a former Stanford athlete, with longtime liberal crime-and-punishment leanings, who decided to give a super-light sentence to a rapist who also happened to be a Stanford athlete.

The only rationale we got was that a long prison sentence would ruin the rapist's life, which is just LOL for so many reasons.

You don't need to know much more than that to be secure in the fact that this judge abused his position and deprived the victim of the appropriate justice she deserved.

[Hockey Guy]

Let's take one sentence at a time....

"Liberals stupidly believe that a judge -- a sole individual with possible biases and other emotional frailties -- should be able to supersede carefully thought out laws and their associated punishments."

So all people you define as liberals operate with a common belief. I doubt it, but you follow up with a thought that these bleeding hearts are on board with a judge being above and beyond the law. Keep in mind that these judges have spent a great deal of their lives studying and practicing law, which has at it's foundation a principle of seperating fact from fiction.

To presume a judge is soft on hardened criminals requires some sort of proof, as is required in court. The same applies to accusing a judge of political influence. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but should you decide to pin down a judge with nothing more than rhetoric, you would likely find yourself pleading mercy before the courts.

And think about this. What's in it for a judge to publicy dismiss the law in favour of an accused person. There is no immediate or long term benefit but cerrtainly potential criticism

So I'm supposed to prove intent for the judge? As I'm not in his head, there's no way to do that.

However, we have a judge who was a former Stanford athlete, with longtime liberal crime-and-punishment leanings, who decided to give a super-light sentence to a rapist who also happened to be a Stanford athlete.

The only rationale we got was that a long prison sentence would ruin the rapist's life, which is just LOL for so many reasons.

You don't need to know much more than that to be secure in the fact that this judge abused his position and deprived the victim of the appropriate justice she deserved.

Why? you seem to do it with everything else. You make all kinds of illogical assumptions.

 

Do we need to review the Gretchen Carlson thread?

 

or perhaps the Jaclyn Moskow thread?

[limitles]

Let's take one sentence at a time....

"Liberals stupidly believe that a judge -- a sole individual with possible biases and other emotional frailties -- should be able to supersede carefully thought out laws and their associated punishments."

So all people you define as liberals operate with a common belief. I doubt it, but you follow up with a thought that these bleeding hearts are on board with a judge being above and beyond the law. Keep in mind that these judges have spent a great deal of their lives studying and practicing law, which has at it's foundation a principle of seperating fact from fiction.

To presume a judge is soft on hardened criminals requires some sort of proof, as is required in court. The same applies to accusing a judge of political influence. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but should you decide to pin down a judge with nothing more than rhetoric, you would likely find yourself pleading mercy before the courts.

And think about this. What's in it for a judge to publicy dismiss the law in favour of an accused person. There is no immediate or long term benefit but cerrtainly potential criticism

So I'm supposed to prove intent for the judge? As I'm not in his head, there's no way to do that.

However, we have a judge who was a former Stanford athlete, with longtime liberal crime-and-punishment leanings, who decided to give a super-light sentence to a rapist who also happened to be a Stanford athlete.

The only rationale we got was that a long prison sentence would ruin the rapist's life, which is just LOL for so many reasons.

You don't need to know much more than that to be secure in the fact that this judge abused his position and deprived the victim of the appropriate justice she deserved.

For the sake of argument lets say this judge was bought out by the Friends of Stanford.
Does this then imply that all judges who went to Stanford or those who have the temerity to align with the deviant left are bound to similar unconcious decisions?

That's what you seem to be proclaiming with your thread title and subsequent posts.

[nightmarefish]

Yeah but if the NRA didn't have such power( gop backed) then we wouldn't have nearly as much crime as we do. Europe is liberal and they have a lot less crime than we do in the u.s.. Why is that? It's because of the bullshit gun laws, and the right wing backs the NRA. So explain that.
That little faggot who killed all those kids should never have had a gun, it's rpetty hard to slaughter 20+ people with a kitchen knife.

Those spree killings are a tiny percentage of all murders in the US.

Most are committed by hardened criminals who would still have accessed to guns, even if totally outlawed.

The US has had a violent crime problem and a violent culture from the start. It's not the same as Europe, and never will be. Try European laws here, and our violent crime issues would get worse, not better.

I am actually for a modification of gun laws to prevent high powered weaponry from landing in the hands of citizens who can use them for murder.

It should also be noted that deranged criminals who want to kill mass people can do so without guns, such as constructing homemade bombs. The Boston Marathon terrorists, for example, committed their crimes without guns (well, until they were already on the run after the crime was committed). The terrorist in Nice committed his crime with a large truck.

Druff is spot on, it's not a gun problem it's a culture of young, black poor people problem. This problem obviously originates from slaves and the black American's struggle to get back on track for one reason or another (which we also can debate as to the reasons why). The black on black murders is the only gun violence in this country that's out of control. Quit listening to the media, overall the murder rate in this country is the lowest it's ever been and continues to drop. Google states with the highest percentage of legal gun owners, there's no correlation with those states and the states with the highest murder rates. In fact, Illinois has one of the lowest percentages in the country of legal gun owners. If you think making guns illegal is gonna stop blacks from killing other blacks in Chicago you're fuckin crazy. The only thing that's going to stop them from killing each other is for the parenting in the black community to step it the fuck up.

[FPS_Russia]

I couldn't make it thru the op, it was a cherry picked case used to smear all liberals. I almost responded in the typical way, linked to the kids for cash scandal / point out failures of the private prisons and conclude no conservatives should be in charge....

But Druff's a reasonable guy. He's a staunch, we need to be tougher on crime conservative. I don't think either of us can know for sure.
I think we should look to a guy like Bernard kerik for answers. He shared your tough on crime conservative views and then some. You're a total dove compared to Kerik, he's was a very tough on crime, right winger , cop since the 70's, police commission, In charge of the NYC DOC for years. Never had a second thought about his tough on crime stance, then he went to prison.

Tough on crime as it gets.

We can both agree he's much more qualified to speak on this subject, right? Let's see what he says. After 3 years in the so called club fed.

Damn powerful stuff
"In a free and democratic society such as ours, justice should not eternally abrogate one’s rights to freedom and liberty, except in the most extreme cases.”
― Bernard B. Kerik, From Jailer to Jailed: My Journey from Correction and Police Commissioner to Inmate #84888-054

[Jayjami]

They cannot only keep him longer they can keep him for life, and if you think for 1 second they wont do just that you are the dumbest kike alive.
Funny story about kikes in Norway, we have like none

LOL @ a country where a guy who kills 77 people gets a 21-year sentence and they have to "decide" to keep him for longer.

You don't see a problem with that?

Brainwashed Scandi sheep

This must be why Scandinavian counties have so much more violent crime than here in the US.

[Wiganer]

LOL @ a country where a guy who kills 77 people gets a 21-year sentence and they have to "decide" to keep him for longer.

You don't see a problem with that?

Brainwashed Scandi sheep

This must be why Scandinavian counties have so much more violent crime than here in the US.

to be fair, when I visited Oslo there was a pan pipe busker who fucking butchered Fernando

[big dick]

Sept 6 (Reuters) - Former Stanford University swimmer Brock Turner has registered as a sex offender in his home state of Ohio, following his conviction for sexually assaulting an unconscious woman in 2015 and public outrage over his six-month jail sentence.

The controversy over a sentence seen as too short and over the fact Turner, a one-time U.S. Olympic hopeful, was released early has stoked intense debate about sexual assault on U.S. college campuses and beyond.

SEE ALSO: Protesters stake out Brock Turner's Ohio home, await his arrival

Turner, 21, was freed from jail last Friday after serving just half of his sentence for convictions of assault with intent to commit rape, penetration of an intoxicated person, and penetration of an unconscious person. California jail inmates can serve half time for factors like good behavior.

The Ohio Attorney General's online sex offender registry had a brief listing for Turner online as of Tuesday morning, detailing his appearance and his Greene County, Ohio address.

Greene County Sheriff Gene Fischer told Reuters on Friday that Turner would be registered as a sex offender in Ohio for life and would have to check in with authorities every three months for as long as he lives in the county.

Turner, 19 at the time of the assault, was arrested after two students saw him on top of an unconscious woman near a dumpster. Court records show Turner expressed remorse over the assault and attributed his behavior to a night of drinking.

[big dick]

At least the litte cunt has to carry that shit around for life.

[Dan Druff]

BUMP

Say goodbye to Judge Persky, the idiot responsible for this debacle: http://abc7news.com/judge-aaron-pers...tence/3565731/

[FPS_Russia]

BUMP

Say goodbye to Judge Persky, the idiot responsible for this debacle: http://abc7news.com/judge-aaron-pers...tence/3565731/

And lets say hello to 311 new prosecutors, not because we need it but because it's what the donors requested.

Attorney General announced that he is appointing a total of 311 new Assistant U.S. Attorneys nationwide. Of those, 86 will be civil enforcement prosecutors, many with the Prescription Interdiction and Litigation Task Force. That new enforcement team is combatting the opioid crisis by targeting every level of the distribution system.

Another 190 of the new attorneys will prosecute violent crimes. The Department of Justice will use the remaining 35 appointees for the prosecution of immigration violations. Another 190 of the new attorneys will prosecute violent crimes. The Department of Justice will use the remaining 35 appointees for the prosecution of immigration violations.

How about 1 or 2 for financial crimes or espionage by foreign govts? Oh hell no, those are the donors. Everything's deregulated and collapse and bailouts by the tax payers is only a question of when.

If you think Sessions is looking to curb the opiate epidemic you know nothing about Republicans. He's going to eliminate big pharmas competition and we'll have another war on drugs. Again not because we need it but because the donors need slave labor and people convicted of drug crimes make the best slave labor. I know donors want him to go after Med MJ but iirc they blocked him.


A fucking Police State ran by the Bolshevik mafia and corporations, quintessential Republican.
Where's Alex Jones now, as if Bernie wouldn't of kicked Trumps ass.

[thesparten]

Taking an anomaly and re-packaging it as a statistically significant trend to claim that some sort of liberal agenda is conspiring to defang the nations capacity for justice is pure alt-right podcast trollatics 101. The hysteria and hyperbole youre relying on to prop up your assertion and drown out more rational, educated voices is thirsty and boorish.

Nothing is conspiring to defang the nation's capacity for justice.

Liberals stupidly believe that a judge -- a sole individual with possible biases and other emotional frailties -- should be able to supersede carefully thought out laws and their associated punishments.

It was originally intended to provide leniency cases where mitigating circumstances made the crime much less evil than it appears on paper.

However, it has since been abused by many a renegade judge who simply wanted to give a light sentence to a defendant who deserved much more, because.... well, he felt like it.

We have the conservative interpretation of sentencing which states that everyone should get a mandatory minimum appropriate sentencing for a serious violent felony, regardless of race, social class, and ability to afford good representation.

Then we have the liberal interpretation which says that a judge can decide willy-nilly to give one rapist 6 months in prison because he's lily white and twinkish, while giving 10 years to the scary-looking black dude who did the same thing.

Funny enough, it's the liberals claiming that they are trying to achieve a justice system which is truly blind to color and social class.

Clearly not.

Brock Turner is not the first one to get a ridiculously light sentence for a heinous crime, thanks to a renegade judge. This problem has existed since before we were born, and it will continue to exist.

It will continue to exist for as long as left-wingers such as yourself cast these concerns as "extremist" or "exaggerated anomalies", without looking to the very real and unfair reason these anomalies can occur in the first place.

There is certain validity to giving the scary guy more time..

If a 250lbs of sold muscle brute rapes somebody, he is a dangerous fuck..

If a twink sticks his dike out, he will just get his ass kicked.
Less dangerous to society..

Plus the brute is probably more anti social and violent in general. He belongs in a cage.

[big dick]

you are the one who belongs in a cage you fucking ape