Political/Current Events Convictions and Defense

This in an open invitation to every member on this site to make a claim, ask a qeustion, or make a statement about any and all subjects. BE prepared to defend yourself using logical and legitmant reasons why your belief is the way it is, be prepared to admit that you are wrong, and be prepared to learn and change. I am not saying that i am going to prove everyone wrong, those things go for me aswell. Im tired of poeple taking stances and using idiocy to defend themselves and im tired of not learning anything new.

Ill repost in this thread if i see its dead just to bring back to the newest posts so that people see it and hopefully say smoething.

Please people, reason and logic, examples and evidence. Thats all i want in here. Not emotion. Not stupidity. THank you, have fun.

So you want to debate? Hmm . . . I recently noted this among the saying at another site so . . .

quote:

---

"Buying a Nikon and a roll of Kodachrome does not make you a photographer [snip]..Just like buying groceries does not make you a chef" Al Weber.

---

You may choose either stance in reply.

Well i was hoping for more of like a political view of your own or something with global awrming or somethign to that effect...

Hmm . . . a statement at a news blog seemed to disappear along with the thread. The article dealt with the democratic party refusal to count the demo primary & Fla. being a closed state. In regard to these actions I stated that I had been an registered independent since I came of age to vote but recently had re registered as a Democrat because I wanted a voice in the choices we as a people are offered (closed state=> independents not being given the right to vote in pre-(s)election process); only to have my vote not counted again. Just go to show that sometimes [b]'you can't win for losing'. [b]

I find that a bit strong. For instance. I was recently involved in a court case where I plead guilty to battery and trespassing. What happend was my girl friends parents were beating her, she was 18 at the time, I broke in the house and got her out of there, in the process I was forced, forced, to hit her father one time. I was charged with a sentence that had the capablility to put me away for 100 percent of the rest of my life in a prison.

Had her parents been irrational maleficent people I could have faced even death, considering as the charge given to me carried the death penalty.

If they were evil individuals, and the people do exist, then they would have been able to kill me.

That should not be aloud. The judicial system should have the ability to judge what is fair, considering not all people are good people.

Individuals should have control over the fate of the perpetrator of a criminal offense against them. This control should be reasonably approximated to equate the value of the crime.

This is true and for some instances they do apply this in Canadian Law. For instance assault is up to the victim about whether or not to charge them. Not exactly your definition but similar.

One problem about this is that people may start threatening people. For instance I murdered Someones husband who happened to be a drug dealer. The wife who also has kids i could easily threaten her by having a friend threaten to kill her kids if she did not drop the charges. Or it could be a joint effort in that you agree to kill her husband and she will drop the charges. If you robbed someone and got caught, you could have friends threaten the person to drop the charges. Where as if it was up to a judicial council you would have no say in what happened threatening you would not matter.

The criminal justice system in itself is poorly run. The justice system focuses on punishing the perpetrator. It does not focus on the victim or having any kind of reparations for the family or victim. Although their would be some satisfaction in having justice being done the family does not see anything out of it. For instance there should be money spent on education on gun violence if someone is murdered with a gun not just sentencing the perpetrator to life imprisonment.

ID agree with that. What I meant was that people shouldnt have the power to decide the degree of punishment. In america the people are allowed to drop the charges, but the state almost 100 percent of the time picks them up because convictions make them look good.

I agree the people should not have the power over what happens to the perpetrator. Judicial councils have far more experience, training and education on deciding the matter. But, like I mentioned the Judicial system needs to focus more on the victim not completely on punishing the perpetrator.