Sad and Bad

[alantf]

Originally Posted by 3-D Video

to clothe, house, and feed someone for 50 years without some damn good benefit to the community that's paying for it is being a "liberal bleeding heart"?

I was reading an article, a while ago, about the sheriff of some county (I can't remember which one) who made the prisoners in the county jail pay for their own food, banned smoking, banned girlie magazines, allowed only the Disney channel on the t.v., & made all the prisoners do work that was beneficial to the local community. Now that man would get my vote! :2tup:

[3-D Video]

Originally Posted by alantf

I was reading an article, a while ago, about the sheriff of some county (I can't remember which one) who made the prisoners in the county jail pay for their own food, banned smoking, banned girlie magazines, allowed only the Disney channel on the t.v., & made all the prisoners do work that was beneficial to the local community. Now that man would get my vote! :2tup:

Speaking as a card carrying bleeding heart liberal, that man would get my vote too... Big Time!
(And, I'd prefer the Hells Angels find that Honda driver.)

[Sarris]

He is Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona

Sheriff Joe

This guy has it right. He don't get many re-offenders compared to other areas. Pink prison garb, 50 cent per day meals, and some sleep in tents. He's one of the good guys, although the civil rights people try to vilify him.

I say, GO JOE!!!

[dhgeyer]

Twice in 40 odd years of driving I've had drivers come up behind me at speeds much higher than I was going, showing no sign of slowing or passing. The first time it was a drunk, and he rear-ended me. I was young and still pretty green. Live and lean. The second time was on the highway at night, and I hit the shoulder when it became clear that it was either that or get hit. I chased the driver, a woman, to her exit and pulled in front of her, got out, and gave her a piece of my mind. She apologized. She wasn't drunk; it was just highway hypnosis.

You have to pay attention to what's ahead of you, as that's where 90% of the trouble comes from. And watch your "6".

[Water Warrior 2]

3-D, I'll clarify my statement. 50 years is better than 5 years and community service. Recently we had a B.C. woman get 4 years for killing a little girl while driving down a residential street. Pure B.S.. in my opinion. She will be out in 1/3 of that time. More B.S. We need stronger laws that do not coddle the law breakers and look at the victims instead.
We even have a hard time putting cop killers to death in Canada. They should be rehabilitated according to some bleeding hearts. B.S. When I was a wee lad they outlawed the Death Penalty and the Lash.
As for Joe and his prisoners...........he gets my vote too.
Back in the 70's I talked to a European woman who said there were no re-offenders in her country. The fear of getting caught a 2nd time scared them straight. After her description of the prison and the entire system I couldn't believe anyone would take a chance of getting caught the 1st time. A lot of prisoners did not live long enough to get out.

[3-D Video]

Originally Posted by Water Warrior

3-D, I'll clarify my statement. 50 years is better than 5 years and community service.

Sorry, WW, can't agree (though, initially, I was just cheesed-off by having "liberal" bad-mouthed)
Man is a social animal who forms into groups and societies, good and bad. Good, and you have clean water, the discovery of America, and a man landing on the moon. Bad, and you have an unaccomplished people, cultural malaise, and unnecessary wars.
Societies have an obligation to protect themselves and their members from harm. They have an obligation to provide what services they can to promote their charter: In the U.S., our charter is contained in the Constitution and in the Bill of Rights. These are not just abstract notions of who we, they define who the American people are, and should be in the back of everyones' mind who writes a law, prosecutes a law, and sentences on behalf of that law.
I find that sheriff Joe is operating fully within this framework (though the underwear seems a bit much). By having his prisoners work for their keep, their presence is not a burden. They are honorably discharging their debt to society, and have earned the right to a clean slate. Those whose don't have such an enlightened detention, I think, would be more likely to live on the fringes of society, and more likely to return to prison.
However, 50 years is an absurd and meaningless period of incarceration. After 3 to 5 and most become bitter, institutionalized messes. If that Atlanta judge wants to look tough, he should go shoot a puppy in the face. Save thousands in tax payer money, and give the girl some reasonable chance of becoming something instead of making her a burden for the rest of her life. Make her work off some time in an emergency room. Something useful.
Here's my liberal bent: I like to see people being empowered.
I think the bad guys like to have power over people.
And, I think 50 years is just plain nuts.

[Water Warrior 2]

Okay, we can agree to disagree. Maybe if the 50 year girl in question received 5 or 6 years with Sheriff Joe I would be all for it.

[dentheman]

A couple weeks ago here in Lubbock a woman was read an indictment for MURDER as she lay in her hospital bed after killing a man in a traffic crash (that's right, murder, not vehicular homicide). The hospital found she had alcohol and marijuana in her system, so the DA threw the book at her.

Personally, I would rather help pay for a 50 year sentence than have a chronically dangerous driver back on the road. I am guessing that with such a severe sentence there must have been other circumstances besides leaving the scene, such as DUI, revoked license, etc. I don't believe that any otherwise law abiding citizen would get such a sentence for 'only' having an accident which killed someone.

Lately it seems to me that law enforcement and the courts are getting much tougher on bad drivers, which is good; something must be done to lower the death and injuries on our highways.

[burkbuilds]

As far as I know, the girl charged with leaving the scene in Atlanta, was not drunk or using drugs. She claims that someone cut her off causing her to veer away and lose control of her car which started the accident. Another witness claimed that they heard a "popping" sound just before her car went out of control and they thought her tire blew out, causing her to loose control. Her mother was charged with trying to cover up a crime because she encouraged her daughter not to come forth and the mom had the car repaired to hide it's involvement. However it happened, the thing everyone agreed about was that she should not have left the scene of the accident. The jury found her guilty of being the cause of the accident and the judge handed down the sentence a few days later. She was offered a plea deal of vehicular manslaughter and 50 years in prison before the trial began, that doesn't seem like much of an offer since she got the same sentence when found guilty, but that was all they offered her. Of course the prosecution argued, "If she wasn't guilty, then why would she leave the scene"? and that argument was apparently what the jury went with. If she was guilty of some intentional or negligent act that caused the accident then I think the sentence was appropriate, if it was truly an accident, then I think she should only be serving time based on what is usually rendered to someone for leaving the scene of an accident, which I doubt would be 50 years. Either way, it is sad that many people died and that a young girl will live out most of her life behind bars for what may amount to bad judgment in leaving the scene of an accident, when so many intentional crimes get relatively little punishment. I doubt that she would have been given 50 years if she had robbed a bank at gunpoint. The accident occurred on an Easter Sunday morning in 2009, she was 18 at the time.

I guess I kinda have mixed feelings about this case. If she was doing something intentionally irresponsible that caused the deaths of so many people, then I have no problem with a stiff penalty. If it was truly an accident and she just panicked and ran away, then I think it is excessive.

[dentheman]

Originally Posted by burkbuilds

As far as I know, the girl charged with leaving the scene in Atlanta, was not drunk or using drugs. She claims that someone cut her off causing her to veer away and lose control of her car which started the accident. Another witness claimed that they heard a "popping" sound just before her car went out of control and they thought her tire blew out, causing her to loose control. Her mother was charged with trying to cover up a crime because she encouraged her daughter not to come forth and the mom had the car repaired to hide it's involvement. However it happened, the thing everyone agreed about was that she should not have left the scene of the accident. The jury found her guilty of being the cause of the accident and the judge handed down the sentence a few days later. She was offered a plea deal of vehicular manslaughter and 50 years in prison before the trial began, that doesn't seem like much of an offer since she got the same sentence when found guilty, but that was all they offered her. Of course the prosecution argued, "If she wasn't guilty, then why would she leave the scene"? and that argument was apparently what the jury went with. If she was guilty of some intentional or negligent act that caused the accident then I think the sentence was appropriate, if it was truly an accident, then I think she should only be serving time based on what is usually rendered to someone for leaving the scene of an accident, which I doubt would be 50 years. Either way, it is sad that many people died and that a young girl will live out most of her life behind bars for what may amount to bad judgment in leaving the scene of an accident, when so many intentional crimes get relatively little punishment. I doubt that she would have been given 50 years if she had robbed a bank at gunpoint. The accident occurred on an Easter Sunday morning in 2009, she was 18 at the time.

I guess I kinda have mixed feelings about this case. If she was doing something intentionally irresponsible that caused the deaths of so many people, then I have no problem with a stiff penalty. If it was truly an accident and she just panicked and ran away, then I think it is excessive.

But what were those 14 other charges against her? They must have played a big part in such a stiff sentence. In any case, I doubt she will serve even close to 50 years when all is said and done.