|
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by Silly Sod
(Post 5064864)
That is far too a simplistic and moral viewpoint and doesn't reflect the social and economic pressures faced by young people with no education and no idea that they have no education in the first place. I agree that nobody 'has' to resort to crime, but saying that doesn't mean they don't. Not to mention the fact that so many of americas poor are criminalised just because of the neighbourhood they are from or because they may out after dark. There are many people arrested and charged for no other reason than those I have just stated. When you are brought up in a poor beighbourhood you develop an us and them mentality, from there it is a short step to striking out against a society that says - you don't 'have' to break the law while at the same time breakling the law itself at every turn. Billionaires in this country break the law every second of the day and we say Hail To The Chief and give them awards and million dollar handshakes. Who is teaching who how to behave here?
Special Ed, I think the sentence is harsh, yes (Silly sausage changed my mind about that :D) and I think maybe they should have been given some reprieve, but still been charged as a US citizen.:) |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by special ed
(Post 5064878)
I don't think mitigating factors for committing the crime are the key issue here though, although I think most people regardless of political stance would concede the role of socio-economic factors in crime. What's at stake here is whether deportation to a country the two have barely lived in is a fair sentence or not
|
Re: Sentenced Home
I didn't read the whole article about them in the link, but how come they weren't US citizens after being LPRs for so long?
|
Re: Sentenced Home
Again though, good point. A few more like that and I'll be karma-ing you myself mate Oh bollix, have some anyway |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by Silly Sod
(Post 5064901)
...before the end of the week this thread will have covered, the crime, the time, pot roast, tampons, 9/11, the gun laws and the michigan meet up lol. ...
:lol: :rofl: Well, I definitely know more about Tampons than you :lol: |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by Mally Lass
(Post 5064897)
I know what you're saying SS but that's like saying "I was never taught to read, because no-one in my neighbourhood can, therefore I won't". Millions of people worldwide grow up in the worst living conditions ever imagined and still make a life for themselves without resorting to crime. We have the same 'deprived' areas in the UK, but not everyone joins in. It's a choice.
Special Ed, I think the sentence is harsh, yes (Silly sausage changed my mind about that :D) and I think maybe they should have been given some reprieve, but still been charged as a US citizen.:) e.g. If I am in a pub in a run down part of Manchester - and some drunken asshole makes an asshole comment about my wife, I would feel perfectly justified in smacking him in the jaw. The court would call that assault and I would be a criminal. I would not feel like a criminal though, nor would I accept the monika. The more deprived your environment the more likely it is that crime is going to find you, at least in the eye's of the law. Oh god, I am sounding like a 1st year sociology student again mixed with Tony Benn - help!!!! :) |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by Mally Lass
(Post 5064927)
:lol: :rofl:
Well, I definitely know more about Tampons than you :lol: (PS - see Special ED ha ha) |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by Silly Sod
(Post 5064703)
Without wishing to sound in anyway insulting - I really believe this a very narrow view of the situation. These people are products of a US society, not criminals who slipped in and, as such, should be sent back to their 'own' country. It is insanity to talk of this punishment fitting the crime, any crime. They are americans in almost every way and should be dealt with in an american court of law. If they were thirty years old and had come from some other nation to carry on a criminal career then I would say yes, deport them in a heartbeat. But this situation is so far from being that black and white it is untrue.
That's the law. What you are saying is that he should be judged differently although the facts of the case are the same whether he had been here 30 years or 30 days. Who is going to draw that line? Should we start deciding cases because he had USC children and a USC wife? What if another man was in the same situation but was childless and unmarried? If you start taking emotional factors into consideration it's not fair for all parties. |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by Silly Sod
(Post 5064935)
The more deprived your environment the more likely it is that crime is going to find you, at least in the eye's of the law.
Oh god, I am sounding like a 1st year sociology student again mixed with Tony Benn - help!!!! :) So yes, poverty does = more crime. The question then is 'should that make any difference in the eyes of the law?' |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by Silly Sod
(Post 5064935)
I firmly believe that you are a product of your environment and you make 'choices' based on your experiences in that environment. So, in a way, you have no real choices. Not eveybody from a deprived area turns to crime but often crime turns to them. If you know what I mean. There are so many other factors involved and 'crime' is just a catch all word in this type of debate. By which I mean; crime is not just something that somebody undertakes with the eventual aim of profiting financially.
e.g. If I am in a pub in a run down part of Manchester - and some drunken asshole makes an asshole comment about my wife, I would feel perfectly justified in smacking him in the jaw. The court would call that assault and I would be a criminal. I would not feel like a criminal though, nor would I accept the monika. The more deprived your environment the more likely it is that crime is going to find you, at least in the eye's of the law. Oh god, I am sounding like a 1st year sociology student again mixed with Tony Benn - help!!!! :) I know exactly what you mean. I grew up in 'one of those' places and had all the horrific experiences to boot. It wasn't easy and had I stayed there any longer would probably be dead by now, but I made a choice (a desperate one admittedly) to leave and not be sucked in by it all, so I did. I'm not easily swayed though, unless there's good reason, so I was strong enough to go against the grain, so to speak. We aren't all sheep :D |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by Rete
(Post 5064827)
No, we don't and as rincewind said anyone can make a documentary. Just as anyone can voice an opinion, be aghast at the "injustice" they see in another country's laws and immigration regulations, or post a post that is strictly to inflame the readers.
I take exception and offense to the inference that this thread was started to inflame. I watched this documentary and was deeply touched by the plight of these young men. I suppose one forms an opinion based on or own level empathy and sympathy for others. One thing to learn from this if you have children born overseas is make sure they become US citizens as soon as possible. Because if they are ever convicted of a drug offense they will be deported. http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/s...discussion.pdf |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by Silly Sod
(Post 5064935)
e.g. If I am in a pub in a run down part of Manchester - and some drunken asshole makes an asshole comment about my wife, I would feel perfectly justified in smacking him in the jaw. The court would call that assault and I would be a criminal. I would not feel like a criminal though, nor would I accept the monika. The more deprived your environment the more likely it is that crime is going to find you, at least in the eye's of the law.
See? It's just not fair to everyone to take those kinds of things into consideration. |
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by another bloody yank
(Post 5064940)
That's the law. What you are saying is that he should be judged differently although the facts of the case are the same whether he had been here 30 years or 30 days. Who is going to draw that line? Should we start deciding cases because he had USC children and a USC wife? What if another man was in the same situation but was childless and unmarried? If you start taking emotional factors into consideration it's not fair for all parties.
|
Re: Sentenced Home
Originally Posted by another bloody yank
(Post 5064958)
But again, the FACT is that you hit him in the jaw. You've admitted it wasn't self defense, do you think a Judge would take the excuse that the jerk called Mrs. Sod a name as justification? Would it be fair to do so? If he did, could I then hit a man for saying something that offended me? Like, I'll have the tuna sandwich, Please?
See? It's just not fair to everyone to take those kinds of things into consideration. Even our great President commuted his friend Mr Libby's sentence because it was too severe. |
Re: Sentenced Home
Even or great President commuted his Mr Libby's sentence because it was too severe. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 9:10 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.