Isn't It Funny...

Sure it is. It's not perfect but justice isn't perfect.

 

There's a fair number of people who believe that this policy has lead to the destruction of the two parent household. Do you know which single metric can reasonably predict a child's future success as an adult?

Having two parents.

 

That's true but the plea bargain has no business being in the "system", it's a clear violation of the Bill of Rights. Every single plea bargain agreement contains a clause that declares that the defendant waives all rights protected by the Bill of Rights. And it must be signed by the defendant. That's not a mistake, that's deliberate.

 

But it's the defendants choices. Like it or not, Americans have the right to waive their rights as they see fit.

 

You said you "I’m referring to those who actually willingly break the law." I would venture to say there is a good chance the majority of first time offenders did not realize they were breaking the law. The simple matter of fact is so many communities and states have so many laws in the books, that technically speaking any and all of us could be arrested for "breaking the law" for stuff we never even knew was illegal to begin with. It all comes down to the judgment of the arresting officer and it is this where racism can and does play a part in creating an injustice.

In general, the ones who do break the law willingly are usually those who commit what we call "white collar crimes", and we know it as a fact that very few of them ever get convicted.

 

Sorry that's a bunch of crap. There is no choice, prosecutors routinely threaten draconian lengths of time for crimes committed or NOT even committed if the defendant chooses to go to trial. It's not a matter of liking it or not, the plea bargain is fully unconstitutional, period. NO ONE should be forced to waive all their constitutionally protected rights under any circumstance. That's not American ideology, it's fascism, plain and simple.

 

sleeping under a bridge?

 

A choice is a choice. Whether there is pressure to make a certain one or not.

 

Would that be considered "trolling"?

Sorry. I just had to say that.

 

I agree with most of what you posted except the above. Prosecutors are all too eager to get the highest conviction rate possible, they pride themselves on that. That's why the plea bargain is such a wonderful tool for them. Those who get away with massive white collar crimes are those in specific industries (i.e. banks too big to jail).

 

Yes because people don’t know stealing is against the law. People don’t know murder, rape, assault, dealing illegal drugs etc are against the law. My lord.

 

People are sentenced to prison for sleeping under a bridge? Do tell

 

Ok you're deliberately avoiding the heart of the issue (constitutionality) to defend a fascist and completely un-American system.

 

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

 

While what you say is true, prosecutors are always looking to achieve the highest conviction rates, sophisticated white collar crimes can take years to investigate and prosecute. It is for that reason they prosecute the low hanging fruit at disproportional rates.

 

I understand your need to think of it as black and white or a binary choice. Unfortunately, life doesn't always work out that way, especially if we still want to hold to the principle of everyone being innocent until proven guilty. The only way to prove a crime is through a trial, not plea bargaining.

 

Which are the vast majority of white collar crimes. But even the big complicated ones don't always get off scott free (e.g. Enron). In fact a prosecutor can make his mark by successfully prosecuting a big white collar crime.

 

Sorry, but to say the majority of first time offenders didn’t realize they were breaking the law is not only silly but purely opinion based. But by all means please provide verifiable factual proof of your claim that the majority of first time offenders didn’t realize they were breaking the law.

 

This article should help you understand the problem:

39% of Prisoners Should Not Be in Prison
{snip}

How did we get to this number? First, many people who are in prison shouldn’t have been sent there in the first place. For example, we found that 25% of prisoners (364,000 people), almost all non-violent, lower-level offenders, would be better served by alternatives to incarceration such as treatment, community service, or probation. Second, another 14% (212,000 prisoners) have already served long sentences for more serious crimes and can be safely set free.​

 

If we allowed prisoners to vote from their cells, we would eliminate much of the motive for jailing the poor.

 

I understand what you mean by that, but convicted felons cannot vote. They should be able to vote once they have served their sentence, but some states (I'm looking at you FL) don't restore or severely restrict their voting rights.

 

Right...except I asked you for proof of your claim that the majority of first time offenders didn’t realize they were breaking the law. Please provide factual proof of that.

 

The proof is in the report.

I'm not going to scour the Internet to prove to you how mandatory sentencing has turned everyday people into criminals for acts they did not even know were against the law. Some examples from my memory include a young man who mailed some LSD to a friend, he got caught and sentenced to ten year mandatory. A construction worker who gets arrested for indecent exposure because he peed within the 200 yards of a school and now has to register as a sex offender for life.

You can argue that is more a beef with mandatory sentencing, but it's also proof of what the report cites regarding the education level of those arrested.

 

mandatory sentencing was implemented in large part due to accusations of racial biases in sentencing. a white defendant not getting the same sentence of a black one and so forth.

 

No it’s not.