If you accidentally kill someone in the US, no matter what the frick happened, you will most likely get a sentence of somewhere between 10 and 40 years in a psychological torture US prison. Only women in blue states will get sentenced to a few years for accidentally killing someone. This bullshit doesn't happen in Europe. US judges think to themselves "Someone has to pay for it!" This is precisely the thinking you get from fricking mobsters. They don't care what the frick happened. Someone died, so someone has to pay for it.
t. almost accidentally killed someone
Anyone who's ever been to court can tell you how fricked it is. I went to civil court without a lawyer, I had documentation proving that I had infact had my landlord paid and the judge simply refused to look at it. On the record, refused to look at it.
>Anyone who's ever been to court can tell you how fricked it is.
Never been to court personally, but I've heard many stories myself. You MUST get a lawyer. They know how shit works, and the fact that the US justice system is so fricked necessitates that you get a lawyer.
I knew all the relevant laws and at one point when talking with a lawyer I was informing THEM of the statutes. Doesn't matter. A judge will frick you over just to hurt you.
You are a israeli slave and you won't do shit.
>A judge will frick you over just to hurt you.
I've heard stories of judges sentencing people insanely harshly just because they disrupted court in a minor way a couple times. They obviously declare it a mistrial, but it can take five years or longer waiting for another trial. When a judge really wants to frick you over, they'll hand the maximum sentence for everything and order you to serve those sentences consecutively.
And judges rarely get disciplined for pulling off this bullshit. They can be evil buttholes with impunity. When they lose their job it's over some leftist bullshit. There was a judge in Illinois who lost his job because he reversed the guilty verdict of an 18-year-old boy who was convicted of rape. I believe the minimum sentence was 6 years, but the judge didn't have the heart to hand out the sentence. Both the boy and the 16-year-old girl he had sex with were drunk at the time, but the way the law was written, the person with the penis is always guilty of rape when at least one of them is drunk. The boy had already spent half a year in prison and the judge said something along the lines of "That is punishment enough."
No my problem, I rape women as a matter of principle
Hello.
What is that principle?
You absolutely do not need a lawyer unless you are in serious trouble. If you have normal everyday type of charges you typically can use a public defender or even do it yourself because most of the time they're going to offer you some bullshit plea anyway with or without a lawyer the only difference is you're going to waste 10 grand on a lawyer and get the exact same outcome.
I've been charged 7 times with crimes that could have over 1 year in prison, mostly misdemeanors. The first three I defended myself in court and had the charges dismissed although the facts were in my favor the charges were assaulting an officer, resisting arrest, and disorderly conduct. I had a DUI charge that I used a public defender for and got deferred adjudication which is basically what they offer every single person on their first DUI unless you injur or kill somebody or something like that. I had a gun charge that they ended up dropping without me doing anything at all. My worst one was a federal charge related to the Patriot act, that one I did get an attorney for even though I thought it was bullshit and I did no contest for 10 hours of community service, but they suspended my passport and told me that I would be on the terrorist watch list for the rest of my life.
>You absolutely do not need a lawyer unless you are in serious trouble. If you have normal everyday type of charges you typically can use a public defender or even do it yourself because most of the time they're going to offer you some bullshit plea anyway with or without a lawyer the only difference is you're going to waste 10 grand on a lawyer and get the exact same outcome.
You're a moronic homosexual and public defenders only operate to secure convictions for the state. I followed the same homosexual advice you're giving here and I got completely fricked by my "free lawyer." Paying 5-10k for a real lawyer is the ONLY smart move, it doesn't matter if you can afford it or not. Otherwise you're just making a deal with the state on how fricked you are.
>Paying 5-10k for a real lawyer is the ONLY smart move
Yea you're the target audience for this bullshit advice, the plumber who tells you it's not possible to unclog your own drain or the mechanic who tells you you can't change your own alternator, for the landscaper who tells you it's impossible to mow your own yard. They're just taking advantage of your ignorance and they know you're panicking. Keep throwing your money away and crying about how you can't do anything yourself.
Lol yeah, the public defenders work in the same building as the prosecutor. They're basically working their way up in the county government. Anyone who uses a public defender for anything besides a guilty plea is moronic. If you ever want to fight a case, you'd be better off alone than with a public defender.
>public defenders work in the same building as the prosecutor
No they don't moron. They're just normal attorneys that take cases extra cheap because they haven't established their practice or want to do community work or supplement their income with easy cases because most of the cases are going to plea out anyway.
Wrong, and moronic. Public defenders DO work at the same building at the prosecutors. The state SOMETIMES hires outside lawyers when they're behind on their case load, but that's not the normal protocol.
You're letting yourself be milked out of fear.
Sounds fishy as frick to me, I've never heard of anything like that before. Might be some bullshit state law. FYI scotus has overturned a bunch of state laws that restrict firearm ownership in use recently you might double check and see if it still applies to you if it is one of those bullshit state laws.
>no they dont
Their "water coolers" are usually within walking distance if not in the same building. Only the most blind, naiive dipshit inner city fool public defender is actually working for the public and not the prosecution, and then you're probably better off alone.
The reason a public defender is an upgrade over no lawyer at all is because the Judge demands respect for the system and if you go trying to prove you don't need a lawyer or that you can operate outside their system they will prove that you can't. They're basically automatically butthurt that you don't have a lawyer which means you're not playing the stupid game they play which means you have to be punished regardless of if you did something wrong that you're being tried for - even if dragging the case out and making your life annoying is all that happens.
How mamy times have you actually had charges on you? Things in the real world don't work the same way they work in your infantile imagination.
A few times, both times I used public defenders because I planned to plea them down. The second time when I was sitting with my Public Defender she left her laptop facing me and swapped to her email, I could see a message from the prosecution thanking her regarding another case lol.
Well, I stand behind what I say but I will add an important caveat: NEVER use a female attorney for anything except family court. In that case, drop the public defender and hire a man. Women operate in transactional space. Men operate in competitive space.
Both times they were women actually. Some context I guess for the glowies and borded friday morning anons reading along;
>traveling crusty hippy type in my youth aka when people dont feel comfortable talking shit to normal mentally ill bums they try to talk shit to you because you're young and more acceptable to target
>San Diego, Ocean Beach literally at the wall where they used to host troll(bum) bashing parties, middle of the day New Years Eve
>dumb fricker starts heckling me about being a traveler and how it's his town, gets in my face with his longboard up like he's gunna swing it
>slap his longboard down and he grabs my wrists, use the momentum to break his nose with my forehead, fight is over and blood is everywhere, we go to the ground a few seconds before I tell him to let go of me and basically walk away
>picked up by police a few blocks later, his blood all over my shit
>assault with a deadly weapon charge, a multitool fell out of my pocket and they tried to say I either used it or tried to use it idk
> a smiley(hobo knocker, monkey's fist, lock on a string) also fell out of my pocket but they didn't recognize it and just handed it over to the police with my other things
>public defender asks me weird loaded questions about the lock on a string and if I used it to lock up a bike, explain that if I had tried to use a weapon it would've been that one and that the multitool was my can opener and plyers
>She kind of laughs and says okay let me talk to the judge
>Comes back a few minutes later with a misdemeanor battery charge plea, let out later that night
>get a 'stayaway' order included which means I can't go to the wall for some amount of time I didn't even pay attention
>go back anyway
>discover that the previous bum bashing parties have been rerouted into getting the travelers in trouble by fighting them and getting them charged with dumb shit and a stay away order
Sounds like pretty typical bullshit any young guy who's not a homosexual would be up to.
The female lawyer thing is serious, I worked at a surgical center for about 15 years and I will tell you the same thing also applies to surgeons. It might be okay to have a female doctor but if you have any other option at all in the whole world, avoid a female surgeon even if you have to go out of state and reschedule the surgery. I feel the same way about airline pilots, although that's a little bit harder to avoid ahead of time fortunately I don't fly very often. I also try not to ever put myself in a situation where I report directly to a female unless she's an absolute pushover, but even then it might be easier for me it's still not really a good thing, ultimately going to be net negative. I'm not even especially sexist it's just common sense.
>They're basically automatically butthurt that you don't have a lawyer which means you're not playing the stupid game they play which means you have to be punished regardless of if you did something wrong that you're being tried for - even if dragging the case out and making your life annoying is all that happens.
Correct. Nobody talks about this but if you don't have a lawyer judges will go after you for the smallest things (slipping up a word) while allowing the prosecuting attorney major errors in discovery. It's wild. Absolutely fricking wild.
>Nobody talks about this but if you don't have a lawyer judges will go after you for the smallest things
In my experience the opposite is true. Judges will give pro se people slack because they simply don’t know everything that is going on.
>while allowing the prosecuting attorney major errors in discovery
It’s on you to call it out. Not the judge. This is why people who represent themselves have fools of clients. This isn’t to say many people are unable to represent themselves, but if it’s a serious criminal matter just get a lawyer. You’ll get fricking rolled if you don’t.
It depends on the judge - and criminal vs civil is a huge factor here, bare that in mind - but when I had to sue that landlord and did go with an attorney, FRICK the judge was a lot nicer that time for some strange, unknown reason. When I represented myself in proper person they were a fricking butthole.
"The man who represents himself has a fool for a client.”
You have 2 weeks to get an attorney from today, including weekends. That's 12 days. Go!
>You have 2 weeks to get an attorney from today, including weekends. That's 12 days. Go!
Don't you have a right to an attorney, no?
I never been to court myself (most people here never see a courtroom in their lives), but I know how the system works here since I know attorneys.
Obviously you can go and find the attorney yourself which could be non-trivial and take time, but the default system is that you call a "legal help" number which in turn have list of public attorneys and the help calls a random (next in line) attorney from the list which then your case gets assigned to. Next the attorney would call you and you'd arrange a time for consultation before the case goes to court.
>Don't you have a right to an attorney, no?
No. Not in a civil case. Only criminal.
>Go and find the attorney yourself
It will take you DAYS to even talk to several, only to find out none of the ones you talked to are available on such short notice.
>No. Not in a civil case. Only criminal.
Well that's strange, doesn't it violate the right to representation?
Here you are entitled to the same "legal help" system in civil disputes too.
There are some limitations though, that if you're the accuser party and it's some trivial issue the legal help could be denied if it's determined that it doesn't make sense so people wouldn't use the justice system for some petty shit.
The accusee party is always entitled to representation, it obviously shouldn't be possible to drag anyone to court who doesn't have an attorney.
Who the frick wants a court appointed lawyer anyway. Who pays them after all.
Idk how it's in Norway but isn't "court-appointed" lawyers more of an American meme, that they're overworked and underpaid and don't put the time in for their cases so the results are bad.
Here most of the attorneys who deal with regular people (company law is a different beast altogether) do public attorney work even if they have their private practices. Basically the idea is to take as much private work as possible which pays better but also take the calls for public attorney work when they come in, since it also pays good. There is no being overworked in a sense that there is no obligation to take on any case, and most want to take the cases. The way it works it's a rolling list of attorneys and if you don't take the case they'll just call the next one on the list and it could take time before you catch your next public case -> less work -> less money. Lot of them work a lot though, but not because they have to but because they are greedy and want to take on as much as they can. I don't know if there are any limits on how much you can take, but your law license is tied on a "good behaviour and proper practice of the law" so probably if you'd be too greedy and take on too much cases for that €€€ and that would lead to you not handling the cases properly, you'd lose your license.
>doesn't it violate the right to representation?
No, because you do not have the RIGHT to representation in civil cases, your RIGHT is limited to criminal.
>it obviously shouldn't be possible to drag anyone to court who doesn't have an attorney.
There are free legal help orgs, however:
>You are not entitled to their services
>They are often worse than no lawyer
>Even if you hire them they tend to ignore you or refuse to see you until the day of and blindside you with bullshit
The homeless burden defense
>your honor, I would like to say that our client was not only loitering and squatting but also vandalizing and thieving!
>harumf... nonsense, that would mean the taxpayer had to foot their prison sentence! This felon is Not guilty!
All of that seems a gross violation of your human rights. I didn't know it's possible in the U.S. to be dragged into court with no viable route to acquire representation. That's news to me, the more you know.
That being the case, if someone had a hard-on for you couldn't he just drag you to court over some bullshit and you would lose even when you are in the right but you couldn't represent yourself properly? An average citizen obviously doesn't know how.
Your human rights do not include the right to be represented in a CIVIL case. You keep using the word "right," but you don't understand what it means or what it entails.
>Your human rights do not include the right to be represented in a CIVIL case. You keep using the word "right," but you don't understand what it means or what it entails.
No, there is no misunderstanding here. There is the matter of differing viewpoint of what a "right" means.
In my view, if anyone can drag you to court where you have to defend yourself against accusations, you obviously should be entitled to representation, no matter whether the case is criminal or civil.
If such right doesn't exist, that means the court system only exists for those who have the means to pay for it. Just like medieval times, where the landed gentry only had rights.
Of course human rights are a modern thing, for most Europe's history only the rich had any rights. But nowadays the people wouldn't stand for that anymore, for the most part.
>In my view
not a right
>not a right
That's your American viewpoint. We do have a right for representation, no matter whether it's criminal or civil. My only misunderstanding was that you'd have that right too.
If a right can be taken away from you at any time, or for any reason, it's not a right. You have already said the right to legal representation can be revoked. Therefore you do not have the right.
White, old italian man. No, he wasn't israeli.
I would say expect to be charged and sent to jail, because people will not think that a pitbull is deadly (despite evidence), because "it's just a doggo, you couldn't have known he would have died!" Whereas everyone knows getting shot with a crossbow is deadly.
So in their minds, it isn't certain death (pitbull) vs 50/50 death (crossbow bolt hits neighbor too), it's possible death vs certain death (pitbull might not have killed him but your crossbow bolt definitely dead). So therefore you committed a dangerous act and deserve punishment for it, despite meaning well. Despite obviously not having mens rea (intent to do harm) you're still going to get charged and convicted.
In that specific case the dude was acquitted and it was deemed an accidental killing.
>Of course human rights are a modern thing
Yeah, and them as an overall concept has been an unmitigated disaster for the west.
>doesn't it violate the right to representation?
The constitution as written makes it so you only have a right to representation in a criminal matter. That being said the bulk of civil matters are personal injury and an insurance policy is involved somewhere. Contractually those insurance companies are obligated to put on a defense for you so if you get into an accident and somebody sues you you will have a lawyer. Homeowner policies have similar obligations to a property owner when it comes to property matters.
>bulk of civil matters are personal injury and an insurance policy is involved somewhere.
Ah of course the most vampiric industry, insurance, is involved. It's always been mind-boggling to me how your countrymen let the situation devolve in such a state where you basically need insurance for everything just to live and not get fricked over. If you don't have things like legal liability insurance or health insurance, you can get fricked over at any point. I do not understand how a first world society can let people die of treatable diseases like cancer or diabetes just because they didn't have insurance.
It's unfortunate reality of politics that people are so easily being duped into voting against their own interests in matters like public healthcare.
Did you know USA (10284$) spends over TWICE in public healthcare spending over Finland (4521$), yet we get free public healthcare while you do not. How the frick do your voters not understand that you should change your system. Well, I mean your people voted Trump in office so hopes for the average voter ain't high and your only two choices of president are between two geriatrics so the hope for the system isn't either.
It would be an easy fix by getting the private industry out of the healthcare industry. It's so fricking stupid that your tax dollars go to massive profits of the private healthcare industry, so obviously you'll never get your moneys worth. Just cut the middlemen of private companies and insurance companies altogether and let the state build the hospitals and pay the doctors directly. You'd instantly get free healthcare without spending any more tax dollars. Some top israelites might lose on a few private islands though, I cry for them too.
> https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.CHEX.PC.CD?locations=US-FI
Almost nobody in the US is uninsured when it comes to health. We have free government healthcare for poor people - two healthcare systems, in fact, and everyone else has their healthcare through their job. Even then, for 99% of treatments you can just get treated and not pay.
>Almost nobody in the US is uninsured when it comes to health.
My point exactly. You pay over twice the amount than we do in tax, then you also pay for your insurance, and you pay a third time as the insurance co-pay. That is that absolutely fricking bonkers, how much you let the private industry vampires suck money at every turn.
This creates an environment where the prices are jacked up so much that it's crazy because it benefits everyone involved except the end-user. The private hospitals jack up the prices because insurance companies gladly pay higher prices which in turn can jack up both the yearly insurance premiums and the per-care copays.
I've seen the crazy invoices over peoples hospital stays where they (their insurance) gets billed like 15k$ for a short ride to the hospital in a private ambulance while the private hospital bills 300$ for a saline drip which cost 0.1$ to manufacture. It's absolutely ridiculous and disgusting at the same time.
Everyone has their hand out, so even the drugs themselves are way overpriced. This is because there is no central payer for medications so the receiving end has zero leverage and drug companies can basically bill what they want.
On the contrary in a public system where the government is a single payer for the medications, the table is completely turned and government has huge leverage. Obviously then the drug companies compete who can offer the best products for the lowest price, since they all want the lucrative deal of supplying a drug (chemical compound) X for everyone in the country. So you end up paying sometimes 100X+ the price for the same exact drug as we do. Obviously if you did public healthcare, the US govt would have a massive leverage in getting even cheaper prices than us being a small country of 5.5mill people can.
>You pay twice the amount we do in tax
I'm gonna stop you right there. I have a german friend - his taxrate is 40% and he isn't even that rich. Horseshit we pay more than you.
>You also pay for insurance
Nobody, and I mean less than 0.5% of people in the US, are PAYING for insurance
>Horseshit we pay more than you.
You do, that is a common misunderstanding in America that they pay less with their current system, as that is provably false. You do understand that it's publicly disclosed how much tax dollars are spent and where, so it's not an opinion but a fact. If you don't trust the World Bank's numbers, there are multiple other sources you can check this fact, including your own goverment's public records.
>I have a german friend - his taxrate is 40% and he isn't even that rich
I was talking about healthcare specifically, not about the public sector as a whole. It's true that our effective tax rate is higher than yours as we have a larger public sector, and of course it's not perfect and there is also some unnecessary bloat that could be cut. Just that healthcare specifically ain't it.
>Nobody, and I mean less than 0.5% of people in the US, are PAYING for insurance
Are you moronic? Nothing is free, even if your employer is paying the insurance premium it doesn't mean that you aren't paying for it, it's money out of your pocket.
The only thing I'm saying is that the healthcare system is much more effective when you cut the middlemen out of the equation. It doesn't matter whether the dollars are spent by tax, through insurance, or directly from your pocket, the only thing that matter is the total dollars spent to receive a service or a product. You are paying multiple times over the same exact thing, which is just absoluty stupidity. Unless you want to not only pay your doctor, but also pay a new railing for some superjew's megayacht when you visit a doctor. Obviously it's your decision, I'm just saying it's a fricking dumb one.
>You do understand that it's publicly disclosed how much tax dollars are spent and where, so it's not an opinion but a fact.
You can say smug things all you want. That's fine. You're wrong, we do NOT pay more taxes than you.
>Buh this graph says
We have 10000x the millionaires and billionaires you do, no shit our taxes are going to be higher
>SO YOU ADMIT IT!
No, because the average person making under 500K a year is being taxed nowhere near where you EU fricks are, they aren't paying for their own healthcare in any way except copays up to a reasonable amount which can be maxed out in the beginning of the year.
>Nothing is free, even if your employer is paying the insurance premium it doesn't mean that you aren't paying for it, it's money out of your pocket.
"Nothing is free," says the yuro, who pays 40% of his income in taxes but claims to have free healthcare.
>the healthcare system is much more effective when you cut the middlemen out of the equation.
BULL
FRICKING
SHIT
I have friends in Canada and the UK. First off, my Canadian friends avoid the ER more than my friends in the US, and I quote, "Because I can't lose a week of work" and I've NEVER heard a brit say a good thing about the NHS.
I also have a Finnish friend, you guys don't have dental covered by your national healthcare. Bet you didn't think I knew that, did you?
>the concept of car insurance triggers Finnish autism
I don’t really care what your opinions on American healthcare are.
Landlord tenant law is some of the most tedious shit judges hear every day and a lot of pro se tenants in court, not saying you fall into this stereotype, are dumb fricking Black folk who slow up the whole docket and turn 30 minute long hearings into hour and a half long circuses. Try dealing with that all day.
I genuinely find those "sovereign citizen" types hilarious because I appreciate the court's time being wasted. Furthermore, it's their job so I think complaining about that is ludicrous. That said, I was doing my best.
Funnily enough, when I got a lawyer and went back after the landlord, it was HIM throwing a tantrum and annoying the shit out of the judge. He tried to charge me $7K for a couple stains on the carpet and holes in the walls, billing me for his own hours worked. He showed up to court with a new watch and in a new truck and threw an absolute fricking fit when things weren't going his way.
That makes sense.
Landlordtenant cases move quickly. They'll give you a week or two IF that. If you say XYZ died they'll want proof. It won't work the way you're thinking.
sovereign citizens just don't have a high enough vantage point, thus most of the shit they think matters doesn't work.
I fricking hate landlords. A blight on society. They make insane amounts of money from simply owning property.
>I genuinely find those "sovereign citizen" types hilarious because I appreciate the court's time being wasted.
That’s fine. You don’t got to court every day. I do. I want those people in camps. They are a waste of everybody’s time and money.
>Furthermore, it's their job so I think complaining about that is ludicrous.
No, their job is the preside over a case and move the docket. It is not their job to babysit morons rambling on about shit entirely unrelated to the case.
>I was doing my best
I’ve seen people represent themselves well. Sadly, the majority of them are fricking moronic.
>shitty landlord gets shit on by the court
Love to see it.
>I want those people in camps.
Boo hoo, you have to do your job.
>They are a waste of everybody’s time and money.
Not mine. Then again I do appreciate their wasting of the court's time. Anything to hurt the current very fricked legal system and throw a wrench into it.
>No, their job is the preside over a case and move the docket
Which is what they're doing The job includes when things are going well and when they're going poorly. Yes, it may be annoying, but e.g. working in IT includes dealing with the moron users as well as other people in IT.
>you have to do your job.
Yeah, and those fricking Black folk are preventing me from doing it. Do you want me to do my job or not?
>not mine
I know. It wastes my time, so frick them.
>fricked legal system
They are a symptom of it. You want to Frick with the legal system? Terrorize your state legislature for all the nonsense they enable the courts to do. Checks and balances, all that fun stuff.
>which is what they’re doing
No. It is not. When you’ve got some cracked out nog rambling on about nonsense when all he’s there for is a late rent payments the docket is not moving. The matter is not being resolved. It’s just a waste of time.
It is. That is why we should at least give them something constructive to do so they don’t sit in their cells all day screaming into toilets. Which they do to talk to other inmates on different floors. Is that really more humane than having them pick up trash on the side of the road? No. It’s not.
Your job includes dealing with the Black folk. I understand your frustration - your job includes dealing with Black folk. You are free to not like that. You are free to get a different job. You are not entitled to be free from time wastage. If it *wasn't* your job, you would've put an end to it. You haven't put an end to the time wastage because it's your job to deal with it.
>Terrorize your state legislature for all the nonsense they enable the courts to do.
It's easier to cheer on people clogging up the docket sheet and inconveniencing everyone.
>When you’ve got some cracked out nog rambling on about nonsense when all he’s there for is a late rent payments the docket is not moving.
Based. Too bad you can't put an end to it right?
>The matter isn't being resolved
Awe jeeeze doood that's terrible too bad your job is more than rubberstamping things so there's gonna be delays haha
>do your job
>but I’ll cheer on why you can’t
>and I’m too lazy to actually fix the problems I see
>to bad you can’t do your job, right?
I sincerely cannot wait for this shitheap of a nation to implode. You get what you fricking deserve.
My public defender was an absolute fricking joke. I was being charged with complete BS the state couldn't prove and tried to ask her things like, "Doesn't the statute say this is required? They can't prove that, because it didn't happen. Can't we fight it?" Her reply was basically, "But the detective said you did it." The discovery they submitted was 80 pages of irrelevant bullshit. I showed up to court after telling my public defender I wasn't going to plead guilty to the felony they were offering and then when I didn't plead guilty the judge literally said, "What is going on here?" (as in, everybody thought I was just going to plead guilty)
They ended up dropping the charges to a misdemeanor and I plead guilty and found out over a year later that because the misdemeanor I plead guilty to COULD have a sentence of over a year (even though I only got a year of probation) I'm not allowed to own or buy firearms any more, because I plead guilty to RECIEVING STOLEN GOODS even though nothing about that plea is relevant to the case.
Public defenders only exist to secure easy convictions for the state. If you think anything else, you are fricking moronic. You're better off representing yourself even if you are moronic.
What state?
South Carolina.
>"What is going on here?" (as in, everybody thought I was just going to plead guilty)
Something's not being said. Why did this occur?
What's confusing about it? My public defender somehow communicated to the judge/prosecutor that I was going to plead guilty to the felony they were offering even after I told her I wasn't going to do that. My lawyer acted like she was embarrassed that she was wasting everybody's time, which obviously she was.
What did she say in response to the judge? I really want to know more about how this played out.
Also,
>They ended up dropping the charges to a misdemeanor and I plead guilty and found out over a year later that because the misdemeanor I plead guilty to COULD have a sentence of over a year (even though I only got a year of probation) I'm not allowed to own or buy firearms any more
AFAIK this only applies to domestic violence or felonies. I don't know of any law that says someone with a random misdemeanor can't have a gun.
>AFAIK this only applies to domestic violence or felonies. I don't know of any law that says someone with a random misdemeanor can't have a gun.
Oh yeah, that's what I thought too. There's a federal statute that says ANY misdemeanor that COULD carry more than 1 year in jail (whether or not that's you sentence you got) cannot own a firearm any more. I got sent a letter from the FBI "explaining" and citing the criminal code when I failed a background check over a year later when I was trying to buy a gun from a gun shop.
Turns out it isn't just felonies or domestic violence; it's literally anything that CAN carry more than a year of jail.
That's absolute horseshit. Reform these laws now.
The only time these laws in this israelite country will be reformed is when the country goes nuclear. Until then we will continue to be soviet america: troony israeli pedophile weimar edition.
I've pled out on several charges including federal, where the possible penalty was more than a year, I'm literally on the terrorist watch list. I purchased a gun last week, I purchased several last year. If that was true most of the country wouldn't be able to own a gun. Are you positive it wasn't snuck in as part of your plea deal?
I don't believe your LARP. I am trying to look up the exact criminal code, but it's already been cited here multiple times. Any misdemeanor that could carry a penalty of more than a year is disqualifying, and even attempting to circumvent that is a felony.
I'm trying to find it too, here's this from the ATF website
>Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year;
Well, think about what you're saying. It would mean every single person who gets a DUI or a tax charge or any other routine charge that happens 1000 times a day would be prohibited from owning a firearm.
Do DUIs automatically carry more than 1 year in jail as a possibly sentence? Then they're disqualifying too, homosexual. I pled guilty to RECIEVING STOLEN GOODS. Does that sound like a super cereal charge to you?
If he's in TX it's possible. They violate federal statues and give the right to get guns back after 5 years.
You have the choice to trial by judge or jury for both civil and criminal. A judge cannot ignore a jury's charge of not guilty and declare you guilty, but they can go the other way around, .e.g., the jury says you're guilty but the judge decides to e.g., declare a mistrial with prejudice or overturn the jury's decision and declare you not guilty.
It's wild. in family court you want a female lawyer and judge. Male judges are simps and male lawyers will ask you to consider what's fair. Any other time it's the opposite.
Yes it's Texas. Our criminal justice system is completely overloaded, it's not a bunch of bored law school midwits with a hero complex trying to change the world.
You know they always say ignorance is no excuse except if you're a police you get qualified immunity so it's an excuse in that sense. Also most crimes require criminal intentions so if you didn't know what you were doing was a crime or didn't have a "criminal mindset" it is also an excuse.
Our judicial system is based around the idea that even lawyers cannot know all crimes and yet at the same time you are not allowed to be ignorant. Ignorance is an excuse whenever it is most convenient to those in power.
But I don't even think that applies to a plea agreement the person has to be completely and fully aware of what they're agreeing to for a plea agreement to be valid. ignorance is no excuse for being charged but it is an absolutely an excuse for denying a plea arrangement.
Found it:
>18 U.S.C. § 921. Definitions
>(B) any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor and
punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less. What constitutes a
conviction of such a crime shall be determined in accordance with the law of the
jurisdiction in which the proceedings were held.
Any conviction which has been
expunged, or set aside or for which a person has been pardoned or has had civil
rights restored shall not be considered a conviction for purposes of this chapter,
unless such pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides
that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms.
Sorry, this isn't the right section. I read over it too fast from memory. I'm still trying to find the right one.
Two years is typically a completely different level of crime. "Two years or less" is weird wording but from what I've seen that sort of ambiguous language is very common in federal law.
No it doesn't. Yes it does sound like you got fricked. Maybe it's some bullshit nuance of your state. You know plea agreements are not valid if you did not understand what you were agreeing to?
The judge asks you if you knew what you're agreeing to and understand the consequences. Ignorance is no excuse, as the phrase goes, even though that's why we have lawyers.
>Maybe it's some bullshit nuance of your state.
It's a federal statute, it has nothing to do with state law. I linked the "definitions" section of the code instead of the correct code, which is why the wording is fricked up.
No, you have the right statute:
>It shall be unlawful for any person who is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce any firearm or ammunition **or receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.**
https://www.whalenlawoffice.com/blog/what-federal-law-says-i-cant-have-guns/
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922
It is 18 USC 922 G:
>(g)It shall be unlawful for any person—(1)who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
Oop, I got the right statute but misread the one you quoted originally. Yes, it is 18 USC 922.
He didn't deny the agreement. He accepted it and then likely agreed he understood the consequences.
Nah I've got a doctorate. Been out of college for years. It's OK to not want to take responsibility, don't blame the drink.
>He didn't deny the agreement. He accepted it and then likely agreed he understood the consequences.
Judges don't sign off on plea agreements until you do this. You aren't going to hire another lawyer afterwards to overturn a judge signing off on this. If you can give me a single case of this working, I'd love to read it.
I spoke with my lawyer after I got the letter from the FBI telling me I wasn't allowed to purchase firearms ever again and he basically told me the only way I could get out of it is applying for a pardon for the misdemeanor through the governor's office, which I'm going to do eventually. He tells me since my charge is a "white collar" crime and the facts of the case are fricked up, I have a good chance of getting a pardon. I told him I don't have any money to donate to their governor, nor special relationship to leverage, and he told me it's all done through committee anyway.
GL with your pardon anon. You got this.
A. Not for civil cases
B. Have you ever used a public defender? In some cases, like jSQAosEp's, they're worse than nothing and actively harmful
I did a little basic hunting and pecking around it looks like receiving stolen property or receiving stolen goods is one of those charges that could go from a slap on the wrist all the way to serious prison time depending on the exact details and what state you're in. Stolen firearms, or certain chemicals, or stolen vehicles for example is a different level, could even be a full blown felony.
I guess it's kind of like possession charges in some states used to be 10 years in prison and other states you could get it at a dispensary that kind of thing, so then the federal restrictions go on top the high variance the state figures it which is why you got tangled up in it.
I was doing cash pickups/deposits from bitcoin ATMs for a company named Coin Cloud. I was doing pickups for 30k+ at a time on a salary. They owed me more than 4k for a month of work and basically claimed that they "already paid me." So, I did a pickup and held onto the money until they were ready to pay me.
Instead they called the cops. I tried to explain myself, immediately gave all the money over to the detective, and then ended up pleading guilty to receiving stolen goods over $10,000.
Coin Cloud when bankrupt in February last year, I'm sure a complete coincidence.
They also tried to claim to the cops that I had accessed machines / stolen money in areas that I didn't cover (Myrtle Beach) and never went to. My public defender told me at the time that because South Carolina is a 3 strike law state that I could be facing life in prison without parole. So yeah, I plead guilty homosexuals, and you would too.
>So, I did a pickup and held onto the money until they were ready to pay me.
I totally get it, and I don't blame you, but you know you fricked up there. It's actually possible that if you went to jury the jury would have let you walk on it. If it was me on a jury I would have have. But with the three strikes, yea I dunno if I would have rolled the dice on it, I might have though.
I couldn't afford to not get paid for a month of work, driving around doing pickups and repairing ATMs. Not only did this company frick me over, but other people at the same time were refusing to pay me for work completed, too.
I did what I had to do.
Oh, and because the company was based in Las Vegas, Nevada instead of South Carolina, the department of labor in SC said they don't have jurisdiction, the department of labor in Nevada didn't care, and if I wanted to sue them I would have to fly out to Nevada to sue them in small claims. So basically, frick me, and nobody in the government gives a shit except showing up to arrest me.
But going back to my original statement, in your case yes that would be something you would hire an attorney for I concede that but I also say that that's not a typical bullshit every day charge. The deal itself sounds pretty good it's just that bullshit Federal overreach add on that fricked you. Maybe you could get the charge expunged eventually or something like that.
>but I also say that that's not a typical bullshit every day charge.
I disagree bro. There's a lot more people than you think getting fricked over on a regular basis the exact same way I did. I got to meet some of them while I was in jail.
>What did she say in response to the judge? I really want to know more about how this played out.
I was in court in front of the prosecutor, my public defender and the judge and the judge asked me how I plead. I said not guilty, and everybody was confused. The judge said, "What's going on here?" My public defender turned to me and said something, but my head was kind of spinning at that point. I asked if I could go to the bathroom because my blood pressure was so high I couldn't even talk. The judge issued a continuance on my case, and by the next time we got back to court they were offering the misdemeanor that I pled guilty to.
I showed up to court that day thinking the prosecutor would drop the felony and offer a misdemeanor before we got in front of the judge, but that didn't happen.
>I don't know of any law that says someone with a random misdemeanor can't have a gun.
By federal law, you may not legally possess a firearm if you were convicted of a misdemeanor punishable by more than one year in prison.
Anon was right. I already checked. Shocking this isn't talked about much
>Public defenders only exist to secure easy convictions for the state.
Unfortunately, you found out the hard way that the way the process works. Is that public defenders also generally have paid clients as well, and they will make off the book deals with prosecutors/judges to horse trade.
>You get my deadbeat charity client on X, but you accept this extremely generous plea on this rich homosexual that is paying me good money to get him a sweet deal
>Oy vey, sounds like a plan! So golf game this weekend?
>because I plead guilty to RECIEVING STOLEN GOODS even though nothing about that plea is relevant to the case.
Kek. What kind of shitty life have you lead? You seem to have gotten really lucky, though. A lesson that you ideally shouldn't have to deal with a public defender. I've seen videos of public defenders acting childish in court. They're public defenders and not high-earning private lawyers for a reason.
>My public defender was an absolute fricking joke. I was being charged with complete BS the state couldn't prove and tried to ask her
Did you expect a woman to be competent?
I had a public defender once. Never even met him, spoke to him, or saw him until after the judge was doing stuff in the courtroom. The public defender, an old fat guy shows up next to me handcuffed in the bleachers. I have absolute evidence proving my innocence in several different ways. The public defender doesn't even look at me, he looks at his folder and the ground
The first thing he says while looking down
>I can get you a really nice deal
>The first thing he says while looking down
>>I can get you a really nice deal
My fricking sides 😀
That sounds more like a scene from a sitcom than real life.
How can that even happen? I've heard so much stories about public defenders being the absolute worst, but how does it come to that?
How does someone have so low respect for themselves and their work that they put in zero effort. Especially since it's not some janitor doing a poor job cleaning a toilet, but someone who should be serving the public and who has people's lives at stake, for god's sake.
Is it that they're so absolutely overworked that they lose their will to live or what the frick is going on?
Also, public defenders are typically a massive upgrade over not having a lawyer. You have no idea how shit works in court, even if you've done hours of reading. Too much shit goes on in there that only people with experience would understand.
My brother used a public defender. the guy never showed up, even for a scheduled meeting, and he got his case thrown out by himself.
1993, july. maybe early august. all the truckers I have asked about the place said the cops there use I-95 to make quota.
>1993, july.
That makes sense. A lot of modern cops will try to pull off the same shit, but it's more difficult now with body cameras. I have seen a recent video of a cop trying to get a 17-year-old girl to give him a blowjob, though, so I know bullshit like this still happens. Cops know that the prosecutor will nearly always be on their side.
he was the reason my mom got a gun and carried it in her purse. funny thing is, the local cops to us had a similar experience in like 87 going up I-95 there. also Operation Tarnished Badge 2006 in Robeson county NC for teh lulz. every cop agency dogpiles the robeson county nc sheriff's dept and police for being organized crime.
you need to get a bunch of angry militants to siege it with you is what you need to do
it's what we all need to do
it's our duty
Maybe in the future if we ever get lucky and the US government becomes extremely unpopular among the average American, including many local government officials.
start doing it now
talk amongst your friends
tell them to do the same
form a network
form a code to speak in and create plans in
start training, even if that means only playing arma
don't wait for the glowBlack folk to start
I wonder what shit would be going on before an actual civil war would start. People would need to get trained to a certain degree before the conflict even began. What would this training look like, and who would be giving it?
I'd predict it to be somewhat like the last civil war. You'll have ambitious people trying to profit from it and you're going to have a lot of draftees who didn't have any say in it....and when it's over, you'll likely have a dysfunctional government that just has retained all the bad habits of the winning side.
Unlike the last civil war, this one obviously has external influences looking to take possession of a lot of the country so it's entirely possible that this one will end with a negotiated peace and the country divided into multiple new ones with governments entirely rebuilt to favor tyrants and aristocrats. It's not like anyone was ever or will ever be willing to act when they can make babies instead.
ex-military dudes are a good starting point, in-fact, THEY ARE the starting point as it was an ex-marine that originally radicalized me
being fit is one of the most important things, being able to run a mile in-gear will be what separates you from pigs and actual militants
if firearms are difficult to acquire, then start making kaboom-booms instead, bows and arrows, and light-based weapons i.e. lazerpointerz
There are no ex Marine. Once you earn the title, it stays with you for your lifetime.
fair point
>the marines are a paramilitary force
We know bro.
also, read picrel
we will balkanize, it's inevitable
i will not share the same flag or land with some gay that thinks transgenderism is real
the best lawyers are the ones who play golf with the judges, make of that what you will.
You only need to get a lawyer to grease the wheels. The Judge is a massive egoist prick who won't follow simple instructions unless protocol is met. That's why they are difficult. You're supposed to take the shit free lawyer so they can train up more monkeys for suits
Don't fool yourself. Europe is pretty much like that, too: The court is merely an extension of politics.
Throughout my life I wittnessed it all - ignoring of fool prove evidence, absurdization of law and even encouraging heavy crime (by broadly publicizing) such as murder.
The only systemic difference I can understand is that a) your prisons are private entities so there is an incentive to lock people up (obviously especially the lower class), while here imprisonment entail high public costs of social workers, therapy, reintegration into the workforce yadeyadeyada + your cops are EXTREMLY poorly trained. In many of the videos I see online they come across as perpetrators themselves rather than actually deescalating violence.
After all we have to face that we one or the other way created a system that rather profits from destruction than of creation. These will go on until some critical point is reached and then other qualities will be in demand again.
Publication doesn't encourage crime. It didn't make sense when it was said about shootings and it doesn't make sense here.
>Your prisons are private entities
Some. Some prisons are. And it still incurs high public cost, we have all of that shit.
>Your cops are extremely poorly trained
They get way more training than any cops in europe I can guarantee that. It doesn't matter how well you train them they deal with Black folk and Black folk will not listen to you if you aren't domineering at all times.
I was not refering to shootings, so I am not sure what you meant. According to Chat-GPT the average training of a US police office is 6 months in the US and 3 years in Germany, followed by another 3 years of semi-infield semi-studying if he wants to follow a higher career path.
There is a reason US cops fire more bullets in a single mission than German cops in the entire year. Deescalation, Scouting, Surrounding all these techniques I never see in those encounters. Its confrontation and open fire. Many of the things I saw would be considered blatant murder by the cop. And well, the adverse selection and migration politics are on either side of the pond. Actually kinda dazzles you how few people still refuse to understand how destructive Africans are, despite it being the most obvious fact that:
- leftoids never truly have black friends
- leftoids never life in black neighbourhoods
- leftoids will avoid blacks in public settings once they display their tribe like mannerism - just really shows you how powerful demoralization truly is.
>There is a reason US cops fire more bullets in a single mission than German cops in the entire year.
yes, its called Black folk and mexicans. you have no idea what they are like here.
They treat everyone the same. The worst cops are typically black, but you're statistically way more likely to deal with a white cop, and they're still fricking terrible to have to deal with. European cops are way more comfortable to deal with. American cops are fricking scary. They may behave like this because of people justifying extreme violence against blacks and latinos, but in justifying this extreme behavior, you're creating something very dangerous that everyone has to deal with at some point in their life. American cops are ludicrously trigger happy, and they are some of the rudest and most egotistical people in the world.
Whites are disproportionally more likely to be killed by police, even when you factor in the differences in population numbers.
yes, and most cops are white. they understand as much as morons can, that blacks are feral animals and to just shoot them.
It's common in the US - or at least it was pre-trump - to hear "The mass shootings are all just because of the MEDIA! They want ATTENTION!"
>According to chatGPT
Denied. Cops are trained between 4-9 months in an academy and then another 6-9 months in the field and then get continual training and seminars as time goes on.
>There is a reason US cops fire more bullets in a single mission than German cops in the entire year.
German police wouldn't be able to handle being a cop in the US. Your entire police force i smaller than one of our states' police forces and we have 50 of them. No, I don't care if some random state has less policemen than you, don't act like a israelite.
>Surrounding
That's a great way to get shot in the US lmao. Surround a Black person. Great idea germ.
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/accidental-homicide/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accidental_death
One google search turned up plenty of results. Why are you lying? Are you a habitual liar?
>One google search turned up plenty of results. Why are you lying? Are you a habitual liar?
Show me one state that has something defined as "accidental killing" that is not just a description of manslaughter. I already know the federal government has no such thing.
First link, I quote:
>Accidental homicide is where you kill someone in the course of a lawful act that is done with a reasonable belief that no harm will take place. Most jurisdictions say that ********an accidental killing******** is not a crime.
That's from a page written for a lawgroup by lawyers.
I read that page and a few other articles. I was right. There is no "accidental killing" or "accidental homicide" charge in California, which is the state that website is focused on. They're going ahead and referring to an accidental killing as not being involuntary manslaughter, but California law itself defines involuntary manslaughter as being accidental homicide. They contradict themselves on their own website. I'm guessing they're using the term "accidental homicide" to refer to something that can't be criminally convicted as involuntary manslaughter.
Here is where they contradict themselves.
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/involuntary-manslaughter/
>There is no accidental homicide charge
Because it's not a crime.
Yeah, it's not defined in their criminal code, but that website even points out that in California, involuntary manslaughter is even defined as "accidental homicide." I'm guessing that California is like nearly every other state in the US and the federal government, and that in the end, it's up to the judge to actually convict you of it or not, regardless of the facts.
>but that website even points out that... involuntary manslaughter is even defined as "accidental homicide.
No it doesn't. See:
>The legal definition of involuntary manslaughter consists of the “elements of the crime” – facts that the prosecutor must prove for you to be guilty under Penal Code 192b PC. Note that the offense is also sometimes called negligent homicide or accidental homicide.
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/involuntary-manslaughter/
>Consider, for example, a real accidental death case in Massachusetts. In 2020, a Massachusetts man accidentally killed his neighbor with a crossbow after trying to save a person from a Pitt Bull attack. The crossbow bolt actually went through a dog, then through a closed door, and then fatally struck the neighbor.2
>This incident amounts to accidental death because the killing took place during a legal act, or the shooting of a crossbow. Further, a reasonable person could not have believed that the bolt would travel through both a dog and door before striking the neighbor.
>Accidental homicide **does not usually lead to criminal liability or criminal charges. Some states even have statutes that expressly say this.**
Any further pilpuls or are you going to keep trying to cherrypick in a desperate attempt to "win?"
>They contradict themselves
No they didn't
>Involuntary manslaughter
"involuntary manslaughter – which is unlawfully causing the death of another person by acting with criminal negligence."
>From the accidental homicide page:
"However, you could face criminal charges if you killed someone on accident while performing an unlawful or negligent act. Most states say that this type of killing amounts to involuntary manslaughter."
You're trying so hard to avoid admitting you were wrong. Just take the L, israelite. You lost to a goy. You got out argued. These things happen.
>Training
As someone who was in law enforcement for over 20 years, training is a complete joke and JUST a way for agencies/departments to cover their ass by claiming 'It's not our fault. We have training on X routinely and according to our paperwork, the officer/deputy/agent received their training.'
The more hilarious shit is how people get hired with a preference if they have a college degree in some agencies/departments. You got a degree? That puts you above someone with ten plus years doing a job that is literally the same as the current job with a different title regardless of what the degree is. This results in people with degrees in political science or gender studies being viewed as more valuable hires to promote the idea that the agency/department hires more intelligent individuals. Veteran hiring preference is usually pretty high as well and the number of women who did clerical/state side journalism shit being hired with the same degree of enthusiasm as a guy who actively patrolled combat zones for 8+ years is hilarious. Of course, the active warzone guys usually get killed/wounded/fired quicker than regular citizens because they assume a functional support network to some degree when doing their job as ordered.
1. Were you allowed to keep your badge as a memento?
2. The supreme court ruled you can be DQ'd from being a cop for being too high IQ - wouldn't a degree have a lot of crossover with such a rule?
3. "Assume a functional support network" - as in, it's not there?
It was a landlord-tenant case - a civil case - where neither of us had lawyers. "Discovery" happened in the court room.
Still have to submit it to the court and other party prior to presenting to the court
>Allowed to keep your badge?
I kept most things from my last position because you were given allowances to buy gear instead of being issued gear. The only thing I didn't keep was weapons, hand cuffs, and such. Badges being used and issued varies from place to place and position. Local departments vary dramatically in how they handle such things.
>High IQ and college interlap
This varies wildly as well. College educated black women and homosexuals were some of the absolute dumbest pieces of shit I ever worked with. Hardcore dykes, not turbo feminist ones, were typically pretty competent though. If you got an in demand, functional degree, odds were low you got into law enforcement to begin with.
3. As in not there?
Mostly, absolutely not. Base level officer work? You are there to take the fall when shit goes sideways. In small towns? You generate revenue writing traffic citations from out of town folks speeding and don't have the man power for two officer stops. In prisons, it varies wildly as well, but again you are there to take blame. If you work in a prison with a camera system (a lot do not have this) it will provide a nice video of you being held down and stabbed/beaten to death by a couple of inmates because you took someone's contraband. Do you have an alarm that transmits when you are prone? Depends on the prison. Do you have pepper spray? Depends on the prison (If the guys stabbing you are from a country where they eat hot ass peppers constantly, you got a 50% chance of that just not working anyway. Do you have a stab proof vest? Depends on the prison. Do you have routine check-ins with someone sent to investigate if something went wrong? Depends. Do you even have help to respond? Depends.
The last riot that took place at a nearby prison was so drastically understaffed, heads should have rolled. It consisted of 14 building each housing roughly 150 inmates each and the night shift had a whopping total of 8 staff working at night. (Cont)
>College educated black women and homosexuals were some of the absolute dumbest pieces of shit I ever worked with.
Lmao
>if you got a... functional degree... odds were low you got into law enforcement to begin with.
Fair enough
>a lot do not have this
What the frick why wouldn't this be standard? On the one hand, based, on the other hand, asinine.
>Why isn't this standard?
Cameras do not stop crime, just make it easier to identify who committed crimes. If that. Turns out having grainy CCTV footage to try identify which person did what when everyone has the same clothes and hairstyle is less than useful. It is mainly used to see where the officer was when shit went sideways to try and throw them under the bus. Staff would much rather have gear.
>14 buildings
>150 inmates each
>2100 inmates total
>Guarded by 8 people
>262.5 prisoners to a person over 14 buildings
It's good to know the only thing keeping the prisoners in is habit
the locked 300lb doors help
If such a large prison has only 8 staff, it should be way easier to escape from, granted the inmates find out about this.
You have to think about the logistics of the prison, in the scenario it sounds like only the doors on a single block cycled and if they cycled back to lock it might've locked them inside the block, they might've had access to certain areas but couldn't go further without alerting the outside to what was going on, even with keys. I'm imagining it went like this
>Doors cycle, inmates notice and get out of the cells into the block
>two of five comes through on their normal checks and gets dunked
>inmates now have access to entire quad so maybe infirmary and drugs or kitchen and food but if they go further the supervisor, door man or perimeter man will notice
>party
>nobody notices for a day because everyone is sitting on their phones
Do you know what happens to the prisoners if martial law is declared or USA is forced into ww3, I am thinking penal battalions / death
>I am thinking penal battalions / death
They stay in the prisons, because the corporations behind private prisons would otherwise sue. Penal battalions wouldn't happen. The US government would rather have the unincarcerated moronic serving in the military before prisoners.
Who will actually enlist though? Black folk and shitskins would rather shit up another country then die for the US, Whites wont serve because of DEI, trannies and women cant fight, so i guess the only place where they can get bodies is prison.
Lol. No. They took the entire compound. The staff were so spread out and keys were hilariously used for dual purposes for building entrances (Building A-1 opened Building C-2 as well). The result was a domino effect.
Did anyone get out?
(Cont)
A supervisor, a person controlling primary entrances, a guy person riding around the perimeter, and 5 people counting and supervising inmates spread out across 8 buildings. They had NONE of the equipment listed. A quick power fluctuation caused a few cells to cycle locks in the middle of the night and inmates just overpowered the staff on duty, took their keys, and started burning shit. It wasn't contained until after outside help arrived almost 24 hours later. The only video evidence was from inmates who had illegal phones recording shit and posting it on YouTube and shit.
Prisons are the weakest link in the chain in law enforcement. It is THE most expensive so bean counters constantly cut shit to make budgets better (and get bonuses), staff pay is laughably low with shit benefits, training is incredibly short, equipment is severely lacking, and it has higher PTSD rates than active duty, warzone deployed, military personnel by a factor greater than 2.
>It wasn't contained until after outside help arrived almost 24 hours later.
So these guys took over, took the keys, had 24 hours to leave and no one ran? No one left? What the frick?
Probably an unplanned prison riot lead by a bunch of morons. The greatest prison escape in recent history involved a giant wrecking ball hitting the side of a prison. 13 people escaped with only one of them getting caught. They were all a bunch of white guys.
>If you work in a prison with a camera system (a lot do not have this) it will provide a nice video of you being held down and stabbed/beaten to death by a couple of inmates because you took someone's contraband.
I'm very skeptical of this being a legitimate fear. Cops get killed in prisons, but usually only by nutcases. Even the drug lords trapped in prisons won't try to pull off that sort of shit, because it would just result in them getting stuck in psychological torture solitary confinement with the cops making sure the rest of their life is a living hell.
>federal RULE OF LAW bot playing the steelman
>for decentralized gun clubs where bubba and his bros who spend all day using tax dollars to clock their biker friends speeding down an unused road
>woah holy shit bro that was 200 mph!
Did you know in some parts of the country they just pull you over and give you a warning if you speed? In other places it's a misdemeanor not to keep your keys in the car.
I bet you can't even imagine such a cozy place to live.
I'm not saying where, you wouldn't belong. You have zero clue how cozy life could be.
In what way are Africans destructive?
And how are tribe like mannerisms something to look down to?
More expensive doesn't mean "more" unless you count trips to israel.
>+ your cops are EXTREMLY poorly trained. In many of the videos I see online they come across as perpetrators themselves rather than actually deescalating violence.
American cops CRAVE violence and bullying. They LOVE antagonizing the people they deal with and belittle them constantly. I see this in MOST of the cop videos I watch, and I'm not intentionally looking up footage of cops behaving poorly. That's how they behave with everyone. People in the US become cops because they love power tripping. I've heard that in many European countries, if a cop behaves poorly and does criminal shit while being cops, they get sentenced more harshly, while in the US, it's the exact opposite. Many prosecutors will refuse to charge cops when they do criminal shit just because they're their buddies. I watched some of this video just earlier today.
>I've heard that
I'm going to stop you right there. All cops, ALL COPS are corrupt - some are better at hiding it.
>Buh I knew someone who was a cop for 20 years
And he was corrupt
>But he was a nice man
Doesn't matter. Nobody who's a cop for any length of time is corrupt. The non-corrupt ones quit or die via other cops.
That said,
>They LOVE antagonizing the people they deal with and belittle them constantly.
I once saw a cop pull over a young college girl. Before I like to continue, I'd like to say I'm not a simp, simping disgusts me on a physical level. However, this girl was not a threat. The cop was domineering, practically leaning into her car. She said she felt scared of hm.
>"Heh why would you be scared of ME? I feel threatened."
I found his choice of words interesting. I asked a friend of mine who went to legal school - if a cop says you're threatening them, that gives them the practical right to execute you whenever they feel.
No, you're not too confused to know what you're doing. Blackout drunk people operate fine. They can check out hotels, find their way to places. You're not too moronic to know what sex is. It's not a justification, it's an excuse, and you are not excused.
>They can check out hotels, find their way to places.
Sometimes, but with immense difficulty. Most likely, they will have difficulty figuring out how to use uber, likely needing the assistance of someone else. I remember forgetting how to play CS:GO while playing CS:GO. I would just get immensely confused the more I drank. Simple tasks become monumental obstacles while extremely drunk.
Nah, it's nowhere near as bad as you're making it out to be. I understand you don't want to be held responsible for your behavior. That's fine - just don't take responsibility. Refuse it. Don't blame the alcohol.
>I forgot how to use a mouse
Horseshit.
when I was a kid, my mom took us to see family in NY state. when we were in prince george county VA a sherrif deputy pulled his dick out during a traffic stop. with little kids in the car.
lotta words to say sociopaths. american cops are sociopaths.
>when we were in prince george county VA a sherrif deputy pulled his dick out during a traffic stop. with little kids in the car.
What year was this?
>American cops CRAVE violence and bullying. They LOVE antagonizing the people they deal with and belittle them constantly.
I'll guess that they all are creaming their iTactickal Black Coffee Commando Underwear for MEN™ at the campuses right now... -_-
School resource officer power tripping like he is dealing with 'teens' kek.
>your prisons are private entities
This is an oft repeated myth. Very few states have any significant private prison industry, that isn't to say they don't exist, and they don't exist in the corrupt state you imply they do, but they're uncommon.
Where our prison system is corrupt, is in how tax dollars create perverse incentives for incarceration. Someone who is convicted, and sent to state prison, causes state and federal tax dollars to flow into the local coffers. So you will constantly see judges sentencing people to JUST enough prison time to unlock those tax dollars. People getting like sub 30 days in prison, which is hardly worth the money spent to ship them to processing only to pull them back out a few weeks later.
The real corruption though is centered around 'dem programz'. Mostly addiction related programs that are run in halfway houses and inside prisons. They are mostly run by private entities that receive money for each convict that goes through their program, and nearly all of them have financial ties to judges who wind up sending people to them as part of their 'reduced sentence'.
To add onto this, if you've watched the lpb recently, it's shocking how often someone who's been doing a half-dozen of "dem programs," has few things on their record while in prison, has been a model prisoner, etc, gets denied and told to go back and do MORE.
>This is an oft repeated myth.
Federal prisons are the most privatized. Within a year of private prisons being legalized, the US federal justice system outlawed parole, and many states have followed since. The US loves locking people up.
One half of the country is trying to put the other half in jail
It's one big game of cops and robbers
>The most privatized
This may or may not be true, but currently they only have 8% of the prison population. So they're a relatively minor part of it.
Way more prevalent, and just as vile, are all of the private industry that cropped up around prisons. For instance, the private companies that manage the pay to call phones. Dollar per minute I'm level scams.
>For instance, the private companies that manage the pay to call phones. Dollar per minute I'm level scams.
There are tons of illegal phones in American prisons. In most European prisons, including fricking Russian prisons, they just simply allow you to have a fricking phone. Professional gang leaders will find a way anyway, so you're just keeping the more normal prisoners from being able to call their friends and family.
>they just simply allow you to have a fricking phone.
That's contraband in prison and will get you years of extra time if you're caught.
He knows. That's his point.
>Buh muh security
No, it's not a security risk because anyone who wants a phone, has one.
>That's contraband in prison and will get you years of extra time if you're caught.
Not in a lot of European prisons, including fricking Russian prisons. They even get fricking access to the internet in those places. They really don't care. There are literal prison cells in Germany with fricking ethernet cords for internet access if you get a laptop or some other computer. They will even let you leave your cell for a certain number of hours each day to go to work if they don't find you to be that dangerous, which is something that also happens in certain American prisons in certain states.
I don't care what they do in Europe, in the US having a cell phone in jail will get you more time when you get caught. Yes, they still have them - but here in South Carolina at the Alvin Glenn detention center they've been running "operations" in coordination with cell phone providers to bust people in en masse for having them. Tons of people are getting time in prison for having a cell phone, including the guards helping the prisoners smuggle them in.
I saw a video of a fricking drone dropping cell phones off for prisoners. They will always find a way to get them. You need to be absolutely draconian to get rid of cell phones in prisons. If you're wealthy enough and you've got decent enough connections, you can even order a fricking helicopter escape from a prison.
Solution deport all Black folk
You can get a lawyer at no cost to yourself, they are not the best but a lawyer is still a lawyer
>doesn't submit during discovery
>shows up at pretrial tryin2 present
>judicial procedure shuts him down
>courts are rigged
Ok mr uppercase "F", lowercase "a", lowercase "g", lowercase "g", lowercase "o", lowercase "t"
we all need to start welding steel plates to bulldozers
>concrete slabs*
>butthurt over own ignorance
>take it out on a municipality that did nothing but bend over backwards to get you that easement
>went further and offered to waive the sewer hookup fee
>offer 9x the amount you paid for the property just to get you to frick off and move
>bulldoze the whole town out of spite and boomer entitlement
Checks out
>Easement
That "easement" was designed to ruin his business.
>Municipality did nothing wrong
They destroyed his business on purpose
>But they offered to waive a fee!
After effectively destroying his business.
>They offered $$$
How about not destroying his business?
>He took it out on the town!
Just the council that hurt him and their properties. Nobody was injured.
You're a fed.
>he sold his own business and leased back the property with the next owned installing the sewer line the same day
He ruined his own business* Black person. Literally bent over backwards to help him despite his pump and dump grift he tried running g for years. Literally admitted all of that could have been avoided if they had just paid him more for the property. Literally waived fines for polluting the ground water thru over a decade of repeated sewage dumping into an irrigation illegally. Dear lord you couldn't be more israeli than him even defending him with no other ~~*points*~~ than this assertion the entire town "ruined his business" into profiting half a million dollars. You're a frickhead
>He sold his business
He didn't want to do this. You are aware the sewer line wasn't the cause of this?
>Admitted
Where did he admit this? He died in the killdozer.
You keep focusing on this sewer bullshit when that wasn't the cause of the killdozer.
Most jurisdictions it's legal for a cop to give you a warning.
He literally offered to sell it half a dozen times. Kept increasing the asking g price and always had that met yet still refused to sell until he relented and sold for nearly 10 fold his initial investment.
Get a grip
>muh initial investment
After his business had already been ruined
>Muh offer to sell
Wasn't what he WANTED to do
You're a zoomer who has only heard passing remarks about killdozer. You don't know what it's about because you weren't alive when it happened.
>Where did he admit this?
If you never seen any of the documentaries or his own recorded confession he made prior than you're admitting to arguing out of ignorance and in effect, bad faith. We'll come back to you after you've done some sort of investigation into the matter or bother to pick up a book.
You've made no points, you couldn't refute the claim, you have no argument. Hit the books and try again
I've seen plenty on Marvin. I've never seen him admit to anything that would cast him in an unreasonable light. Stay mad, fedboi.
>fedboi
You won't do shit
You're right. Just like with the 2020 protests and just like with these israel protests. I'm going to sit back, relax, and do nothing.
>You're right.
Always have been.
You were wrong on Marvin lmao
You said:
>Did you know in some parts of the country they just pull you over and give you a warning if you speed?
I said:
>Most jurisdictions it's legal for a cop to give you a warning.
You said:
>In, most jurisdictions a warning is a waste of their time and the taxpayer's money so it's rare.
>Cause I say so
I know big guy (for me at least) , I know
You were. You've made no arguments and provided no proof.
>huh durr, I reject public documents
We have public documents of his life, his property, his statements. But no, you can't be bothered with the truth that goes against your narrative. Try harder israelite demoralizer.
Your statements of their contents vs what the public documents actually say are two different things.
In, most jurisdictions a warning is a waste of their time and the taxpayer's money so it's rare.
Zoomie or fed. I'll bet you think ruby ridge was a good shoot.
You're a Black person that bulldozes a playground and library but not until it wad evacuated
you will be burned over a fire like the pig that you are
You'll have a nice day encased in concrete while watching Vin diesel flicks on loop
not really, my suicide would be much more spectacular than that, and explosive
>you won't do shit
neither will you agent 🙂
Alright, well just leave you to think about that for a bit. Good luck
Just don't show up at your court date an stall them as much as possible, you dumb?
>Don't show up
Default judgement, you lose immediately.
Here you can tell them that your relative died, you are sick or something and they have to move the sentencing 6 months into the future XD
It's so easy to get, go to a psychiatrist and tell him that you are stressed because of the sentencing and you have your medical exemption
>I went to civil court without a lawyer
lol
lmao
You have 10 days to get a lawyer. Go.
lets go with 14 days
just like 14, simple as
14 days until your case including weekends. That's 10 days to get a lawyer. You call 30, 10 call back over the next 5 days, 7 aren't available at the time you need them to be, and the remaining 3 have terrible reviews.
okay here ya go
troony.
EVEN BETTER THAN THAT
>Bhutan troony
Oh it's you. Yeah didn't realize. I knew you were a troony from your behavior though.
>Oh it's you
>I knew you were a troony
so you're a fan?
might be able to give you autograph
I wouldn't call myself a fan. I know of you in the same way I know of Seth Mcfarlane.
>I know of you in the same way I know of Seth Mcfarlane.
its actually seth macfarlane
anyway, yeah, see, you're a fan
anyway
do you like american dad? its pretty good
I'm not a fan and do not consent.
>do not consent
is this flirting?
you're a qt 3.14
Based. I remember you from a few years ago.
oh, another fan
wel, famIam, heres a secret
you're looking at the new and improved, fully awake version
cute
The israelitedicial system also ignores when it's a israelite COHENcidentally killing people and any other crime by psychopaths, it was designed to be useless against them.
Funnily enough you may want a israelite lawyer for a civil case but NOT criminal. Italian for criminal. Why? Because israelites cannot help themselves. They will "techknikally ur awnah da law says..." until they piss off the judge.
I actually went to two different hearings about that same incident. At one point my lawyer brought his cop buddy. They kept claiming there were flies "everywhere and buzzing around their head" and the cop dude kept repeating that he'd been a cop for 20 years or something. I asked, "So where's your evidence?" and every other person in that court room was disgusted with me, judge included.
>How dare you question the lack of evidence against you
He didn't have any photos btw
Not my lawyer, my landlord* brought his cop buddy
>tfw no muscle futa lady to mating press you
You should go to prison for "accidentally killing someone". You can't accidentally kill someone without doing something stupid, dangerous, and negligent.
You're wrong. Accidental killing is not a crime - but if something negligent happens, it's involuntary manslaughter.
Anyone who's ever drunk alcohol can tell you women absolutely can consent on that shit. Acting out on alcohol is an excuse. Everyone can tell you're faking it.
>Anyone who's ever drunk alcohol can tell you women absolutely can consent on that shit.
The point is that your judgement is completely fricked. It's the same reasoning behind having an age of consent. The thing is, from what I've seen, people who have sex with drunk people are typically charged with first degree rape, rather than statutory rape. They really love fricking people over in the US. If the guy is fricking drunk, the woman could just lie and say that he raped her while you were drunk. Men are fricked either way when alcohol is involved. Being drunk puts you in a more vulnerable position.
>Your judgement is fricked
You're underaged or never drank alcohol in your life. It isn't. Everyone is larping on alcohol. EVERYONE.
>It isn't. Everyone is larping on alcohol. EVERYONE.
You're psychotic. Your IQ falls exponentially with each drink, and you feel fricking invincible.
I'm not psychotic, you're looking for an excuse to act like a child. Everyone can tell you're faking anon.
>Your IQ falls exponentially
No, alcohol does not give you the IQ of a rat. You're a big boy/girl - act like it.
>No, alcohol does not give you the IQ of a rat.
You become increasingly confused with more alcohol. I used to get blackout drunk every night before sleep because of insomnia. This happens to everyone. I remember not being able to figure out how to sign into my computer or turn it off. Some people forget how to get into their house. Alcohol has the potential to lower your IQ to below that of a really young child. You really are psychotic if you're a drinker and you can't recognize this.
Are women responsible for DUIs they commit while drunk? Semi serious question.
They're not responsible for "raping" drunk men, while drunk men are responsible for "raping" drunk women. So if assume they have no responsibility for DUI either.
I've never heard of a woman getting more than 10 years unless she did a lot of other nasty shit, especially alcohol related shit, like multiple DUIs, prior. I recall watching a video where this woman who had multiple DUIs prior broke out in tears when she got sentenced just 9 years for accidentally killing an entire family in their vehicle.
Intoxication is one of those weird areas of Schrodinger's Law where you are simultaneously both completely responsible for your actions and completely not in control of your actions.
A man and a woman both get drunk and frick. She feels guilty later so calls it rape. The court system would say yes she was raped because she was too drunk to consent, but also somehow magically he was able to consent under the exact same circumstances.
Drugs and alcohol are in that status because of the results of Prohibition. When it comes down to it, you really just have a socially dysfunctional labor force but you're going to force them to live and breed in hardship conditions and try to keep them from doing anything gratifying on the short term because you're selling the lie that they'll be around to enjoy a retirement with many kids willing to provide them with everything they need or want.
Most managers are on the road to hell paved with good intentions. The kindest thing you can do for them is to not allow them to indulge in letting their guard down around you because you know that later on, when they are commanded to use the whip, those acts can be used against them. They still must be held accountable for crimes, but it clears the way to put blame where blame is due.
For now, my best advice is to avoid any job involving the handling of money. Just don't even try because people are trying to use you has a cover-up for their crimes, and certainly don't let yourself be tainted with some kink of link to drugs or alcohol. Put all ambitions aside until you know the results of this war.
Nice job dipshit. You turned this into an incel thread
Or it was a failed attempt to discreetly kill someone obfuscated by 'dindu nuffins'.
For example in case of cult bullshit it's another crime (when you are a moronic half-african and caused harm for fun knowing that the guy would survive).
>You're wrong. Accidental killing is not a crime - but if something negligent happens, it's involuntary manslaughter.
You really are moronic. It depends what your state's laws are or what federal laws are, but I've never heard of a state where accidentally killing someone isn't a form of manslaughter. Usually, you can get away with it if your connection is fairly distant, but if you accidentally hit a switch or pushed a button that resulted in some moron dying, you will likely get a 10 to 40 year sentence for manslaughter in the US.
Accidental killing is not a federal crime. "Accidental killing" and manslaughter, both voluntary and involuntary (especially voluntary) are two different thins. Educate yourself
>everyone's j-just being fake drunk
You're an actual teenager, and not a popular one.
This.
So if you shoot a dog who's attacking someone with a crossbow, and the crossbow bolt goes through the dog, through a solid wood door, and reflects into your neighbor and kills them, you should go to jail? This is your stance?
>You can't accidentally kill someone without doing something stupid, dangerous, and negligent.
Remember this whenever they tell you to give a shit about Pearl Harbour or 9/11. Lol..
Pippa has no teeth and can give killer blowjobs.
She has a black boyfriend too.
His hand was white in that one catbox.moe file that showed her giving him a handjob.
mutt's law
hot
I've nearly been killed by a braindead boomer at a site and I'd prefer they suffer somewhat for snuffing out my life rather than
>ooopsie poopsie! I guess I was just distracted! better go home to my mansion and eat lobster
That's negligent behavior which would be involuntary manslaughter. Not an accidental killing.
I haven't been able to find a single US state that has something called "accidental killing," and federal law doesn't even have such a thing. If someone's actions were involved in the death of someone else, they will likely try to get that guy and hand him a nasty decades-long sentence. You could say it was negligence at any level. If drugs were involved, even if they didn't really play that significant of a role, you are definitely fricked.
I'm terminally distracted and assume I'll kill everyone on jobsite, safety people love me, anyone who pays money? Hates me.
Your jobsite will be over-budget and safe, you will like it.
>had a party
>black chick there
>couple days later black chick stops by to chat and hang out
>"IS THIS DUMB b***h TRYING TO ROB ME?"
>b***h starts saying she lost something and needed to find it
>"Lost what?"
>dumb b***h freaks out, starts throwing dishes, tries to stab me, runs out of the house, THROWS A BRICK THROUGH MY WINDOWS
>cops come, arrest dumb b***h
>
>court 2 months later for civil case against black b***h
>1000 in damages
>black b***h has a BLM lawyer
>claims I was racist and fighting against racism
>judge says she won't look at police report
>judge says "ITS UNFAIR THAT SHE IS TESTIFYING FROM JAIL"
>israelite judge throws out my case
It really is the israelitedicial system.
>judge says she won't look at police report
>judge says "ITS UNFAIR THAT SHE IS TESTIFYING FROM JAIL"
>israelite judge throws out my case
Excessively harsh for everyone else, but easy on Black folk when the offender is black. The same thing happens when the offender is female and the victim is male. I fricking hate American leftism.
>crying about justice during the Kali Yuga
Yeah m8 that's how its supposed to be
The more you seek justice the more you will be punished
Sounds like a reason to intentionally kill someone.
Nobody thinks of the justice system until it negatively affects you. Then, you find yourself ALONE in front of a judge and wonder why there aren't thousands of people there in your defense.
I am far too lazy to look this up, but can anyone explain me juries? Like, do you have jury for both civil and penal cases? Do the jurors get to decide themselves? (and what's the judge there for then?)
When you pay people to incarcerate as many people as possible and reward them based on their performance at this task, you get a machine geared to incarcerate you because it can, not because it should.
Bullshit.
Oh yeah,
>there's no such thing as an accident. You made a series of bad decisions that brought you here today...
Whatever, until they make a mistake and suddenly
>it was just a big accident! Whoops! I won't do it again!
Or if Alec Baldwin shoots 2 people killing one. You know how fast a normal person would've got arrested if they shot 2 people? Even if they people who were shot were begging for the shooter to not be arrested, he woukd still be arrested. But not if you're famous.
They also hand out prison sentences like candy, like prison is just a normal place to go, when they know how dangerous they are.
It shows me that they're total losers, who know they're losing, so as soon as some idiot is stupid enough to get caught by some braindead cops, and ends up in kangaroo court, they toss the book at them, because they know they're not actually fixing anything, or dealing with real criminals half the time, so it's out of anger and spite, and to pretend they're doing something good.
They're all going to burn in a lake of fricking fire.
>Someone has to pay for it!
I definitely support this, and hate the European lenient sentences. USA system is much better in this. I cannot fathom how it's possible that you cause someone to die and get out of prison in just a few short years, that is unacceptable.
In fact, I think even USA system is too lenient. The best justice system was already invented 4000 years ago by the Babylonian king Hammurabi (or maybe even earlier, but this is the earliest known time when it was written down) of "eye for an eye". Simple, effective, and morally just.
First we obviously have to define what is an "accident", and to determine fault, with an example:
1. You are driving on a highway while someone from the opposing lane veers on your lane to a head-on collision. Other driver dies while you survive. This is not your fault, nor should you be punished for it.
2. You are driving on a highway and you veer to the opposing lane for whatever reason, maybe you looked at your phone, it doesn't matter, and you cause an head-on collision. The other driver dies, while you survive. You are at fault, and should pay for it with your own life for causing the untimely death of another.
It should matter frick all whether you "meant to do it", if you are at fault.
In fact, the lack of personal accountability in policy leads to individual decisions which harm the safety of others.
This is prevalent in many things, but a good example is U.S. drivers fancying massive trucks (even in cities where there is absolutely no need for them) in the recent decades, and this has caused pedestrian deaths to shoot up steeply.
It's clear that people are selfish, so if you had to pay for any death you cause with your own life, this would be a factor whether you choose to buy a vehicle which is proved to be much more deadly to other people.
...
If my neighbor is being attacked by a pitbull, so I shoot that pitbull with a crossbow, and the bolt passes through the dog, through a door, and takes a turn and kills my other neighbor, should I go to jail? A simple yes or no will suffice, I don't need to hear your explanation.
The landlord was allowed to submit his evidence to court the day of at the hearing. I was not. What's your next excuse?
>If my neighbor is being attacked by a pitbull, so I shoot that pitbull with a crossbow, and the bolt passes through the dog, through a door, and takes a turn and kills my other neighbor, should I go to jail?
Of course not. In this scenario, the pitbull owner's neglicence is the root cause and at fault in this scenario, so he should be punished for it, not you.
Similar scenario:
A sets fire to a building, fireman goes in and tries to save B by carrying him out of the building. Fireman stumbles on the way and drops B, B dies. Obviously it's not the fireman who should pay, he did nothing wrong, A should pay.
The case I cited is a real example btw. It was determined that the person committed accidental homicide, e.g., did not commit a crime.
what color is the landlord?
Anecdotally such a situation happened to a friend of mine:
A car sped up behind a corner and hit him. It being an typical European sedan, the front grille clipped his legs and his body hit first the hood, then caved in a bit of the windshield, and ultimately rolled over the roof and ended up on the asphalt behind the car. Being of a sturdy ice hockey player build, the car was worse for wear than he was and he didn't even need any medical care.
If the same situation happened with a Ford F350, he would have been crushed and not alive today.
So if one decided to buy such a pedestrian-crusher, and such accident happened, you really think the driver should not be held accountable for his decision?!
In fact, I find that be very typical thinking of Americans. Many of them think there should only be rights, but should never be accountable of their own actions.
>I cannot fathom how it's possible that you cause someone to die and get out of prison in just a few short years, that is unacceptable.
By a matter of chance. Unless your life literally revolves around sitting behind a computer screen and never going out, the chance you will accidentally kill someone increases exponentially. I almost killed someone myself, and it was a freak accident. I learned a shitton from that experience, though. Also, younger people are more likely to do stupid shit in the first place, and this stupid shit could result in loss of life. It's not fair to sentence people in their late teens and early 20s the same way as people in their 30s and older. Their brains aren't fully developed, and they don't have as much adult experience. Also, if you do end up doing something that killed someone by accident, you are way less likely to do such a thing in the future. One of the reasons why people get locked up is because they are a danger to society. If you are way less likely to commit a certain crime again, then it can be extremely unfair to sentence you harshly, especially if you didn't even intend to do anything harmful.
>I almost killed someone myself
Almost doesn't count. That's what I mean by for an "eye for an eye". You didn't cause harm to anyone, so you shouldn't be harmed in response.
>do stupid shit in the first place
My point exactly. Personal accountability breeds responsibility. Personal unaccountability breeds negligence. In general, people would be less likely to do stupid shit endangering other people if their own lives are at stake.
Answer my question you coincidentally missed:
>Inb4 some excuse about how you don't have to answer
>Inb4 some non-response or non-reply that doesn't address my question
>Inb4 some subject change
Yes or no, should someone in that scenario be charged?
>Almost doesn't count. That's what I mean by for an "eye for an eye". You didn't cause harm to anyone, so you shouldn't be harmed in response.
By literal chance, I didn't kill someone that day. Had he been in the wrong spot, somebody would've died that day. It's not fair to sentence someone so fricking harshly for something that happened by chance. I learned a lot that day, and had I actually killed someone that day, I would've learned the same. Since I didn't actually kill someone (and he was enough of an angel to not even call the cops), nothing happened to me, but had I actually killed someone, I likely would've ended up with a 10 to 40 year sentence.
Well then you know where to move.
What would've happened in Norway?
Brevik killed like 60 kids and lives in what amounts to a cushy mental institution
>60 kids
Fake news, he killed 60 larval leftists. Next you'll be trying to claim the McVeigh killed children at OKC.
>60 kids
it was future moronic commies.
IN WHICH CASE?
It's impossible to say anything to your scenario since you don't give out any specifics. The important part is if you were at fault being negligent. If yes, and someone died, you should be punished. If you're talking about fair, it's not fair to the dead person's family that you get to live while he doesn't because he did nothing wrong and you were stupid.
This!
You have to go back you fricking Black person
While I think eye for an eye, is a good system for willful decisions, accidents are very hard to determine.
>Driving down the road
>Dumb b***h steps out from behind a parked car and you splatter them
Was this an accident?
>Driving down the road, you noticed b***h walk between two parked cars, but didn't slow down.
>They step out and get splattered.
What about now? Is this an accident, or must you die?
>Driving down the road
>Fat homosexual didn't want to go out and salt his part of the sidewalk
>b***h slips on ice and falls into the road, causing you to run them over.
>Ice melts before police arrive
The only "accidents" that should probably be considered willful at all times, are any crimes and "accidents' where one party was intoxicated in any way. Smoked a blunt? All crimes are premeditated, same for alcohol gays
Obviously you should be held accountable when you're at fault in the accident. None of those accidents in your examples were caused by your behavior, so of course you're not at fault and thus not accountable either.
If on the other hand you were looking at Tiktok videos on your phone and rear-ended someone who didn't do anything wrong, and they got hurt, you shouldn't get away with just a slap on the wrist.
Of course there are accidents which cannot be foreseen and where everyone was doing everything correctly and no one is at fault.
Just as there are accidents where the victim wins a darwin award by looking at their phone and walking to subway tracks and get splashed by a train. Obviously it's the victims fault, and train driver isn't responsible.
If you caused an accident by being the negligent party not following the rules, then and only then should your life be taken in return.
Only rape sentences in Europe are garbage. In the US, they sentence some moronic Youtuber for stealing a car without knowing there was a kid in the back and immediately giving it back 45 years.
>Hur hur, stupid games, stupid prizes
Porfirio Diaz was right about the United States.
>You are at fault, and should pay for it with your own life for causing the untimely death of another.
>It should matter frick all whether you "meant to do it", if you are at fault.
Yeah, if your bloodpressure drops the moment before this happens or if you get vertigo the second before this happens, give him a life sentence. Justice for All!
Why is that "mobster" morality. It sounds like mob morality which is not the same thing. Mob rule is simply allowing the feelings of a hostile majority to dictate judgement regardless of what the established law is. Mobsters are criminals who have actively chosen a life outside the law, who simply THINK that they represent the people even when they are hurting everyone.
This is really the cornerstone of modern community dysfunction. People seem to think that the rich are going to take financial risks on a capricious community. That community may even think that they are doing God's bidding, but when it comes down to it, nobody is going to invest in a mob who thinks that your money is at their disposal.
Right now, you have the super-rich who are more mobster, thinking that their multi-national status puts them above the law, and you have the mob, who has gotten irresponsible with their interpretation of the law.
The biggest problem with "the mob" is that they are inclined to not care about where the money comes from. Personally, I blame this on years of entitlements for baby makers who have used that generosity from the state to bully others. The state isn't really free from guilt as they've been doing the bidding of the super-rich to tax the unmarried in order to subsidize the married, all in an effort to keep a cheap labor force.
This is simply going to have to play out in the coming civil war. There's no point in trying to predict and prevent conflict because all parties are committed to breaking the wills of people who aren't in a position to 'do the right thing".
The US justice system has committed suicide already. The failing is when the two-party system decided to break the law in a Malcolm X style of "by any means necessary".
I don't need to hear the play-by-play. I already know that pride will prevent any and every effort to prevent the coming civil war. The only thing a person CAN do is refuse to legitimize any of the players.
Mobster means mafioso. Obviously.
>US judges think to themselves "Someone has to pay for it!"
US judges have a God complex. I'm still surprised this issue isn't that big. Libs are right for the wrong reasons about SCOTUS. And it isn't just them, it is all judges in the US. They have too much power, but it is ignored because they only have power in the judicial system which most Americans don't encounter daily.
>They have too much power,
Judges actually have very little power. The average pleb doesn't understand, but juries have the final and absolute power inside a criminal trial.
Jury nullification is the ultimate power, and the only illegitimate power that judges have carved out, is preventing it's mention in court.
Your connection is based on very tenuous ground and you seem to be saying
>US justice system bad
>mob bad
>therefore US justice system is mob
its simple supply and demand.
there is a prison industry in need of convicts so they supply them.
that's you country on godless hyper capitalism
This happens in europe too, unless you're brown.
*On second thought, brown people don't ACCIDENTALLY Kill anyone.
uh no this doesnt happen to blacks under zog, or the israelite, ever.
putting this on muh wimmenz is incel morality.
Does USA have Corrective facilities like here. We have a couple of special prisons where prisoners serve their sentences while having to work in the mines /potato fields and if they work good they can get a couple of years off
In some states, there are some low security prisons where they will let you leave for work while being supervised. This is pretty rare, though.
Cool, at least no penal colonies
>We have a couple of special prisons where prisoners serve their sentences while having to work in the mines /potato fields and if they work good they can get a couple of years off
We used to. Then the bleeding hearts said that was cruel and unusual punishment and cried muh slavery. So to “rehabilitate” prisoners we shove everybody into concrete boxes and feed them shit food. Yet the bleeding hearts wonder why they don’t behave.
I bet it's because being in a cage being fed shit food is kind of annoying to say the least. Not because of unemployment.
Anglo-Saxon "legal system" is literally a derivative of new world pirate culture and unwritten laws lmao, why would it work in any other way.
Imagine inheriting perfected Roman law blueprint and still deciding to go with smelly pirate mentality over it, thank god Europe wasn't so moronic.
what is Pippa's freaking problem?
I kind of want to know where this meme originally came from because there's a lot of variants at this point.
One more "land of the free moment"? Maybe you aint free after all?