I'm not being a jerk, I really think your post shows we're at a place where people struggle to determine and agree what problems even exist. Which really precludes any meaningful conversation about a solution. I reckon as long as reasonable folks can keep talking, we'll figure it out.
Agree to disagree. With violent criminals rehabilitation isn't necessary. Just eliminate them and move on, as they did with their victims. Society deserves it. They've proven they can't live in society. There is no point in housing them. Some would argue the death penalty is even more humane than prison, but what's lost in the discussion of criminal rights is what justice demands. The victims deserve to have this violent criminal eliminated. It shows that their loved one was important and that their life had real value. It was so valuable the one who took it forfeits their right to draw breath.
I think certain populations of Americans are more prone to violence. There is a book that I wish I could pull the name of that provides a lot of details about where the population in the US historically comes from. It was like down to the county level, and it made a pretty good argument that much of our politics and also to an extent I guess what you might call the quality of communities can be predicted based on where immigrants settling the area originally came from. Basically a more detailed look at the fact that to the extent you can get detailed stats, basically every demographic you can think of does better in the US than their equivalent in their ancestral home, but this was less focused on that and more just about how it predicted politics and community. One of the examples/claim was about how family feuds in appalachia were basically just a repeat of the feuds that their scottish ancestors had.
Similar to what I posted above, what you call "serious about crime" is the only way we can effectively reduce our crime rate.
And what would you do for those who were wrongfully convicted and put to death?
True but they have to kill someone to get put there. They walk around having their episodes and continually do dumb shlt. In and out of courts, until they finally stab somebody, then we send them to jail.
If he's proclaiming insanity, what does it say for all the idiots that show up picketing for him?
That's a crime that deserves justice as well. But the small potential for wrongfully convicting someone is not a reason to let easily provable violent criminals spend our money and energy living in a prison for decades. Luigi Mangione isn't going to be discovered not to be the killer. He did it. He premeditated it. There's video of it. We won't find out later he's actually innocent. In a just world, he'd be executed already.
I mean, it's pretty effective. There was this ridiculous notion back in the 80's and 90's that incarcerating criminals didn't reduce crime. You'd even see idiot newspaper articles where the headlines would be like "Crime drops despite rising incarceration rates" (which resulted in the term "Butterfield Effect" being coined)
You may have heard people say this in the 80s and 90s. However, here's what actually happened:
So what people said is also what actually happened? Am I missing something?
Read Freakonomics if you want to hear a leading theory why. We'll get a live test of this theory around 2040, complete with experimental and control groups right here in the US.
In my mind, most people capable of premeditated homicide are suffering from some level of insanity.
Well, in a way, a person has to be a little off kilter (even insane) to kill someone in cold-blooded, pre-planned murder. But lots of other murderers have preceded him and they didn't get off for being crazy. He's just got a backing, mostly female, because he's physically attractive to them. And some, of course, actually believe what he did was justified because of the health care industry.
Nope.
www.courttv.com
I think they are basing their defense that a NYC jury will see it as Luigi did. And they very well might. Hell, half the women up there and around this nation are in love with the guy. And.....he couldn't be tried in a more friendly/favorable environment. With such liberal DAs up there, he might get a chance to get off scott-free. If he was tried in Mississippi, he'd almost certainly get the death penalty.
If it weren't such a high profile case, DA Alvin Bragg woulda let him out the same day.
I read the article, and it seems to be a straight-forward explanation of basic criminal trial procedure happening here. You may not agree with the judge's ruling, but exclusion of evidence based on established case law and the 4th amendment is the way that the system should work. The judge allowed things that were subject to a proper search and excluded others that he determined were not. He's allowing the notebook with the "manifesto" and the guy's voluntary statements to the cops. Seems pretty down-the-middle to me.Nope.
Luigi Mangione gets win as judge suppresses evidence in murder case
A judge ruled that a loaded magazine will stay out of Luigi Mangione's trial, while a gun and notebook will come in.
How much personal experience do you have with Manhattan DAs? Doesn't sound like much.
Can't claim insanity on the federal charges from my understanding.......
And there are quite a few people out there with legit platforms condoning what he did which is 17ing sick.
Boy you really wanna talk about statistics?It sucks to have to hear ideas you find distressing, I'm sorry you experienced that.
The good news for you is that beyond whatever words you may have to endure, here in the land of the free we have 5% of the world's population and 20% of the prisoners. You can rest assured any rhetoric is not in alignment with action:
View attachment 1330042
List of countries by incarceration rate - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I mean, it's my opinion as a 20+ year litigator who has dealt with all manner of judge and opposing counsel out there. I've argued and lost many motions in limine and I can think of a handful of times I believed the judge's political agenda played into the ruling. Was I pissed? Of course. But not paranoid.
This is a spot we need to be #1It sucks to have to hear ideas you find distressing, I'm sorry you experienced that.
The good news for you is that beyond whatever words you may have to endure, here in the land of the free we have 5% of the world's population and 20% of the prisoners. You can rest assured any rhetoric is not in alignment with action:
View attachment 1330042
List of countries by incarceration rate - Wikipedia
So has measured levels of blood. Very high correlation. And it is known to affect behavior, especially impulse control.
I know I start actin' a little funny when I'm running a quart low
We have more violent people here. We actually don't imprison enough violent people, those who have repeatedly shown they're willing to terrorize and even kill innocent people. Most people don't avoid going to certain areas or living in certain neighborhoods because they're afraid of billionaires. We don't even have to imprison a large percentage of society. It's likely around 1% who commit most violent crimes. Why allow them to live around law-abiding citizens?It sucks to have to hear ideas you find distressing, I'm sorry you experienced that.
The good news for you is that beyond whatever words you may have to endure, here in the land of the free we have 5% of the world's population and 20% of the prisoners. You can rest assured any rhetoric is not in alignment with action:
View attachment 1330042
List of countries by incarceration rate - Wikipedia
How much would that cost? Where would you find the drill sergeants? Do you really think murderers and rapists are just future HVAC guys who made a couple of bad choices?
I think some might be. Otherwise what's the explanation? Why do Asian American women have such low crime rates and lower crime rates than any young American males?
