Explain this

[Pancho 44,487]

 

[speed817 19,115]

Looks pretty black and white to me....

[DigglerontheHoof 21,065]

I've been told by very reliable Republicans that racism is a thing of the past.  It doesn't exist anymore so this is, obviously, fake news. 

[OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys 2,059]

My heartless explanation would be “anecdotal” and not conducive to the normal type of conversation you see on Surly.  The racism in sentencing is real of course, but my guess is you could line up 10,000 people with similar scores and see a range of penalties for either demographic.  Maybe one was a pistola and one was a knife.  Maybe one was part of a bigger heroin buy.  Maybe some “affluenza” effect.  
 

but yeah, black people do get harsher sentences than whites.  Just done know that is what happened here and making the judges number go viral doesn’t seem cool. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21,065]

2 minutes ago, OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys said:

My heartless explanation would be “anecdotal” and not conducive to the normal type of conversation you see on Surly.  The racism in sentencing is real of course, but my guess is you could line up 10,000 people with similar scores and see a range of penalties for either demographic.  Maybe one was a pistola and one was a knife.  Maybe one was part of a bigger heroin buy.  Maybe some “affluenza” effect.  
 

but yeah, black people do get harsher sentences than whites.  Just done know that is what happened here and making the judges number go viral doesn’t seem cool. 

Seems cool AF to me. 

[conVINCEd 21,468]

Maybe the white kid is his nephew?

[fattyflattie 4,636]

Fucked up. White kid should have also gotten 26 yrs.  

[Js1 85,112]

4 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Seems cool AF to me. 

If Judge Sherwood Bauer Jr. wants to be an elected official, he has to live with his judicial record being public and on blast.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

7 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Fucked up. White kid should have also gotten 26 yrs.  

Maybe split the difference, and give em with 13 years.  Would love to now all the circumstances beyond the ones posted as comparisons, but yeah black folks seem to make up the majority of prison inmate %'s while only being about 20% or so of the general population.

[Skipper 6,103]

After a quick google search, it seems the white guy's offense was a drug deal and he testified against his co-defendants.  Here is a quote from sentencing:

[Legleitner] was more than cooperative with us in his pre-trial, his deposition, provided truthful statements at trial … Mr. Legleitner understands the seriousness of the crime and the severity of the situation that he got himself into. He…was the last to join this party, if you will. He is…the least culpable of the entire group. He knows he should have left the situation. He knows he should have not partook [sic] anything. He did not touch anybody. He did not hurt anybody.

And I think that is important for Your Honor to understand that without his assistance we would not [have] been able to get secure convictions, get past a judgment of acquittal, and certainly not to get to the real bad guys here. So … I would agree that based on what I just represented to you that he qualifies for a downward departure, I would have no good faith basis to object to a downward departure …

 

Then, it appears the black guy robbed a gas station and a pizza hut at gunpoint so a "crime against the public" and did it while driving around a 2 year old and 5 year old in the car with him.  So with that background this isn't as surprising.  So like every other political based meme, no matter the slant, shockingly this one doesn't tell all the facts.  But I'm sure managed to rile a bunch of people up.

 

[Hate 20,103]

According to Politifact, the white kid cooperated which lead to two other convictions.  Is two other convictions worth 24 years?  I don't know.  Does racism still exist?  Yes.  Was racism a part of this situation?  I don't know.  Were there more facts available using a quick search?  Yes. 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/17/facebook-posts/was-race-only-difference-sentencing-two-defendants/

[DonkeyCigars 144]

46 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

The problem with society and communication today is we take half-truths or crafted images pushing an agenda (on both sides) and then let everyone jump to conclusions and let the outrage machine kick into gear.

If this was a test question and the prompt was "Explain This" the only acceptable answer on a multiple choice is D) Not enough information

[Skipper 6,103]

I don't care what gender or race you are, if you are driving around committing armed robberies with a 2 year old and 5 year old in the backseat, putting their lives in danger so you can take a few hundred bucks from a Pizza Hutt, your ass needs to go to jail for a long time.

[Brisketexan 104,628]

6 minutes ago, Skipper said:

I don't care what gender or race you are, if you are driving around committing armed robberies with a 2 year old and 5 year old in the backseat, putting their lives in danger so you can take a few hundred bucks from a Pizza Hutt, your ass needs to go to jail for a long time.

Hit a Papa Johns, though....and I'll cut you some slack.

[RomaVicta 29,794]

There is so much wrong with our wildly varying sentencing standards and the absolute horror of our prisons.

Twenty-six years is a long time to put anybody in prison. Even with parole, what? The black convict will be nearly 40 when he gets out? Then what do you have? That brings us so the issue of our prisons.

We use prison pretty much for punishment and little else. That's the policy. The reality is that we put prisoners in overcrowded, dangerous hell-holes which we like to crack wise about the hilarious likelihood of prison rape. What does that say about us? We're gettin' tough on crime because we're really tough guys here in the US?

No. It says we are wantonly cruel and proudly uncaring. It also says we like to burn money on the prison system instead of investing in efforts to head off criminality (merely keeping kids in high school can do that) or giving people some sort of hope for a decent life after they've done their time. 

The white guy will have less damaging time behind bars. He'll still be young when he gets out. Maybe he won't remain a criminal.

The black man will emerge in middle age with no skills and the scarring of walking through 20 years of that amusing little inferno we call American prison.

Hee hee hee! Don't forget the soap on a rope! Hee hee hee!

Brisket hit it on the head. Cruelty is our brand.

[washparkhorn 9,935]

[lmao 178]

Structural racism and classism. There is also a huge gender disparity in sentencing as well. 

The Innocence Project just had a black former student at the University of Kansas released after he was sentenced by an all white female jury to twelve years for what is now known to be a false sexual assault allegation.

Edited September 20, 2021 by lmao

[TheRealRonWeaver? 1,258]

It's alright because it's all white.

[David Dennison 18,661]

1 hour ago, Hate said:

According to Politifact, the white kid cooperated which lead to two other convictions.  Is two other convictions worth 24 years?  I don't know.  Does racism still exist?  Yes.  Was racism a part of this situation?  I don't know.  Were there more facts available using a quick search?  Yes. 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/17/facebook-posts/was-race-only-difference-sentencing-two-defendants/

You don't know? Really?

[Hate 20,103]

Well of course I do.  All white people are racists.  Duh.

[David Dennison 18,661]

2 minutes ago, Hate said:

Well of course I do.  All white people are racists.  Duh.

They certainly benefit disproportionately from racism.

[Captainant 27,466]

12 minutes ago, Hate said:

Well of course I do.  All white people are racists.  Duh.

I'm so glad that you've come to raise the bar on the dialogue here in the CR that you love to bitch about everywhere else on the site

[speed817 19,115]

Who the hell names their kid "Sherwood"????

[South Austin 52,144]

2 minutes ago, speed817 said:

Who the hell names their kid "Sherwood"????

A parent who wants their kid to get his ass kicked in school.

[Captainant 27,466]

btw you should read the politifact link you posted @Hate - it provides additional detail that you apparently aren't aware of, despite bringing the link into the convo.

The key fact difference in these cases seems to be that Legleitner (the white defendant) had accomplices he could testify against, and Lloyd (the black defendant) did not. So when Legleitner was helpful to the prosecution, they "lobbied hard for leniency". 

Either way though, I don't see how the same fact pattern and scoring guidelines can return a 24 year delta between the two cases for a simple robbery in which the minimum sentence was just under 7 years (source - snopes factcheck)

So the brass tacks of the matter are: 

• Legleitner (born in September 1989) was 19 when he committed an armed robbery, along with five other people, on 3 November 2008. He was arrested in February 2009.
• Lloyd (born in July 1987) was 21 when he and another man committed two armed robberies in Stuart, Florida (of a Pizza Hut and a Sunoco gas station), on 18 March 2009. He was arrested later that night.
• Both Legleitner and Lloyd were charged with two counts of “robbery with a deadly weapon,” a Class D felony.
• Legleitner pled “no contest” to the charges against him on 18 November 2009, and Lloyd pled likewise on 11 March 2010.
• Both Legleitner and Lloyd had 138.2 “sentence points,” which yielded a minimum sentence of 82.65 months (just under seven years.)
• On 23 July 2010, 19th Judicial Circuit Judge Bauer sentenced Lloyd to 13 years in state prison on each of two counts, yielding a sentence of 26 years.
• On 23 June 2011, Bauer invoked a “mitigated departure” from the minimum sentence calculated from Legleitner’s sentence points and sentenced him to time already served of 722 days in Martin County jail (one year, 11 months and 27 days).

Not sure how you can logic a 5 year downward departure for helping the prosecution and simultaneously give an 19 year upward departure. Especially when the judge has a track record of 2-3x more severe sentences for dark skinned defendants (also from snopes link)

[TwiceHorn 31,283]

2 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Fucked up. White kid should have also gotten 26 yrs.  

Neither one should have got 26 years.  That's fucking ridiculous unless someone got hurt.

The seven years from the guidelines seems more appropriate.

And, I suppose the police apparatus would grind to a halt, but I am pretty disgusted by investigation by prosecution, that is, using confessions/cooperation to secure more convictions while being lenient on the confessor/cooperator.

Edited September 20, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Fudge Nuggets 19,151]

8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Neither one should have got 26 years.  That's fucking ridiculous unless someone got hurt.

Hate's feelings got hurt.  Does that count?

[TexArcher 37,519]

13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I am pretty disgusted by investigation by prosecution, that is, using confessions/cooperation to secure more convictions while being lenient on the confessor/cooperator.

I tend to agree.  It's pretty well-documented that torture doesn't yield accurate information because under that kind of stress people will say anything to make it stop.  Doesn't that also apply when someone has the choice between a long stretch in pound-me-in-the-ass prison or a couple of years in County?

Also, I don't think we should be particularly surprised that the racial group that isn't being murdered in the street by cops several times a year tends to be more cooperative with the legal system.

 

Edited September 20, 2021 by TexArcher

[fattyflattie 4,636]

21 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Neither one should have got 26 years.  That's fucking ridiculous unless someone got hurt.

The seven years from the guidelines seems more appropriate.

Curious why you feel this way.  What would you feel would be apropos if someone did get hurt?  Say they shot one of the clerks, leaving him paralyzed and unable to support his family, but not dead?  Now that they have effectively destroyed several lives, what would be an appropriate sentence?

Using a firearm to rob someone, or in this gentlemen's case, rob several different people, is some serious shit.  Not boosting cars, or shoplifting.   7 years, so gets out in 4?  Fuck that noise. 

[Brisketexan 104,628]

25 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Curious why you feel this way.  What would you feel would be apropos if someone did get hurt?  Say they shot one of the clerks, leaving him paralyzed and unable to support his family, but not dead?  Now that they have effectively destroyed several lives, what would be an appropriate sentence?

Using a firearm to rob someone, or in this gentlemen's case, rob several different people, is some serious shit.  Not boosting cars, or shoplifting.   7 years, so gets out in 4?  Fuck that noise. 

Other than our desire to "show that fucker what's what" (and BTW, I understand that sentiment better than you can imagine).....what do we the people get out of such a lengthy sentence?

Our "corrections" process is utterly FUBAR.  Zero rehabilitation purpose, just punishment.  Which does nothing but create more bitter, better criminals at the end of it.  A felony conviction already means you are locked out of 90% of decent jobs when you get out.  So, what the hell are we really doing with these people -- what's our plan?  At this point, we'd all be better off just executing everyone who commits a crime where we want to send them to prison for more than 5 years, because once we send them down that road, they are only going to be WORSE, not better, when they eventually get out.  So what's the point?  What are we really accomplishing?  It's not a deterrent to others.  It doesn't rehab anyone.  The only thing it does is "get the guy off the street" for the period of his sentence.  But again, unless that sentence is "forever," he WILL be heading back to the street, and he'll likely be a worse person when he gets there than when we sent him away.

I'm not posting this as a bleeding heart, "let's give all the bad guys another chance" kind of thing, at all.  I'm doing it from a perspective of wondering what our goals actually are, and how we are accomplishing them or not.  When it comes to our incarceration model, it sure seems like it's 10X more destructive than it is productive.  

For example, let's look at the case in the OP.  Both guys took part in a dangerous crime.  One got light treatment because he turned on his accomplices.  The other had no accomplices, so he didn't have that path available to him.  But do we really think there's a big difference between the two guys in terms of "if he's not in prison, he's a continuing danger to society?"  I suspect that the white dude isn't gonna be a boy scout moving forward, at least not materially more likely than if the black guy was in the same spot.  If the purpose of incarceration is to "get bad dudes off the streets," we failed here -- because the only thing the white dude did differently was rat out his fellow criminals.  He's a bad dude, and he's still on the streets.

I don't have easy answers, by the way.  I just know that our "lock em up and throw away the key" approach hasn't gained us shit.  Except to have the largest and most expensive incarceration industry in the world.

 

 

And you and I both know that insane rate falls even MORE heavily on minorities here.  It's fucked up.  And it's further fucking us up.  We create a cycle of incarceration, unemployability, and no future, for men and their families.  And we gain NOTHING by it.  Are we safer than any of those places?  Nope.  When you're doing something that a) isn't working and b) is actually making things worse, a smart country would hit the brakes.  We are not a smart country.

Edited September 20, 2021 by Brisketexan

[South Austin 52,144]

11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

At this point, we'd all be better off just executing everyone who commits a crime where we want to send them to prison for more than 5 years

Looks like that's what they're doing in the Holy See.

[hobbes2702 12,846]

37 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Curious why you feel this way.  What would you feel would be apropos if someone did get hurt?  Say they shot one of the clerks, leaving him paralyzed and unable to support his family, but not dead?  Now that they have effectively destroyed several lives, what would be an appropriate sentence?

Using a firearm to rob someone, or in this gentlemen's case, rob several different people, is some serious shit.  Not boosting cars, or shoplifting.   7 years, so gets out in 4?  Fuck that noise. 

The goal of our criminal justice system should be to rehabilitate not punish. 

[Brisketexan 104,628]

3 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Looks like that's what they're doing in the Holy See.

The Cathlicks just ain't tellin' us what is really happening here.  Do you even underground dungeon, bro?

 

[TwiceHorn 31,283]

3 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

The goal of our criminal justice system should be to rehabilitate not punish. 

Well, even I think that's a little lofty.  But there needs to be more of an effort toward rehabilitation.

[tx 3 putt 76,401]

How dumb do you have to be rob a Pizza Hut )

[fattyflattie 4,636]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The only thing it does is "get the guy off the street" for the period of his sentence. 

That's a decent start, and is not a bad thing.  We've been seeing the lovely effects of letting out everyone short of a serial killer here in Houston.  Murder after murder after murder - "defendant was out on bond..."

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

But again, unless that sentence is "forever," he WILL be heading back to the street, and he'll likely be a worse person when he gets there than when we sent him away.

I agree.  So maybe instead of giving them a set time, let them out when they can  prove they are a benefit to society.  How to do that, I don't know. Maybe they can stay in there and learn shit until they have the cred to get into a state university.  Doesn't have to qualify for UT, maybe something shitty like aggy or UH.   What I do know if letting them run around robbing people at gunpoint isn't the answer.  

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The other had no accomplices, so he didn't have that path available to him. 

I thought I read in the link he did have an accomplice, that was arrested along side him.  I'm not seeing that again so maybe I dreamed it in my head /crabtree/ but yeah, that's a pretty shit situation for black guy to not have the same situation.  As an attorney you can better understand whether DA's should be able to offer deals, and if they are useful in the grand scheme.  I can't speak to that. I assume it's a useful tool that won't go away anytime soon, but probably needs to be revisited wrt minimums for the snitches. 

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I suspect that the white dude isn't gonna be a boy scout moving forward, at least not materially more likely than if the black guy was in the same spot.

Very likely not.   I think they both should have gotten the same sentence.  Maybe slightly more for the guy who took the kids along for the robbery spree. 

14 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

At this point, we'd all be better off just executing everyone who commits a crime where we want to send them to prison for more than 5 years, because once we send them down that road, they are only going to be WORSE, not better, when they eventually get out.

This is probably right.   The problem is these guys don't have many options, and likely aren't educated.  AND likely are lazy.  Where it gets difficult is not having good options and being uneducated is a large swath of our society.  But why should we give a solitary fuck about the guy that decides to hold up someone's husband/wife/child at gunpoint?  My garbage man doesn't have a great lot in life.  Likely uneducated.  But he dabbles in my fucking garbage for $12/hr because he's not a lazy pos, and would rather sling filth than rob people.  There's 10's of millions of people across the US that do shit fucking work for shit pay and walk the straight and narrow.  Why should we waste time with the criminals?

[hobbes2702 12,846]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, even I think that's a little lofty.  But there needs to be more of an effort toward rehabilitation.

I’m not saying that we can rehabilitate everyone but if our only goal is to punish then why even have prisons. Just line them up.

[hobbes2702 12,846]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

That's a decent start, and is not a bad thing.  We've been seeing the lovely effects of letting out everyone short of a serial killer here in Houston.  Murder after murder after murder - "defendant was out on bond..."

I agree.  So maybe instead of giving them a set time, let them out when they can  prove they are a benefit to society.  How to do that, I don't know. Maybe they can stay in there and learn shit until they have the cred to get into a state university.  Doesn't have to qualify for UT, maybe something shitty like aggy or UH.   What I do know if letting them run around robbing people at gunpoint isn't the answer.  

I thought I read in the link he did have an accomplice, that was arrested along side him.  I'm not seeing that again so maybe I dreamed it in my head /crabtree/ but yeah, that's a pretty shit situation for black guy to not have the same situation.  As an attorney you can better understand whether DA's should be able to offer deals, and if they are useful in the grand scheme.  I can't speak to that. I assume it's a useful tool that won't go away anytime soon, but probably needs to be revisited wrt minimums for the snitches. 

Very likely not.   I think they both should have gotten the same sentence.  Maybe slightly more for the guy who took the kids along for the robbery spree. 

This is probably right.   The problem is these guys don't have many options, and likely aren't educated.  AND likely are lazy.  Where it gets difficult is not having good options and being uneducated is a large swath of our society.  But why should we give a solitary fuck about the guy that decides to hold up someone's husband/wife/child at gunpoint?  My garbage man doesn't have a great lot in life.  Likely uneducated.  But he dabbles in my fucking garbage for $12/hr because he's not a lazy pos, and would rather sling filth than rob people.  There's 10's of millions of people across the US that do shit fucking work for shit pay and walk the straight and narrow.  Why should we waste time with the criminals?

Are you actually taking issue with people being out on bond? Do you think we should just keep people who’ve not been convicted of crimes in jail?

 

As for “waste time with the criminals”, because they still exist and are still part of society. So unless you think we should simply kill them all we are going to have to do something about it.

Edited September 20, 2021 by hobbes2702

[Brisketexan 104,628]

1 minute ago, fattyflattie said:

Where it gets difficult is not having good options and being uneducated is a large swath of our society.  But why should we give a solitary fuck about the guy that decides to hold up someone's husband/wife/child at gunpoint?  My garbage man doesn't have a great lot in life.  Likely uneducated.  But he dabbles in my fucking garbage for $12/hr because he's not a lazy pos, and would rather sling filth than rob people.  There's 10's of millions of people across the US that do shit fucking work for shit pay and walk the straight and narrow.  Why should we waste time with the criminals?

Cost is a great place to start.  It costs around $25k per year in Texas to imprison a person.  Sentence someone to 10 years? You just committed the people of Texas to a $250k expenditure.  Multiply that by our giant-ass prison population (I'll save you the looking -- Texas spends around $3.5 BILLION on prisons per year).

And we create future generations with poor options/education/upbringing when we incarcerate their fathers, and when their dads get out, they can't get a job that pays shit, because we functionally blacklist anyone who has ever been in prison.  So, a generational lather, rinse, repeat.  It's their choices, so why should we care?  Because we pay for it.  We pay for the prisoner.  We pay for his kids, who grow up with shitty situations and are more likely to become a drain on society/prisoners themselves.  

If I can spend $500 million in effort and reduce our prison population (and thus our prison spending) by a third, I not only get better outcomes for all of us, but I save over $500 million a year.  It's not all about dollars -- like I said, it's a complex picture with no one, simple, easy answer.  But what we are doing.....is NOT working.  It's hurting us, not helping.  We should do everything we can to find a different path.

[fattyflattie 4,636]

4 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Are you actually taking issue with people being out on bond? Do you think we should just keep people who’ve not been convicted of crimes in jail?

It definitely needs to be looked at.  Murder after murder because the courts can't keep up.  Two murders a few weeks ago in an attempt to raise money to bond out another in the gang.  A person that will shoot you in broad daylight to take your watch to bond out his buddy is not someone who can be rehabilitated.  That person will NEVER become useful to our society.  So what should we do?

6 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

As for “waste time with the criminals”, because they still exist and are still part of society. So unless you think we should simply kill them all we are going to have to do something about it.

Robbery doesn't really get you there.  But I have a hard time finding a solitary fuck for rapists, murderers, and child predators.  

[hobbes2702 12,846]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Cost is a great place to start.  It costs around $25k per year in Texas to imprison a person.  Sentence someone to 10 years? You just committed the people of Texas to a $250k expenditure.  Multiply that by our giant-ass prison population (I'll save you the looking -- Texas spends around $3.5 BILLION on prisons per year).

And we create future generations with poor options/education/upbringing when we incarcerate their fathers, and when their dads get out, they can't get a job that pays shit, because we functionally blacklist anyone who has ever been in prison.  So, a generational lather, rinse, repeat.  It's their choices, so why should we care?  Because we pay for it.  We pay for the prisoner.  We pay for his kids, who grow up with shitty situations and are more likely to become a drain on society/prisoners themselves.  

If I can spend $500 million in effort and reduce our prison population (and thus our prison spending) by a third, I not only get better outcomes for all of us, but I save over $500 million a year.  It's not all about dollars -- like I said, it's a complex picture with no one, simple, easy answer.  But what we are doing.....is NOT working.  It's hurting us, not helping.  We should do everything we can to find a different path.

It’s not like there aren’t examples all over the world. We are one of the worst in the world when it comes to recidivism. You’ve highlighted all the reasons why. This is another thing like healthcare that other countries have largely figured out but we continue to bury our head about. 

[UncleSonny 6,559]

Don’t want to derail the thread, but I’m confused how they ended up with the same charges and “points”. 

People are pointing to the kids as the main difference in the fact pattern, but shouldn’t that have added another charge? Reckless/wonton child endangerment or something (idk shit about the criminal code)?

Either way that disparity is clearly bullshit. 

[hobbes2702 12,846]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

It definitely needs to be looked at.  Murder after murder because the courts can't keep up.  Two murders a few weeks ago in an attempt to raise money to bond out another in the gang.  A person that will shoot you in broad daylight to take your watch to bond out his buddy is not someone who can be rehabilitated.  That person will NEVER become useful to our society.  So what should we do?

Robbery doesn't really get you there.  But I have a hard time finding a solitary fuck for rapists, murderers, and child predators.  

Yea if you think we should keep people in jail that haven’t been convicted of crimes then we have a fundamental disagreement that likely can’t be resolved.

Your feelings are irrelevant to the discussion and the problems. You don’t have to give a fuck. It still costs money, it still costs lives. A blanket statement of “they can’t be rehabilitated ever” isn’t true or helpful. 
So what are you advocating? Locking people up forever and throwing away the key? Death penalty expansion? The only solution is to make rehabilitation more important.

[fattyflattie 4,636]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Cost is a great place to start.  It costs around $25k per year in Texas to imprison a person.

That in itself is fucking stupid.  I'd posit it can be done for 1/5th of that cost.  But if we are making major decisions off of trying to save money, I've got some disappointing news on the welfare and immigration fronts.

[hobbes2702 12,846]

Just now, fattyflattie said:

That in itself is fucking stupid.  I'd posit it can be done for 1/5th of that cost.  But if we are making major decisions off of trying to save money, I've got some disappointing news on the welfare and immigration fronts.

I wonder if welfare might see a decrease in spending if there were fewer people in prison…

[OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys 2,059]

5 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

wonton child endangerment

Sentencing guidelines don’t care much if the victim was Chinese.  

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

2 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

That in itself is fucking stupid.  I'd posit it can be done for 1/5th of that cost.  But if we are making major decisions off of trying to save money, I've got some disappointing news on the welfare and immigration fronts.

Not if you plan on making a profit doing it.

[fattyflattie 4,636]

4 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Your feelings are irrelevant to the discussion and the problems.

As are the "feelings" in those tweets.  Completely irrelevant.  

4 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

A blanket statement of “they can’t be rehabilitated ever” isn’t true or helpful. 

It's largely true.  There's plenty of time to think about what you've done while in time out.  Most don't.  A business owner shouldn't be forced to hire an ex-con.  So the cycle continues.  

5 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

The only solution is to make rehabilitation more important.

That largely starts and ends with the criminal themselves.  There are less than ideal legal jobs they can do when they get out.  The fact they find it easier to stick up the goddamn pizza hut is a problem for the criminal.  So I ask again.  If they can't find a fuck to give, why should greater society?

[UncleSonny 6,559]

4 minutes ago, OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys said:

Sentencing guidelines don’t care much if the victim was Chinese.  

Still can edit, but I don’t deserve it 

[Brisketexan 104,628]

3 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

That in itself is fucking stupid.  I'd posit it can be done for 1/5th of that cost.  But if we are making major decisions off of trying to save money, I've got some disappointing news on the welfare and immigration fronts.

I mean, if you want to violate every basic human right, sure.  We can put them in open-air cages and feed them rotting food with a dumptruck.  Again, at this point, you are functionally lobbying for just executing anyone convicted for a crime -- it's the only rational outcome of a path where we 1) toss them in the hole forever, and 2) don't give a fuck about rehabilitation or even providing for the most basic of human rights.

I am NOT sympathetic to criminals, particularly violent criminals.  They have broken laws, they have brought disorder to our society.  We have to have a system of criminal justice.  And yes, we will need prisons -- just like every other nation in the chart I cited still has (except the Vatican, which either sends criminals to a secret underground dungeon or, if they're pedophiles, to a new parish to molest more kids, but I digress).  But it is undeniable that our current path costs more than any other civilized country, causes greater damage than in any civilized country, and yields much shittier outcomes than any other civilized country.  I gotta tell ya, "Costs more, hurts more, accomplishes less!" is a helluva slogan for a policy, but it's pretty damned on-brand for us these days, so fuck it, let's keep on truckin'!