Runboard.com
You're welcome.

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)


Page:  1  2  3 

 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3819
Karma: 11 (+17/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


I KNOW I have posted it before but I love the story and it demonstrates the attitude to being dumb with a gun.

A man shot a 9 yearold girl in a Halloween costume because he thought she was a skunk! despite the girl receiving extensive injuries he was only charged with misdemeanor assault!

there have been two cases in recent weeks of hunters shooting after dusk (illegally in one case)and mistaking people out walking dogs for deer in neither case does prosecution seem likely - although its too early to tell - there will definitely however be a prosecution for the hunting violation!
12/11/2017, 12:21 am Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

mais oui wrote:

quote:

Why wouldn't you hold a thirteen year old responsible for shooting someone? It's not like they are completely brainless.



completely brainless no (although in my experience most 13 yearold boys are almost completely brainless)

But when a 13 year old is playing with his fathers loaded gun and someone gets shot I would hold the father at least 80% at fault



I wouldn't. I consider the 13 year old to be a little too old for him not to have the primary responsibility for what happens.

12/12/2017, 10:22 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

Persons aren't always charged in an accident, sometimes it is an accident depending what happened and who was involved. The father I would have put him in jail for years, the kid would get counseling and monitoring. I have read several swimming pool drownings of children over the years with kids and no one held responsible it was called an accident. The parents didn't see it as justice for the kid, they said it would be the last thing their son would want to happen to his life long friend.



Neither of my parents deserved to be placed in prison for years for leaving a loaded gun where I could find it as a toddler. They simply made a careless mistake which fortunately didn't cost anyone his life.

In this case the boy was plenty old enough to know to never point a gun at anyone unless in self-defense. Pointing guns at innocent people is stupid and only a very foolish 13-year-old would have pointed a gun at his friend even if he didn't believe the gun was loaded.

As for the DA, he was simply being more objective about who was responsible for what happened than the parents of the slain boy who knew the other boy and cared more about him than the DA.

12/12/2017, 10:28 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3819
Karma: 11 (+17/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

I consider the 13 year old to be a little too old for him not to have the primary responsibility for what happens.



would you let him vote?
enlist in the army?
marry?
serve on your jury?
sign for credit?

you seem to think that he has adult capabilities so its only logical that he should be allowed to do the above things.

quote:

Neither of my parents deserved to be placed in prison for years for leaving a loaded gun where I could find it as a toddler.



actually they did and depending on the state they not only morally but legally deserved to go to jail.

You say its OK because no one was hurt and it was just a silly mistake suppose I were to drink a half dozen martinis hop into my car and drive down the road would that be OK - it was after all a silly mistake and no one got hurt.

Its a bit late sending some one to jail after some one gets killed
12/12/2017, 11:08 pm Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
Global user

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 3950
Karma: 25 (+39/-14)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


If your parents are that irresponsible, at 13 how exactly are you to know responsibility, from the responsibility fairy?
12/13/2017, 1:10 am Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

would you let him vote?
enlist in the army?
marry?
serve on your jury?
sign for credit?-mais



No, but that's irrelevant. I also wouldn't let an 18-year-old freshman in college perform brain surgery or be an astronaut but if he committed murder I'd hold him responsible.

quote:

you seem to think that he has adult capabilities so its only logical that he should be allowed to do the above things.



A classic case of "apples and oranges." The fact that he isn't capable of performing certain adult tasks or simply isn't allowed to do so doesn't mean that he isn't responsible for what he does do.

If he shoots someone he is responsible for that just as he would be responsible if he decided to take his father's car and go for a joyride. If he wrecked the car and ran over a policeman while doing so not only would he be considered responsible for it he would be held accountable.

quote:

Actually they did and depending on the state they not only morally but legally deserved to go to jail.



They did not morally deserve to go to prison. My dad was a gun collector and neither of them believed the gun was available to me. They were surprised when I managed to gain access to it. Also, after that incident my mom saw to it that it never happened again by getting the guns out of the house.

quote:

You say its OK because no one was hurt and it was just a silly mistake suppose I were to drink a half dozen martinis hop into my car and drive down the road would that be OK - it was after all a silly mistake and no one got hurt.



Getting drunk and driving a car is quite different from putting a gun where you don't believe a toddler can find it and being surprised when he or she does.

quote:

Its a bit late sending some one to jail after some one gets killed.



I agree.
12/15/2017, 2:57 am Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

If your parents are that irresponsible, at 13 how exactly are you to know responsibility, from the responsibility fairy?



Even a 13-year-old should know better than to point a real gun at their friend and to take guns very seriously.
12/15/2017, 2:59 am Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
Global user

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 3950
Karma: 25 (+39/-14)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


You are giving them more credit than they deserve, which is not their fault. I've raised kids and I'm raising grand kids and 'parenting' does not work that way, they don't know better, unless they are taught and half the time that doesn't stick either. You cross your fingers and hope they eventually get it as they age into maturity. At the end of the day it is the parent who should know better, if not for that parent, that child would still be alive.
12/15/2017, 3:16 am Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3819
Karma: 11 (+17/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

No, but that's irrelevant. I also wouldn't let an 18-year-old freshman in college perform brain surgery or be an astronaut but if he committed murder I'd hold him responsible.



you wouldnt let a freshman do brain surgery because he has not had the training we are not talking about training we are talking about the innate ability to be responsible.

If some one isnt responsible enough to judge your actions (in a jury) how can he be responsible enough to judge his own?


quote:

If he shoots someone he is responsible for that just as he would be responsible if he decided to take his father's car and go for a joyride.



suppose for a moment that I accept your premise, would a ten yearold be responsible? a 6 year old? a three year old?

there has to be a lower limit or you would be jailing toddlers for shooting people (Veronica Rutledge was shot dead by her two year old - what do you think 20 years in the slammer be long enough even though he would still be a young man on his release?)


quote:

They did not morally deserve to go to prison



Im sorry but they absolutely did!


quote:

Getting drunk and driving a car is quite different from putting a gun where you don't believe a toddler can find it and being surprised when he or she does.



How? both are the result of stupidity and both can result in multiple deaths - at least the drunk driver can claim that his judgement was impaired by alcohol when he was stupid presumably your parents were not judgement impaired
12/15/2017, 10:27 am Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3281
Karma: 4 (+14/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


The US has a fairly complex judicial system, to review it in a classroom setting is very revealing as to the basis of Innocent UNTIL PROVEN Guilt. All criminals INCLUDING those witnessed in the activity of proceedings is granted their day in court according to Federal Law. Otherwise we would be no different than the ME or any other nation in the ability to jail, hold, torture or torment until the 'Accused' dies as happens in many foreign instances. Or you have Kangaroo Tribunals as the Amanda Knox situation where proof was never forth coming as an absolute but by association found guilty.
12/15/2017, 8:33 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

You are giving them more credit than they deserve, which is not their fault. I've raised kids and I'm raising grand kids and 'parenting' does not work that way, they don't know better, unless they are taught and half the time that doesn't stick either. You cross your fingers and hope they eventually get it as they age into maturity. At the end of the day it is the parent who should know better, if not for that parent, that child would still be alive.



I would agree that depending on the circumstances the parent(s) shares in the responsibility for what happened but the teen is primarily responsible.

12/15/2017, 10:10 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

you wouldnt let a freshman do brain surgery because he has not had the training we are not talking about training we are talking about the innate ability to be [sign in to see URL]



True. That's why those matters you brought up like not being able to drive a car at the age of 13 were irrelevant.

quote:

If some one isnt responsible enough to judge your actions (in a jury) how can he be responsible enough to judge his own?



I don't even believe most adults are qualified to sit on a jury. Your argument would require folks to excuse even adults if they committed a murder because of their poor judgment powers when that is precisely why they would commit a murder in the first place.

quote:

suppose for a moment that I accept your premise, would a ten yearold be responsible? a 6 year old? a three year old?



No but a 13-year-old would be.

quote:

there has to be a lower limit or you would be jailing toddlers for shooting people (Veronica Rutledge was shot dead by her two year old - what do you think 20 years in the slammer be long enough even though he would still be a young man on his release?)



True and I have no problem with a lower limit. 13 years old isn't it.

quote:

Im sorry but they absolutely did!



I still disagree. Underestimating the ability of a highly intelligent toddler to find a hidden loaded gun is not an offense that justifies prison time.

If the gun is left out or placed somewhere where a child can easily find it that is another matter.

quote:

How? both are the result of stupidity and both can result in multiple deaths - at least the drunk driver can claim that his judgement was impaired by alcohol when he was stupid presumably your parents were not judgement impaired.



A drunk driver could make that claim but it wouldn't be a valid one. There is still a big difference between knowingly risking the lives of people by drunk driving and unknowingly risking lives by leaving a gun where you believe it is safe from the curiosity of a child.

  
12/15/2017, 10:31 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3819
Karma: 11 (+17/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

True. That's why those matters you brought up like not being able to drive a car at the age of 13 were irrelevant



sorry Im not following your logic I know lots of 13 and 14 yearolds that can drive perfectly well but are not allowed to.

It snot a matter of lack of ability it is a matter of law - with the freshman brain surgeon it is the opposite he hasnt the training but might be allowed in law if the patient consented.


quote:

I don't even believe most adults are qualified to sit on a jury



YAWN!

quote:

true and I have no problem with a lower limit. 13 years old isn't it.



If not 13 then what?


quote:

I still disagree. Underestimating the ability of a highly intelligent toddler to find a hidden loaded gun



If you were a highly intelligent toddler then your parents more than any one would have know that and should have acted accordingly.

BTW the only safe place for a gun not in use is in a safe - I dont consider trigger locks adequate


If the gun is left out or placed somewhere where a child can easily find it that is another matter.

who decides what is a place that a highly intelligent toddler might discover? in MY view the arbiter of that should be a highly intelligent toddler if the toddler finds it is wasnt hidden well enough!


quote:

A drunk driver could make that claim but it wouldn't be a valid one. There is still a big difference between knowingly risking the lives of people by drunk driving and unknowingly risking lives by leaving a gun where you believe it is safe from the curiosity of a child.



A driver who is alcohol impaired not only has his ability to drive impaired he also has his ability to make wise decisions impaired.
  Your parents had no such impairment and must surely have realised how highly intelligent you were and failed to take adequate steps to safe guard both you and the wider community from a firearm
12/15/2017, 10:57 pm Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

sorry Im not following your logic I know lots of 13 and 14 yearolds that can drive perfectly well but are not allowed [sign in to see URL]



Yes but whether they can drive perfectly well or not they bear responsibility for what they do if they commit a crime.

quote:

It snot a matter of lack of ability it is a matter of law - with the freshman brain surgeon it is the opposite he hasnt the training but might be allowed in law if the patient consented.



And what the law doesn't allow them to do in regard to driving a car or performing brain surgery is irrelevant. They are responsible when they commit a crime even when they are 13 years old.

quote:

If not 13 then what?



Significantly younger. Remember Mary Bell? She was only 10 when she first committed murder. She was locked up for 12 years by the British authorities. If a girl that young can be responsible for a murder then a 13 year old boy can be responsible for negligent homicide with a gun.

quote:

If you were a highly intelligent toddler then your parents more than any one would have know that and should have acted accordingly.



It can be difficult to gauge the intelligence of a toddler. They can fool you.

quote:

BTW the only safe place for a gun not in use is in a safe - I dont consider trigger locks adequate



I would have no objection to legally requiring that guns be kept in safes for two reasons. One to keep them out of the hands of children and two, to keep them out of the hands of criminals.

quote:

who decides what is a place that a highly intelligent toddler might discover? in MY view the arbiter of that should be a highly intelligent toddler if the toddler finds it is wasnt hidden well enough!


  
An adult has to decide where a gun is safely beyond a child's reach and you've already decided that. A safe. And I agree.

quote:

A driver who is alcohol impaired not only has his ability to drive impaired he also has his ability to make wise decisions impaired.



That just sounds like something a drunk wants people to believe when he is looking for people to let him get away with some crime. In reality unless he was a complete idiot even before he got drunk he will know that he isn't in any shape to be driving a car when he is staggering to his car and has trouble putting the key in the ignition.

quote:

Your parents had no such impairment and must surely have realised how highly intelligent you were and failed to take adequate steps to safe guard both you and the wider community from a firearm.



I didn't go outside with the gun and terrorize the neighborhood. I just pointed it at them inside our home putting the fear of God into them. They learned their lesson and the guns were removed from the house.
12/17/2017, 8:00 am Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3819
Karma: 11 (+17/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

Yes but whether they can drive perfectly well or not they bear responsibility for what they do if they commit a crime.



that really doesnt follow
they are not allowed to drive - no matter how proficient they are because they lack the essential skills of decision making and if their decision making processes are such that they are prohibited from driving why are they capable of making decisions about a gun?


Remember Mary Bell? She was only 10 when she first committed murder. She was locked up for 12 years by the British authorities.
Firstly that was a very long time ago and secondly 12 years for two murders and a sexual mutilation - not too bad.

To say that she was 'locked up' is a little misleading , yes she was deprived of her liberty but she was not placed in jail it was more like a secure boarding school
12/17/2017, 12:07 pm Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

that really doesnt follow
they are not allowed to drive - no matter how proficient they are because they lack the essential skills of decision making and if their decision making processes are such that they are prohibited from driving why are they capable of making decisions about a gun?-mais



You're still comparing two different things. Not being able to make decisions about things which require adult level abilities is not the same thing as not having the mental capacity to recognize basic things like the fact that pointing a gun at some innocent person is not a good idea.

Teenagers, including ones who are 13, are not complete idiots with no concept of reality at all. They are responsible when they do something that is extremely stupid like shooting and killing their friend.

quote:

Remember Mary Bell? She was only 10 when she first committed murder. She was locked up for 12 years by the British authorities.
Firstly that was a very long time ago and secondly 12 years for two murders and a sexual mutilation - not too bad.



True but still less time locked up than what some older teen males received in this country for murder. Some were let out after only a few months of incarceration. And that was in the relatively liberal country of England, not the "law and order" USA.

The main point though is that what she did was taken seriously and she was held accountable even at the very young age of 10.

quote:

To say that she was 'locked up' is a little misleading , yes she was deprived of her liberty but she was not placed in jail it was more like a secure boarding school



Not surprising since she was initially only 10 years old.
12/17/2017, 8:16 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3819
Karma: 11 (+17/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

True but still less time locked up than what some older teen males received in this country for murder. Some were let out after only a few months of incarceration. And that was in the relatively liberal country of England, not the "law and order" USA.



sorry but to me that seems garbled.

you compare Mary Bells's treatment In UK to that of older people in the US.
and then compare UK as a 'relatively liberal country' to 'law and order US'

But Mary Bell was 50 years ago and followed close behind the crimes of the 'Moors Murderers' and shortly after we had confined the death penalty to the pages of history

A better comparison would have been the James Bulger murder (which was still over 30 years ago)in which two ten year old boys were convicted of murder - they served less than 9 years in the same secure boarding school type facility which had housed Mary Bell.

But there is a world of difference between the actions of Thompson, Venables and Bell and the momentary foolishness of the 13 year old in the OP.

I never said that the 13 year old in the OP should get a pass I simply opined that in my view his culpability was minimal
12/17/2017, 8:43 pm Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3281
Karma: 4 (+14/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


The parent(s) involved with the 13 year old are also a component of the problem. Having a loaded weapon in availability range of that child, not keeping it under wraps, under lock and key, keeping the child distanced from it. As well teaching the child the difference between right wrong and the indifference of those around them to law.
12/17/2017, 9:45 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
cooter50 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3281
Karma: 4 (+14/-10)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


And as to the OP, Yes I do still believe in our Judicial system fraught with issues yes but better than I see elsewhere.
12/17/2017, 10:27 pm Link to this post PM cooter50 Blog
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
Global user

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 3950
Karma: 25 (+39/-14)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

cooter50 wrote:

The parent(s) involved with the 13 year old are also a component of the problem. Having a loaded weapon in availability range of that child, not keeping it under wraps, under lock and key, keeping the child distanced from it. As well teaching the child the difference between right wrong and the indifference of those around them to law.



I taught my kids the difference between right and wrong, same with the grand kids, the problem lies with they do wrong sometimes anyway, that is part of child rearing and growing up. When I had guns, they didn't know where they were, should be a no brainer.
12/18/2017, 4:48 pm Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

mais oui wrote:

quote:

True but still less time locked up than what some older teen males received in this country for murder. Some were let out after only a few months of incarceration. And that was in the relatively liberal country of England, not the "law and order" USA.



sorry but to me that seems garbled.

you compare Mary Bells's treatment In UK to that of older people in the US.
and then compare UK as a 'relatively liberal country' to 'law and order US'

But Mary Bell was 50 years ago and followed close behind the crimes of the 'Moors Murderers' and shortly after we had confined the death penalty to the pages of history

A better comparison would have been the James Bulger murder (which was still over 30 years ago)in which two ten year old boys were convicted of murder - they served less than 9 years in the same secure boarding school type facility which had housed Mary Bell.

But there is a world of difference between the actions of Thompson, Venables and Bell and the momentary foolishness of the 13 year old in the OP.

I never said that the 13 year old in the OP should get a pass I simply opined that in my view his culpability was minimal



The culpability is not a derivative of how serious the crime was. The point I'm making is that if people like Mary Bell are responsible for the crimes they commit and should be treated accordingly so are 13 year old boys in both countries. This country has had a great tendency to let them off the hook for crimes like murder.

And in this case, momentary foolishness or not, what he did was extremely serious. He killed an innocent person due to his stupidity.

He was also more responsible for what happened than his father.
12/19/2017, 7:17 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

cooter50 wrote:

The parent(s) involved with the 13 year old are also a component of the problem. Having a loaded weapon in availability range of that child, not keeping it under wraps, under lock and key, keeping the child distanced from it. As well teaching the child the difference between right wrong and the indifference of those around them to law.



At least one parent played a role in the tragedy but the 13-year-old was still primarily to blame. But I agree that teaching children things like not pointing them at other people is extremely important if you are going to have them around. Best thing is probably not to have them around if you have children in the house unless they are locked up in a safe.
12/19/2017, 7:28 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
mais oui Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3819
Karma: 11 (+17/-6)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

The culpability is not a derivative of how serious the crime was



Actually I agree totally - US law however (in its application) is not so sure.

A 13 year old charged with a trivial or minor offense will usually be tried as a juvenile but once the offense becomes more serious it becomes usual for it to be heard in an adult court and an 'adult' penalty applied.

which is of course totally wrong, either 13 year olds have faculty, in which case the should be always tried in an adult court or they do not.
To say they dont have faculty when they steal a packet of candy but do when they kill some one is plain stupid.


I'm making is that if people like Mary Bell are responsible for the crimes they commit and should be treated accordingly so are 13 year old boys in both countries. This country has had a great tendency to let them off the hook for crimes like murder.

Messers Bell, Thompson and Vennables were treated like children - they did not serve sentences of the length applied to an adult in similar circumstances nor they they serve their sentences in conditions in which an adult would have served.

And I reject totally your assertion that "the US a great tendency to let them off the hook for crimes like murder."


There are over 2000 child offenders serving life without parole sentences in U.S prisons for crimes committed before they were age 18,

Curtis Fairchild Jones served 17 years for murder committed when he was 12
12/19/2017, 7:30 pm Link to this post PM mais oui Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
Global user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 2012
Karma: 12 (+14/-2)
Reply | Quote
Re: Still believe in our jury system?


quote:

cooter50 wrote:

And as to the OP, Yes I do still believe in our Judicial system fraught with issues yes but better than I see elsewhere.



Better than some dictatorships. Places like the Philippines maybe but still not good.

Our jury system needs to go. It doesn't work well enough to keep using it.
12/19/2017, 7:32 pm Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3 





You are not logged in (login)
Back To Top