Enhanced Penalities for crimes?

This is a discussion on Enhanced Penalities for crimes? within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Hopyard, I do not object to a JUDGE weighing mitigating and aggravating factors in a crime. That is, of course, their job. What I object ...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: Enhanced Penalities for crimes?

  1. #31
    Member Array TravisABQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Moving to Texas
    Posts
    499
    Hopyard, I do not object to a JUDGE weighing mitigating and aggravating factors in a crime. That is, of course, their job.

    What I object to is that we have seen many crimes played up and over hyped in the media which were prosecuted as "hate crimes", such as Mathew Shepard's murder, and there have been other notorious crimes, with the perpetators and victims being of reversed races, which seemed MUCH, more demonstrably to be crimes of racism, and hatred, NOT prosecuted under similar applicable statutes, and very much BURIED by the mainstream Media. (Knoxville Massacre, Wichita Horror)

    Evil acts deserve high punishment. I hope a good judge applies severe sentences to violent, hateful criminals, I do not want to see middling level crimes "enhanced" with manadory minimum additions because someone said a taboo word, or got into a conflict with someone of the wrong race.

    We've seen that before, and it was wrong, then, too.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    In other words you irresponsibly broke the law by driving drunk and now you want to cry that your civil liberties are being taken because you were charged and vigorously prosecuted. You attack the prosecutor who was doing his job.
    If a MN statute protecting people's rights was being flouted and ignored by a prosecutor in that attempt to "do his job," then he absolutely should be shamed into performing it honorably, at minimum by pointing out the missteps. That's absolutely what a defense attorney should be doing. That's his/her job. In this instance, it was the accused. That's also his/her job, if able to do it. Where's the infraction, moral or otherwise, in catching a person in a legal tangle of his own doing (ie, catching a shameless prosecutor attempting to thwart the intentions of the people and the legislature)?
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  4. #33
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    If a MN statute protecting people's rights was being flouted and ignored by a prosecutor in that attempt to "do his job," then he absolutely should be shamed into performing it honorably, at minimum by pointing out the missteps. That's absolutely what a defense attorney should be doing. That's his/her job. In this instance, it was the accused. That's also his/her job, if able to do it. Where's the infraction, moral or otherwise, in catching a person in a legal tangle of his own doing (ie, catching a shameless prosecutor attempting to thwart the intentions of the people and the legislature)?
    I am quite amused at the attack on the prosecutor. Shamed him?

    An irresponsible drunk carries a weapon and suddenly the prosecutor is shameless? A felony DUI would disqualify anyone in Arizona from acquiring or maintaining a concealed weapons permit. And frankly, anyone that is so irresponsible as to drink and drive should not be allowed to own a firearm.

    This forum is becoming severely twisted. A drunk is hailed as a hero and the prosecutor should be hog tied, tarred and feathered. And many here support rebellion against a duly elected Constitutional government simply because they have irrational fears.

    Shall we discuss the horrific consequences of drunk driving and their innocent victims? Or shall we elevate a drunk for the ONLY reason that he owns a gun?

    I give full credit to the prosecutor for trying to keep a deadly weapon out of the hands of an irresponsible drunk. It is unfortunate that Minnesota has not limited ownership of firearms to responsible, law abiding citizens.

  5. #34
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    The rest of your post was a comment that officers don't ask for or receive special treatment. Maybe. But the fact is that in many jurisdictions assaulting an officer or a corrections officer carries a higher penalty than assaulting someone else. Similarly, in many jurisdictions harming an elderly person carries a higher penalty.

    I happen to think that is the way it should be. Someone who would assault you is a danger to all of us.

    So, I don't know why this is being made into an issue.
    Nor do I, we are in agreement.

    I guess my point is, an LEO isnt a protected class. He is only protected by stiffer penalty's during the course of serving the public. Flip side, the LEO is also subjected to more crime against him that cannot be prosecuted vs. that of the normal citizen.
    Also, I argue that it is not a special anything to be protected by this law, LEO or elderly. You can become an LEO and "enjoy" the added protection just like I did. One day, hopefully, we all will be elderly too.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post


    The equal protection idea someone brought up doesn't fly because the legislature determined that crimes motivated by hate are different from other crimes. Anyone convicted of committing a hate crime faces the same range of punishment. That is the true meaning of equal protection.
    Its only equal if all groups are protected equally by the same laws. To make a special law that is only applied to certain groups and say its equal is ridiculous. Are we going back toi separate but equal thinking?

    I remember having to take a class on discrimination at my former workplace. A lawyer specializing in equal rights gave it. When we all were seated she looked around and remarked that none of us were covered or protected by the laws. She refused to discuss why.

    Michael

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Woman arrested at airport after refusing enhanced pat-down
    By ccw9mm in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: January 8th, 2011, 09:27 PM
  2. hate crimes & 2a
    By Thanis in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 4th, 2009, 01:17 PM
  3. Springfield's New Enhanced Micro Pistol (EMP)
    By Joseph Pike in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: September 21st, 2006, 02:48 PM
  4. % of Gun Crimes by CCW Holders
    By Hivoltage in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: August 27th, 2006, 12:37 AM
  5. Enhanced Peripheral Vision
    By AzQkr in forum Defensive Carry & Tactical Training
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: July 7th, 2006, 12:12 AM

Search tags for this page

law system for enhanced penalities

,

ohio hate crime enhanced

Click on a term to search for related topics.