100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Hate Crime Reality | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
There is an overlying problem that doesn't seem to be noticed. Our founding fathers came up with a justice system that was fair and honest. If you murdered someone, robbed a bank, raped a women, stole a horse, etc., you were tried by a jury of peers. If you were found guilty you were taken out to the hanging tree and disposed of as someone not belonging to the human race. Lawyers were not able to make enough money on this process so they gradually changed the laws making the process more and more complicated. Some areas of the country would not convict a white in a crime against a black and that added additional pressure which mostly does not exist today. And no matter how complicated you make the system, you still end up in front of the same jury of peers. We developed a revolving door policy for criminals where you commit any number of felonies, spend a lot of time in the court system, spend a little time in the prison system, and start all over again. This system makes tons of money for the lawyers and wastes the time and morale of our police forces (not to mention billions of dollars of tax money). The hate crime bill just makes the system more complicated and exposes the flaws in the justice system. We should learn from the past instead of making a problem we created worse. Anyone who commits murder for any reason should be removed from society. If the first paragraph of this were true and accurate there would never have been a need for government intervention. But since it is not and never has been we will have to intervene as a government and a people until it does. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Thu 04/30/09 02:09 PM
|
|
For a country who insists on equal rights for everyone they sure do a hypocrital job when it comes to the minorites.Special work rights,special marriage rights,special rights concerning crimes,special education rights,special rights while getting loans and morgages.The list goes on and on. No more special rights to the minorities! If all was equal for all there would be no need for monitoring and governing at that level. But it is not all equal so who is the hypocrit, the American who wants equality for all or the American who wants only equality for himself? I am a hypocrit because I say we should all be equal?I am not the one asking for special rights here! If you feel you are the hypocrit, so be it. I said who is the hypocrit? If having "special rights" is the only way to make the board more equal until people get over their own hypocrisies then so be it. I want equality for all not the priviledged. Give me a break.Martin luther king JR would be rolling in his grave.I can't see your logic when we have a black president,Oprah is billionaire,we have thousands of minority millionaire sports players,thousands of millionaire rap artist,and minorities in all forms of government,all forms of business,all forms of everything.They have all the rights and more than anyone else in this country.They don't need more. Would you mind telling me how we can possibly bend over more backwards for these people than we already have?We else could they possible want? How about a black president-Got it How about powerfull government positions-Powell head of defense Rice-Secretary to the president Ummm...they are the exception to the rule. Why does having a black President mean that we are bending over backwards for black people? That is so wrong! Just because we have a black president doesn't mean true equality has been met. The people who cannot see outside of their own small world are the problem in all of this. They choose not to see the struggles of others, the rights of others, the needs of others, etc... They close their mind and decide others are unworthy because they are not the same as them. This is not right for all. Until we have equality for all, we will have to have a government to insures it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've watched enough TV to know when a murder suspect is being questioned, they always try to find the motive behind it.
There's no need for more suppression, we have enough already. There are already special circumstances on the books. Rob a bank with a gun carries a greater sentence than robbing it with a note. There are also degrees, 1st, 2nd, manslaughter, etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is an overlying problem that doesn't seem to be noticed. Our founding fathers came up with a justice system that was fair and honest. If you murdered someone, robbed a bank, raped a women, stole a horse, etc., you were tried by a jury of peers. If you were found guilty you were taken out to the hanging tree and disposed of as someone not belonging to the human race. Lawyers were not able to make enough money on this process so they gradually changed the laws making the process more and more complicated. Some areas of the country would not convict a white in a crime against a black and that added additional pressure which mostly does not exist today. And no matter how complicated you make the system, you still end up in front of the same jury of peers. We developed a revolving door policy for criminals where you commit any number of felonies, spend a lot of time in the court system, spend a little time in the prison system, and start all over again. This system makes tons of money for the lawyers and wastes the time and morale of our police forces (not to mention billions of dollars of tax money). The hate crime bill just makes the system more complicated and exposes the flaws in the justice system. We should learn from the past instead of making a problem we created worse. Anyone who commits murder for any reason should be removed from society. If the first paragraph of this were true and accurate there would never have been a need for government intervention. But since it is not and never has been we will have to intervene as a government and a people until it does. The system was fair and honest. As I described in the later paragraphs, it was the juries that were not. You can make the system as complex as you want but the same juries are still going to try the cases. |
|
|
|
|
