It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Supreme Court Rules California Must Free Tens of Thousands of Inmates

page: 2
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by onequestion
 


There is a lot that can be done...you/me/we just aren't willing to do it. And I, personally, am not down for dying for a cause that i had no chance at to begin with.

But we were given our 2nd Amendment rights so that something COULD be done.




posted on May, 23 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by sentinel007


Can you imagine what the state of California is in for when this mass exodus of criminals hits the streets.


Yes, I'm not only worried about family back in California, but also the effect on neighboring states as some of these criminals decide to not remain in CA.

Couldn't the SC Justices have just ruled that CA needs to build more prisons instead of dumping felons on the rest of society?



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by onequestion
They became hardened criminals because of the prison system, don't you get it? The problem isn't people are commiting crime, the problem is they have to in the first place.


Well, then they are already hardened criminals from being in prison even if what you say is true that they weren't before. Too late for them now.

Just like it is too late for some ordinary citizens who don't realize that the SCOTUS has indirectly sentenced them to death at the hands of some of these criminals. Dead (innocent) citizens walking ...



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by onequestion
They became hardened criminals because of the prison system, don't you get it? The problem isn't people are commiting crime, the problem is they have to in the first place.


Well, then they are already hardened criminals from being in prison even if what you say is true that they weren't before. Too late for them now.

Just like it is too late for some ordinary citizens who don't realize that the SCOTUS has indirectly sentenced them to death at the hands of some of these criminals. Dead (innocent) citizens walking ...


99% of the time you and I fully agree. On this, i believe we don't.

As a lover of liberty, and a freedom fundamentalist (a title i will proudly wear), it would seem that the inconveniences of too much liberty are far more acceptable than the relative safety of the California nanny state.

Many of these people were wronged by the State. If their release creates issues from a newly criminalized population, that is just the price we pay for beginning to right the ship. The alternative (to continue to incarcerate people for the reasons and at the rate we have without regard to humane conditions) is so unsavory as to make my stomache literally feel ill.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I know a few big fat furry Texans, but you sir have to be my favorite one on ATS.



It's not everyday that you find someone willing to give up a little relative safety in order to protect liberty.

Reminds me of a quote actually... I'm sure you've seen it before but maybe not the person you're arguing with?:


"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Franklin's Contributions to the Conference on February 17 (III) Fri, Feb 17, 1775


www.ushistory.org...



edit on 23-5-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
If their release creates issues from a newly criminalized population, that is just the price we pay for beginning to right the ship. The alternative (to continue to incarcerate people for the reasons and at the rate we have without regard to humane conditions) is so unsavory as to make my stomache literally feel ill.


I also know we often agree, but ....

Except who is the "we" that will pay the price for "righting the ship"?

Will it be you and those that agree with you, and who consciously decided that that's what should be done?

Or, more likely, will it innocent people - maybe even children - that end up paying the price for "righting the ship"?

It sounds just a bit cavalier or elitist to say, "too bad, but it's for the best".

My point is that even if these people went into prison "non-violent", they most likely had to change in order for them to survive in prison. Plus, many of them will likely bear a grudge against the state and people that put them there.

Last, we probably agree that some of these things should not be classified as the serious crimes they currently are. Remember, though, that these people were still well aware of the risks they were taking by engaging in these activities anyway.

So, again, if there is a price to pay for "righting the ship", who should pay it? The people who got themselves into prison through their own actions, or innocents who just happen to be on the receiving end of a mass prisoner release?

Really think about this from ALL sides. You may be feeling sorrier for the criminals than they deserve ...


edit on 5/23/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


I know a few big fat furry Texans, but you sir have to be my favorite one on ATS.



It's not everyday that you find someone willing to give up a little relative safety in order to protect liberty.



Live in or near California?

Again, fine if you are just making that kind of choice for yourself. But quite elitist if you are making it for someone else - especially when you feel that it's not likely to impact you anyway.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
Except who is the "we" that will pay the price for "righting the ship"?

Will it be you and those that agree with you, and who consciously decided that that's what should be done?

Or, more likely, will it innocent people - maybe even children - that end up paying the price for "righting the ship"?


Look at it the other way. If we keep imprisoning more people than any other country on Earth for non-violent victimless crimes, how many non-violent victimless "offenders" are going to have to pay the price for not living in a free country?

What are you, worried about a bunch of pot.s busting in your house with Uzis or something?




And no, I live in Virginia where we're already allowed to shoot and kill anyone trying to break into our homes and nothing ever comes of it. This state does tend to take more personal responsibility than California does, at least by my reckoning of the relatively lax gun laws. That's a good thing because I don't want to put my well-being in the hands of a nanny state bureaucracy. We still imprison plenty of non-violent victimless offenders though, everything from pot.s, gamblers and even old ladies with pills they don't have prescriptions for anymore.

Did I mention prostitutes? Don't tell you're afraid of a 6'4 recently-released tranny busting down your door.

edit on 23-5-2011 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by centurion1211
Except who is the "we" that will pay the price for "righting the ship"?

Will it be you and those that agree with you, and who consciously decided that that's what should be done?

Or, more likely, will it innocent people - maybe even children - that end up paying the price for "righting the ship"?


Look at it the other way. If we keep imprisoning more people than any other country on Earth for non-violent victimless crimes, how many non-violent victimless "offenders" are going to have to pay the price for not living in a free country?

What are you, worried about a bunch of pot.s busting in your house with Uzis or something?


This isn't about me. Keep it on topic. If you have nothing left on topic, refrain from posting.

I didn't say we should "keep imprisoning more people than any other country on Earth for non-violent victimless crimes". Read my posts again - slowly and for content. I said I don't think these should be classified as the serious crimes they currently are.

But we're not talking about people being imprisoned in the future, are we?

No, we are talking about people who are already in prison for committing actions they knew were (rightly or wrongly) considered serious crimes. They knew but did it anyway.

My point is that if someone has to "pay" for prison overcrowding, it shouldn't be innocent people. Start with the people who knowingly committed the crimes.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by centurion1211
This isn't about me. Keep it on topic. If you have nothing left on topic, refrain from posting.


I'm on topic. But if it isn't about you, who do you think you are speaking for? I don't know exactly who all they released, but if it's just drug dealers, prostitutes and gamblers... I don't really see an epidemic of chaos in the near future. They should have never been imprisoned in the first place if you ask me.


What do you think about the US putting more people in prison than any other nation on Earth? Do you think that's really necessary? Do you think we can even really say this is a "free country" anymore? I don't think so.



No, we are talking about people who are already in prison for committing actions they knew were (rightly or wrongly) considered serious crimes. They knew but did it anyway.


So what? That's the American spirit right there. They could make it a felony to pick berries and you know what? I would pick more berries than ever. If you think that's a problem with me rather than the government then I don't particularly care. Just because something is against the law doesn't mean it's hurting anyone, or that it's necessarily even wrong to do. It just means the government is overstepping its boundaries like usual and the innocent people that are paying for it are the ones being bullied by police and sent to prison.


My point is that if someone has to "pay" for prison overcrowding, it shouldn't be innocent people. Start with the people who knowingly committed the crimes.


Your definition of "innocent" here is arbitrary. Someone who is imprisoned for prostitution is still innocent to me, because what kind of crime is that really? That's abusing an innocent person.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


The people that need to "pay the price" are the ones who victimized their fellow humans by being so cavalier about how easily and frequently our "land of the free" infringes on the rights of, and seizes the freedoms of those fellow humans.

How do you make that happen? I dunno...you first have to identify who those people are. Certainly, police and judges are culpable. Not to mention lawmakers, and the lobbyists that created the prison industry to begin with. And the prosecutors who just want to keep their job by driving statistics, thus putting people in prison for victimless and arbitrary crimes.

But what about The People? You and I? Have we not provided support in this march towards the most imprisoned nation in the world? If not direct support, then indirect via silent acquiescence?

Regardless, the answer is not to continue victimizing people. If someone is only guilty of a victimless crime, and yet has to become tougher to survive, is it the just thing to do to hold that against him? It is a system that WE have created. It is time it be deconstructed.

The only other option is to continue to imprison more people than any other nation in the world. And that is shameful.

One quote keeps coming to mind for me here, although it is applied here in a way that we normally would not think:


"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" - Thomas Jefferson"


In this case, the tyrants (The People) can become the patriots. And if it creates a surge in violent crime, such is the price we pay for a return towards liberty. That kind of thing tends to happen when liberty goes on the march, even when we are just 'righting the ship".

It is time that we as Americans decide that we are willing to put our money where our mouth is. If we want change, we are going to have to go through the discomforts that will come with that change. Without that willingness we end up just like with TARP....broke as hell, and just kicking the can down the road. That is not justice, nor liberty.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by centurion1211
This isn't about me. Keep it on topic. If you have nothing left on topic, refrain from posting.


I'm on topic. But if it isn't about you, who do you think you are speaking for? I don't know exactly who all they released, but if it's just drug dealers, prostitutes and gamblers... I don't really see an epidemic of chaos in the near future. They should have never been imprisoned in the first place if you ask me.


I'm not posting for the purpose of you making derogatory comments. Clear enough?

Just because you don't see a problem doesn't mean prisoner releases hasn't caused a problem in the past, or won't in the future.


What do you think about the US putting more people in prison than any other nation on Earth? Do you think that's really necessary? Do you think we can even really say this is a "free country" anymore? I don't think so.


I don't believe it is necessary. But, to the point, that isn't the subject of the OP. It is about a mass prisoner release and the potential effects of that release.


No, we are talking about people who are already in prison for committing actions they knew were (rightly or wrongly) considered serious crimes. They knew but did it anyway.



So what? That's the American spirit right there. They could make it a felony to pick berries and you know what? I would pick more berries than ever. If you think that's a problem with me rather than the government then I don't particularly care. Just because something is against the law doesn't mean it's hurting anyone, or that it's necessarily even wrong to do. It just means the government is overstepping its boundaries like usual and the innocent people that are paying for it are the ones being bullied by police and sent to prison.


So, now you've made yourself sole arbiter of what's legal and what is not. Who needs our government, police and courts when we have you?


My point is that if someone has to "pay" for prison overcrowding, it shouldn't be innocent people. Start with the people who knowingly committed the crimes.



Your definition of "innocent" here is arbitrary. Someone who is imprisoned for prostitution is still innocent to me, because what kind of crime is that really? That's abusing an innocent person.


No, it is your opinion of whether or not to follow the law that is arbitrary. Imagine if everyone thought and acted like you. Remember, that even with the laws in place, some people still think violent crimes are OK. Under your "standards", they should be allowed to commit those crimes simply because they believe they are OK. Oh, and is there a reason you keep trying to bring prostitution into this discussion?
edit on 5/23/2011 by centurion1211 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by centurion1211
 


The people that need to "pay the price" are the ones who victimized their fellow humans by being so cavalier about how easily and frequently our "land of the free" infringes on the rights of, and seizes the freedoms of those fellow humans.

How do you make that happen? I dunno...you first have to identify who those people are. Certainly, police and judges are culpable. Not to mention lawmakers, and the lobbyists that created the prison industry to begin with. And the prosecutors who just want to keep their job by driving statistics, thus putting people in prison for victimless and arbitrary crimes.

But what about The People? You and I? Have we not provided support in this march towards the most imprisoned nation in the world? If not direct support, then indirect via silent acquiescence?

Regardless, the answer is not to continue victimizing people. If someone is only guilty of a victimless crime, and yet has to become tougher to survive, is it the just thing to do to hold that against him? It is a system that WE have created. It is time it be deconstructed.

The only other option is to continue to imprison more people than any other nation in the world. And that is shameful.

One quote keeps coming to mind for me here, although it is applied here in a way that we normally would not think:


"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" - Thomas Jefferson"


In this case, the tyrants (The People) can become the patriots. And if it creates a surge in violent crime, such is the price we pay for a return towards liberty. That kind of thing tends to happen when liberty goes on the march, even when we are just 'righting the ship".

It is time that we as Americans decide that we are willing to put our money where our mouth is. If we want change, we are going to have to go through the discomforts that will come with that change. Without that willingness we end up just like with TARP....broke as hell, and just kicking the can down the road. That is not justice, nor liberty.


Sorry, but all that was pretty much just a bunch of wishful thinking that you know will never happen.

On the other hand, this mass prisoner release will happen and it will likely affect the lives of people that will not deserve to have done to them whatever happens because of it.

These people they want to release are sadly and tragically not the same people that went to prison. They will come out hardened, even if they did not not go in that way. That "hardening" will make at least some of them a danger to society that they might not have been if they hadn't committed crimes and gone to prison.

Again, they went to prison for doing something they knew was considered illegal even if they believed it shouldn't have been.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Just send the majority of the ones that are going to be released back to where they came from...
Mexico...
Might as well send the rest of the inmates(blacks) down there too...
Problem solved...

P.S.
Make them build that border wall first though...



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 



Again, they went to prison for doing something they knew was considered illegal even if they believed it shouldn't have been.


Under the yoke of 600,000 various laws, you and I could easily end up there, too. Especially if the prison industry keeps getting cheddar thrown their way.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   
You know what's sick about that?

4 judges still voted to keep the whole thing going.

And guess what, you know what a release of all those prisoners will mean don't you?

``BUILD MORE PRISONS`` will be what's coming from the sheeple and the legislature.

And the prison industry will thrive even more in California... having more money to bribe judges and politicians to get more drastic laws to get more prisoners.


What you need is a total overhaul of the system of laws, the end of corruption, the end of private prisons, the end of drug laws and harsh sentences for anyone bribed to end the problem... And that is not counting the end of scum in power who are pro-police state...



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I'd feel much safer to see 10's of thousands of non violent drug offenders be released than, say, if they were to add 20 new police officers.

Why?

I value my life.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   
I'm with the poster who says most of these people don't need to be in prison and that we have the highest prison population in the world.

Lets punish all our non violent drug offenders like some of these other countries who have low prison population.

They are executed.

Most of those countries also have low drug related crimes also.

That would solve the prison population and drug problem all at the same time. We certainly don't need to release them just because to many people are breaking the law.

Flame on.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Becoming
Lets punish all our non violent drug offenders like some of these other countries who have low prison population.

They are executed.

Most of those countries also have low drug related crimes also.

That would solve the prison population and drug problem all at the same time. We certainly don't need to release them just because to many people are breaking the law.


A little harsh for a supposedly civilized country.
Statements like that make me want a 30 foot wall at the border, and to just keep on moving further north.

Thankfully, most Americans don't think like that.



posted on May, 23 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by sentinel007
 


It is a victory for liberty, if a round about way to achieve it. The people being released are likely far less dangerous to you than your friendly neighborhood jack-booted cop who'll glare at you for the capital offense of saying, "Hello!"



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join