Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–457 of 457 posts

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#451

Post by OKRainbowKid »

foxglacier wrote: post #449
atoav wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a Austrian province governed by a neo-nazi connected right wing party, when I say voting against their interest who I mean are those who aren't ardent Nazis. Sure, there might be actual Nazis who would like to lose everything if it just allowed them to force their beliefs on others as was historically the case. But most people who vote for right wingers do so because they believe they will have tangible…

I don't understand what you mean. People in your province voted against their own interests because they believed (incorrectly?) that it would benefit them? How do you know what their interests were or whether it did benefit them in ways that were important to them or not?

Do you believe people have perfect knowledge of the consequences of their vote, and of the plans of the people they vote for? If no, then it's not hard to fathom that people can get manipulated into voting against their own interests.

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#452

Post by marcus_holmes »

ty6853 wrote: post #374
yowzadave wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point to any actual real-world cases where something like this has happened? It sounds like a movie concept; we're letting real-world policy be determined by a fantasy people have about a lone gun enthusiast killing a bunch of drug cartel members?

Warsaw ghetto uprising bought some people a few extra days (and a couple women their lives spared), which is better than nothing.

I really hope your example remains a straw man argument, and not something that Americans are going to have to face up to in the next few years.

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#453

Post by marcus_holmes »

akimbostrawman wrote: post #429
marcus_holmes wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, interesting. But we don't see the same reaction with Aussie farmers. I mean, most of them do own guns, but that's more about the wildlife...

It does not matter what threat its about protecting or even if its that likely to happen. Its human nature to have things to protection youself and things you care about. Like insurance you never need it until you do but then its too late. “God created man. Sam Colt made them equal.”

And yet, that's not true in any other country. So I doubt it's human nature.

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#455

Post by akimbostrawman »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #453
akimbostrawman wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does not matter what threat its about protecting or even if its that likely to happen. Its human nature to have things to protection youself and things you care about. Like insurance you never need it until you do but then its too late. “God created man. Sam Colt made them equal.”

And yet, that's not true in any other country. So I doubt it's human nature.

Other countries have locks and self defense weapons even firearms. marshal arts have existed in all cultures world wide.

Denying self defense isn't a core part of human history and desire for political reasons is very unscientific.

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#456

Post by foxglacier »

OKRainbowKid wrote: post #451
foxglacier wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what you mean. People in your province voted against their own interests because they believed (incorrectly?) that it would benefit them? How do you know what their interests were or whether it did benefit them in ways that were important to them or not?

Do you believe people have perfect knowledge of the consequences of their vote, and of the plans of the people they vote for? If no, then it's not hard to fathom that people can get manipulated into voting against their own interests.

Sure they can but you're not exempt from that manipulation so your own evaluation of their interests and what they're voting for is just as subject to manipulation and thus you can't tell if it's in their interests or not any better than they can. The difference is they're responsible for their vote, not you.

atoav called the government a "a neo-nazi connected right wing party". It won't actually be neo-Nazi because that's surely illegal in Austria. So it's probably some kind of propaganda that led him to believe that or exaggerate its significance as being against the interests of non-Nazis. Maybe they offer something their voters want and their voters don't care about whatever media-hype-hate-frenzy label they're given.

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#457

Post by piuantiderp »

akimbostrawman wrote: post #455
marcus_holmes wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, that's not true in any other country. So I doubt it's human nature.

Other countries have locks and self defense weapons even firearms. marshal arts have existed in all cultures world wide. Denying self defense isn't a core part of human history and desire for political reasons is very unscientific.

Think of the other side of the coin. Through history the first thing slaves are denied are weapons. And there is many countries that allow weapons at home, US, Mexico, Latin America....
Post reply on HN