531–540 of 567 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good point, in that case, let’s open it up and let it be a free for all. May as well let them take the drugs in through the front door, while we’re at it.
Of all the things to be concerned about you picked drugs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes I'm sure we could keep digging up more. I've been down this rabbit hole before so I know how it always ends: I provide a data driven take backed by source after source which ends in endless nitpicking and scrutiny and rejection of the sources, meanwhile unsourced hot takes go completely unchallenged without the demand sources, as seen in your sister comment. This is the key of this two-pronged approach, one comme…
Oh, I have no interest in going around and around about it -- that's not a good use of anyone's time. I think it's a somewhat understudied field, and was legitimately interested in your cites. Your material is way better than surveys about how many people feel like they've been falsely accused; relying on self-reporting like that is clearly flawed. I also, for what it's worth, think that "did you talk to the wife" is…
The divorce industry and divorce lawyers request these orders like candy, as leverage for proceedings and to take away custody briefly during the temporary order while the custody hearing is going on so that during custody hearings it can be argued the child already is only with the mom or dad and they should get full custody. It also lets you eject the partner from the home without a legal eviction process, so they are at their weakest and homeless when fighting in court. They produce a massive number of weak DV claims, the point was never to take them final but to provide enough of a discontinuity in their life to crush them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> difference between treatment at a pyschiatric center vs the offer of psychiatric treatment in a prison? The first was rejected by Mr Clarke's own country before committing any crime. The second was offered following a crime which could have cost somebody their life. It's a very clear difference in my mind.
You're talking out your arse now. This is not true: "The first was rejected by Mr Clarke's own country" The country didn't reject it. He refused to get treatment and actually fled the country to escape it. So, a crime is a crime even if it is committed by somebody who is insane? That is insane!
The hardest thing in my life was to sign a committal form to send Niall to hospital.
And follows with
Irish health authorities refused to commit Clarke
That sure sounds like Mr Clarke's country refused to treat him.
And to your points:
> He refused to get treatment and actually fled the country to escape it.
What you are saying and what I said about Mr Clarke's country refusing to treat him can all be true at once.
> So, a crime is a crime even if it is committed by somebody who is insane?
Is a crime committed by somebody who is insane, who refuses to get treatment, and who flees their own country in avoidance of treatment, a more acceptable crime?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's an example in connecticut[]. DV applications: ~8800 DV ex parte granted (no chance for defendant to defend him(her)self): ~5100 DV final order granted after defendant able to defend him(her)self): ~3200 So for example in CT on just a civil standard, only 2/3 of the accusers were able to get even a temporary order when the defendant had zero chance to tell their side of the story. Once the defendant was able to…
Note that it's not trivial to demonstrate that a restraining order is necessary, even in cases where domestic violence has occurred and has a reasonable risk of recurring. I understand that you're simply using this as a proxy for the actual unknowable data, but I think it's worth pointing out that the map is not the territory.
The final order is more difficult, but quite often (i.e. in divorce / custody court) the only goal was to evict them from the home and disrupt custody to get the upper hand in hearings, so temporary is all that's needed to do the job and then no need to actually defend the claim made 14+ days later when they're already homeless and with the baseline of out of the kid's life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is an PDF of a bad court decision about an illegal search; he was not convicted of harming anyone. It contains no evidence of him harming anyone.
If police can determine there is probable cause they can immediately search without a warrant. It contains strong evidence of him committing harm directly to his gf at the time. It does not contain a legal decision or conviction, but that's not a lack of evidence - the report's existence itself is by definition evidence.
What you are probably thinking of is what is called the “exigent circumstances” warrant exception, and it was misapplied here by over-zealous police who violated his rights.
There is no evidence to support that the injuries sustained by the woman in his apartment were caused by him, according to that document.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of all the things to be concerned about you picked drugs?
I’m just using it to point out the stupidity of your argument. Don’t think too deeply about it, you might hurt yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More dystopian than people in prison not being able to prepare themselves for a life outside?
The moral hazard is rather high. At the limit, the entire white-collar work force is wrongfully imprisoned, working for slave wages.
Perhaps it'd be an interesting SFF novel.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're talking out your arse now. This is not true: "The first was rejected by Mr Clarke's own country" The country didn't reject it. He refused to get treatment and actually fled the country to escape it. So, a crime is a crime even if it is committed by somebody who is insane? That is insane!
The article you linked quotes Mr Clarke's father: The hardest thing in my life was to sign a committal form to send Niall to hospital. And follows with Irish health authorities refused to commit Clarke That sure sounds like Mr Clarke's country refused to treat him. And to your points: > He refused to get treatment and actually fled the country to escape it. What you are saying and what I said about Mr Clarke's countr…
Your lack of heart and compassion is shocking, tbh.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's related. In programming, the only employment options are working for a government, for some corporation, or trying to sell directly to individuals? Somebody who had worked for a recognizable tech company is far more hireable than somebody who is Self Employed or who has worked for the government.
But that's not prison labor. Prison labor specifically refers to penal labor. You receive no pay, because the labor is part of the punishment for the crime. It is the prisoner who is paying off his debt. In those cases, I don't think it is moral for private companies to make use of that labor for private gain. Penal labor should only be used for public benefit. Here, we're talking about preparing someone for the job…
To me, it looks like a net benefit for the public, the department of corrections, and the inmate.
If you are worried about the inmate being allowed to build up savings that they can use when they are released, then that's on the judge. If the inmate has met their restitution obligations, then I don't have a problem with them being allowed to leave prison with savings that will enable them to get back on their feet again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A prisoner costs taxpayers around $50k a year on average in US. If their "take-home" wage is $0.40/h, it may still be generous.
That cost should be taken by our government and the tax payer, as a disincentive to locking people up. If you can lock someone up and get close to free labor for it, then we're going to start locking a lot of people up. I mean, it's free labor. Which is why we used to give people 20 years for possession of marijuana. What, you think it's just a coincidence we were throwing primarily black Americans away in prison for…