LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 1,940
0 members and 1,940 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 09-12-2016, 11:51 AM   #1348
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,231
Re: I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall View Post
Couldn't have said it better myself.

TM
Actually, we both could have said it better.

People should also not be barred from public housing, or student loans, or any state or federal license* because of a prior conviction for which they have served their time.

ETA: The govt can propose forfeiture of license, or certain other rights, but the convicted person (or plea bargainer) must get a credit - which is set forth explicitly in the sentencing guidelines, just like a "downward departure" for cooperation) - against any time he serves for giving up that right or license. BUT, no -- a person cannot avoid time by paying a larger fine... that'd be abused.

Govt can have your time, or forfeiture of rights/licenses, but not your time plus a "bonus punishment."

Yeah, and while on this soapbox, let's get rid of these fucking retarded sentencing ranges. This "facing 30 years" bullshit is laughable to those who know how the actual guidelines work, and cynically cruel to the poor bastard facing the charges. You can't have an honest plea bargain where one side at the table gets to say he can *technically* put you away for half of your life. See: Aaron Swartz.
_______
*I'd allow people with violent crime histories to be barred from acquiring gun licenses. That seems a reasonable line.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Last edited by sebastian_dangerfield; 09-12-2016 at 12:03 PM..
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:08 AM.