LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 3,367
0 members and 3,367 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 04:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 02-18-2020, 05:18 PM   #404
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,231
Re: Objectively intelligent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
Hard to square what Roy writes with what you seem to believe:
Your acquaintance is cherry picking a few sentences at the end of the first Stone memo and emphasizing their importance over the pages and pages of arguments for a maximum sentence preceding them. He’s also stretching to find evenhandedness, mercy even, in his characterization of words which offer neither of those things.

I could never prove it, but the memo reads like someone other than the authors demanded those potentially helpful (to Stone) sentences be included.

But otherwise, the article highlights the real culprits here: Sessions, and the Tough on Crime Crowd.

I’d suggest this be a Constitutional amendment: No one may be sentenced to more that ten years for non-violent crime.

These 30 year sentences are obscene.

But it certainly speaks volumes to our perverted values. Bernie Ebbers gets life effectively for fucking with investors. Meanwhile thousands of violent criminals, pedophiles even, get a fraction of that.

Basing fed sentences on dollar value of white collar crime is openly admitting we are a seriously fucked up country.

The cherry on top is of course our retention of the death penalty. Fucking troglodyte politicians, offering human sacrifice for the walking and breathing trash among us who crave that sort of thing.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Last edited by sebastian_dangerfield; 02-18-2020 at 05:21 PM..
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:29 AM.