Criticizing Lawyers, Teachers & Dating
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
From a PM I just sent to Inzl Kett; delmar; ktoyou; ebenz47037 ; Knight; Jefferson;
Do you really believe that is a statistical reality or are you just taking a broadside against lawyers?
I know some great lawyers.
Can't say the same, I'm afraid.
My grandfather, but he died when I was three. Didn't really know him.
My comments were made regarding the current legal/justice system vis a vis what is recommended biblically, especially wrt to swift punishment.
Yes. I think for him to have some culpability in the matter would require him to have done the same thing while knowing that the results were likely to happen.
I have a friend and fellow church member that is our state inspector general. He is an honest guy in a state with a history of corruption. His ability to be effective is dependent to a great extent to the state legislature and the governor's support. His is not an easy job, but he is a honest and conscientious man seeking to do the right thing and to enforce the state's laws.
"Likely"?
With what degree of likelihood?
90% ?
40% ?
2% ?
0.0005% ?
He was a self confessed trafficker in the most foul forms of child pornography imaginable.
Why release him at all?
Had he been imprisoned, how likely is it that the mother would still be alive?
How likely that the ten year old girl would not be scarred for life?
Why should his "rights" outweigh theirs?
Last edited:
actually Steve, I take that back - I do know one very nice, well regarded fellow who is currently working for the state judiciary system (not a judge)
He's OK.
He's OK.
Yep.
As far as the east is from the west.
The law is supposed to teach people. When it lets the guilty go free and argues for days on end about nonsense, it teaches disrespect for judgement.
You can talk all you like about intent, but it is outcome that is important.
Great. :up:
This isn't an argument. The story we have is of great evil perpetrated by your system.
Shoot down the justice system, Res, just don't go shooting down Town while you at it. It's posts like this---->
that can lead you down a path to trouble. He's not hurting you by debating you on the subject.
I agree the justice system is broken these days. You detract from your argument when you get in conflicts with members.
Now what I am going to say isn't going to be popular, both you and Town need to back off of each other. I don't think either of you will ever get along. My advice is place each other on ignore. The ignore button is a safety valve to prevent more trouble from developing.
Now for my actual opinion on today's justice system. The judicial system was meant to protect the innocent and convict the guilty. Early in this country's history it did a pretty good job. Today there still are some honest lawyers and attorneys out there, so I am not going to be making any blanket statements.
Today something has gone seriously awry for this to happen.
| Renz was allowed to remain free because of a prosecutor requested court extension in his pending child porn case. Investigators required additional time to sort through the extensive evidence. Without a prior criminal history, Renz was given homebound electronic monitoring in lieu of detainment so long as he remained home at night, off the internet, and away from schools, parks, and other areas populated with children. |
The guy should have been fried for murdering Bresnahan and raping her ten year old daughter. It is obvious this guy wasn't tried in a court filled with honest lawyers.
StanJ53
New member
He was charged last summer with possession of lots of child pornography, appeared before a judge in January and released with an ankle bracelet pending a trial somewhere down the road. Apparently on Thursday he got the urge to cut off his bracelet and go hunting.
I was on the road in the area on Saturday. It was all over the radio.
I have no interest in "debating" him. I believe I've been clear on that since coming back as res.
Done
Why don't you make that offer to Sod, who has been doing a less than honest job of playing for my attention, his attempts to reinvent that notwithstanding.
He's being dishonest about engagement. I noted an example of it in his reference to a conversation he had about me with anna.
He keeps declaring he isn't interested in having anything to do with me, then shows up in Observations over and over, does the sort of inferential thing he's doing here...look at the thread Tambora started about my closing Observations and see who the primary poster is. It isn't even close.
That said, search my last hundred posts and see how many of them have anything to do with Sod. You might be surprised. Especially if you do the same for his.
No.
I am interested in any argument you can muster to back that feeling or to contradict my counter. So far you aren't offering any.
It's tragic, but it isn't a product of the system any more than the second amendment is responsible for the deaths of the people in Aurora, or the children in Sandy Hook.
though any system made by and administered by men will invariably find corruption within it. The system is a good one. It works most of the time. And when it fails it has mechanisms to address those failures.
No. It has a remarkably high conviction rate and a history of overturning unjust verdicts to boot. It's far from perfect, as are men.
Like I said, its conviction rate speaks to the falsity of your feeling here.
I am interested in any argument you can muster to back that feeling or to contradict my counter. So far you aren't offering any.
Where is that written? The law is supposed to set limits and impose penalty. It may ward, instruct or even rehabilitate, but the foundation of the law is regulating the interaction of people each possessing right.
Again, our system overwhelmingly convicts and punishes. Exceptions to rules shouldn't be conflated with anything else. Any system run by men will both free the guilty and convict the innocent on occasion. That's because few cases that actually go to trial are cut and dried, which is one reason they're at trial.
What did I say about intent?
The goal of the system is justice. It isn't evil any more than a gun fashioned to protect but occasionally used to harm the innocent is evil.
Rather, calling a justice system evil wasn't an argument. What I offered in counter was. I argued that your use of mistake by that system no more justifies your blanket condemnation and is no more reasonable than someone claiming a gun created to protect is evil because someone misuses it.
The story you have is of a man perpetrating great evil while he awaited trial for a crime he hadn't been convicted of and without any priors which would have triggered the Court denying bail.
It's tragic, but it isn't a product of the system any more than the second amendment is responsible for the deaths of the people in Aurora, or the children in Sandy Hook.
some other dude, koban, Thor and a half dozen others over the last ten or eleven years
