What reforms would you like to see? At least in the U.S., it's hard to see what's "unlawful" about charging someone with a thousand crimes and persuading them to plea-bargain.
Juries are a good idea if the people you live among are like you and have the same values as you. I think that's increasingly not the case. The high trial costs are the whole issue here. I'm saying bring them down, and be brutal about it if necessary.
-
-
If you can't bring them down, the only remaining response possible is to have fewer trials, and plea-bargaining is a reasonable way to do that. As I said, an order-of-magnitude reduction in cost is what is needed.
-
My solution: cops bludgeon minor offenders, and let them walk.
-
Trials and juries and presumption of innocence are all good things, but they're not free, and if the state is no longer effective enough to be able to provide them while still maintaining order, then we lose them. Simple as that. Crying "muh rights" doesn't change anything.
-
Of course, but given cultural realities I'd like to maintain them for as long as possible. Order gainz, by my calculus, aren't worth converting our criminal justice system to the universities' sexual assault-tribunal model.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
For the time being, this is an option. Once your enemies capture the system though, it doesn't matter whether you're before a jury, a judge, or a private arbiter. If that day comes, I want trials to be as costly as possible so I can strike a good plea-bargain.
End of conversation
New conversation
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.