We don’t know that it does, because we haven’t tried an alternative. (The SF plan is incomplete at best.) My idea is to protect Constitutional rights for everyone first. A wealth-based system doesn’t do that. Need to solve in the context of Constitution.
-
-
Replying to @runako @GehaniNeil and
What would you do to make sure that people return to courts for their dates?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @facts16966471 @GehaniNeil and
Something that applies regardless of wealth. Maybe we use....technology? Wanton abandonment of the Constitution under the guise of security is not an acceptable answer.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @runako @GehaniNeil and
That's not an answer. Technology doesn't work as proven over and over by ankle monitors. People are given ample opportunities in the US to improve, gain wealth without crime. So if you want to propose a change in the system, please propose a better system.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @facts16966471 @GehaniNeil and
The Constitution is a good system. We should start with it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @runako @GehaniNeil and
All men equal in the eyes of the constitution. If you and I are booked for a homicide all of us have to come up with a bail of $1,000,000. How is this unequal?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @facts16966471 @GehaniNeil and
The bail amount is set so that some people will have it and some won’t. If bail is $150B then I agree it’s equal and fair.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @runako @facts16966471 and
In any case, we can look at the effect to see what happens. We don’t have to guess. Rich people skate out, poor people do not. (And therefore are treated as guilty while they may be innocent.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @runako @GehaniNeil and
But then you'd move the goalposts even further. He looks cleaner, healthier, taller, smarter, educated, more eloquent. So instead of improving the one that isn't you'd want the one with those qualities muffled further.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @facts16966471 @GehaniNeil and
No, I’m just saying we should not imprison people who have not been found guilty of a crime, no matter how poor they may be. That’s the whole argument.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
What about terrorists that we think are going to blow up buildings and hurt your and my loved ones? Let them roam free until we are absolutely certain that they are the person?
-
-
Replying to @facts16966471 @GehaniNeil and
Okay, you’re on the pre-crime front, I have to bow out.
I’m stuck here with 2020 tech and the Constitution.pic.twitter.com/OFL0cGkS6f1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
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.