Is this fair or not?

Jiro said:
true. it's funny that some people think prison is like a hotel just because of 3 square meals and a bed. Guess what? You have to take a shit/piss in an open view, worry about not getting raped at shower room, and eating disgusting prison food.
Click to expand...

well, some street people eat food out of the garbage can, shit/pee in front of the public and sell their bodies for drugs or food to support themselves (just as bad as being raped). no big difference is there?
 
I don't think it's fair....rich people deserve to be in jail just like poor people do..but then poor people are taking advantage of the taxes we pay for the jail system....so it's like there's no solution to the issue basically.
 
Remember the poor people has to depend on public defenders who have to work on a limited budget that the municipal, county or state impose so that is why the rich people have a huge advantage in the fucked up judicial system.
 
but if a poor person has a rich uncle, he can bail him out.. so it isn't like he is going to jail for being poor.. but going to jail because he is unable to pay his fine.... but It would be nice to fine them by percentage of their income like they do on taxes.. but then homeless would just get away with everything for free!
 
Also this question applies to races, sexes and disabilities, too.

I have noticed that the members of minority races tend to be punished more severe than the whites do.

Our judicial system is a major clusterfuck anyways.
 
Rich man- pays fine & will not learn lesson because money pays for him.

Poor man- will learn lesson and has personal growth from this lesson.
 
Royale said:
Also this question applies to races, sexes and disabilities, too.

I have noticed that the members of minority races tend to be punished more severe than the whites do.

Our judicial system is a major clusterfuck anyways.
Click to expand...

yes, that can be unfair if two people charge with the same crime. But sometimes the judge look at people's attitude to decide how severe the punishment should be. He could simply mistaken people as "I don't care" attitude because he can only relate to the culture he is from. (That is, a deaf person can tell another deaf person how repentance he is, but a hearing person can not)
 
Royale said:
But in most cases they always do not based on incomes, races, sexes and disabilities.
Click to expand...

The system is more willing to take pity on a person who is poor & in a wheelchair and has a family to support.

If the person was able, rich and single..forget about it.
 
In most other countries(at least in europe), your amount of cash don't decide if you have to go to prison or not after a sentence. I bet most people would go crazy if that was allowed.

But, rich people seems to get away a lot easier quite often, not matter justice system.
 
Mrs Bucket said:
The system is more willing to take pity on a person who is poor & in a wheelchair and has a family to support.

If the person was able, rich and single..forget about it.
Click to expand...

I guess most deafies have tried to act hard to communicate with and use deafness in different ways when the cop stop us driving a bit fast. Sometimes it works :)
 
Actually the media cases you see were the police officers violating the deaf people's rights to an interpreter. When a deaf person is pulled over and an officer talks to them & expects them to sign something, how can a deaf person be willing to sign a legal document without knowing the full extent of what the crime & the fine they will receive?

Nowadays some uneducated police officers are just not willing to learn ASL or accommodate a deaf driver's rights because they say "time is not on their side" when they forget they are actually violating a basic human right to communication and violating a basic human right to a service.

Time always has to be on the officer's side to accommodate and this would make a lot less hassle for everyone involved for the general community.
 
flip said:
In most other countries(at least in europe), your amount of cash don't decide if you have to go to prison or not after a sentence. I bet most people would go crazy if that was allowed.

But, rich people seems to get away a lot easier quite often, not matter justice system.
Click to expand...

That's the thing, U.S. don't decide the amount of cash you have either. It's a matter of if you can pay for the crime with cash. You can be very poor and still get out of jail if you have the money (sell your car, beg for money, etc.) If amount of cash did matter, they would charge crime by your income (but homeless would get out for free).

The real punishment is fine. Can't pay it, you go to jail. They really don't want to put these people to jail anyway... it's too expensive to keep them there.

kinda like how someone has to pay for damages on your property. They have to pay for it to fix it somehow. If they can't and the owner ended up paying for it themselves, then something have to be done
 
Royale said:
Also this question applies to races, sexes and disabilities, too.

I have noticed that the members of minority races tend to be punished more severe than the whites do.

Our judicial system is a major clusterfuck anyways.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It is well know that our justice system metes out punishment, and even creates laws that are inequitable. Criminologists and sociologists have spoken on just those issues for any number of years.
 
Lighthouse77 said:
yes, that can be unfair if two people charge with the same crime. But sometimes the judge look at people's attitude to decide how severe the punishment should be. He could simply mistaken people as "I don't care" attitude because he can only relate to the culture he is from. (That is, a deaf person can tell another deaf person how repentance he is, but a hearing person can not)
Click to expand...

Justice is supposed to be blind. Any judge that is handing down sentences based on cultural differences should be removed from the bench and have his law license revoked. And some have for just this type of action. Being from a different culture than the judge does not make one more guilty in the eyes of the law, not does being from the same culture make them less quilty.
 
Mrs Bucket said:
Actually the media cases you see were the police officers violating the deaf people's rights to an interpreter. When a deaf person is pulled over and an officer talks to them & expects them to sign something, how can a deaf person be willing to sign a legal document without knowing the full extent of what the crime & the fine they will receive?

Nowadays some uneducated police officers are just not willing to learn ASL or accommodate a deaf driver's rights because they say "time is not on their side" when they forget they are actually violating a basic human right to communication and violating a basic human right to a service.

Time always has to be on the officer's side to accommodate and this would make a lot less hassle for everyone involved for the general community.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
jillio said:
Justice is supposed to be blind. Any judge that is handing down sentences based on cultural differences should be removed from the bench and have his law license revoked. And some have for just this type of action. Being from a different culture than the judge does not make one more guilty in the eyes of the law, not does being from the same culture make them less quilty.
Click to expand...


That's not what I am saying.. I am saying that I think some judges have a hard time reading people because of cultural differences. NOT because he is prejudice (sp?).

Like this, on the outside surface, people see deaf people as whiny and emotional but on the inside, we don't hear ourselves and we use more visual expression than hearing people. Hearing people don't always realize that.

So if a deaf person go to court and the judge sees a whiny and emotional person, he wonder if he suspend his license or not because he certainly do not want an unstable person on the road. Or if he should add extra points to their driving record But if a hearing person comes in all calm and cool, he think the person is rational and probably just made an honest mistake. So less driving point for her. (yes, I had extra driving point than the other person who did the same thing.. I don't think I've worded it correctly like the other person did. It just came out wrong)
 
Lighthouse77 said:
That's not what I am saying.. I am saying that I think some judges have a hard time reading people because of cultural differences. NOT because he is prejudice (sp?).

Like this, on the outside surface, people see deaf people as whiny and emotional but on the inside, we don't hear ourselves and we use more visual expression than hearing people. Hearing people don't always realize that.

So if a deaf person go to court and the judge sees a whiny and emotional person, he wonder if he suspend his license or not, or add extra points to their driving record But if a hearing person comes in all calm and cool, he think the person is rational and probably just made an honest mistake. So less driving point for her. (yes, I had extra driving point than the other person who did the same thing.. I don't think I've worded it correctly like the other person did. It just came out wrong)
Click to expand...

Again, punishment should not be decided based on a person's personality, but on the mandated sentence for the crime committed.

And, that deaf person is entitled to have an intepreter in the courtroom, as well as a lawyer that is familiar with deaf culture and can properly represent that person to the court. Don't let the courts violate your rights.
 
Back
Top