And why would that be a bad thing? We already have the biggest prison population in the world. Perhaps our injustice system needs to work a little less efficiently?
Hell, with all the money it takes to keep people incarcerated, we would probably save money by giving everyone a trial and incarcerating fewer people. There's a big "peace dividend" in it for all of us when we stop waging war on our own citizens.
Plea bargaining was created as i understand it so that it could alleviate some pressure from the court system
If you want to reduce pressure on the court system, reduce the number of offences, or reduce the incentives people have to commit offences. Both solutions will lead to a healthier society than allowing the powerful to bully common people into prison sentences they don't deserve. Punishing people for exercising their right to a trial is off the table for any society that wants their justice system to actually deliver justice.
If enforcing a law isn't important enough to justify paying for the trials, then the law isn't important enough to be on the books.
so that it could be used as a bargaining chip to get them to comply with providing information about associates.
By giving people an incentive to lie about their fellow citizens. How is that supposed to be a good thing?
But abuse of the system does not mean it should be thrown out entirely.
Every use of plea bargaining is an abuse. Everyone has a right to a trial, even those who are most definitely guilty of a crime.
A better reform to honor Aaron Swartz would be the abolition of plea bargaining. Nobody should be coereced out of their right to a trial by an overzealous prosecutor with trumped up charges. Every prisoner, every single one, deserves a trial.
So, why don't we quit pretending and searching them so closely and turn our attention more directly on islamists around us in our countries and focus more on containing and pushing back against their countries that are openly antagonistic against us.
Because violence begets more violence. The greatest marketing tool for Al Qaeda is the claim that America is in a war against Islam. There is nothing to be gained by making that claim factual.
When is the rest of the world, going to finally have enough of these 'pease loving' American asshats and just start stomping them...HARD? They don't seem to want to play nice with the rest of the world, and frankly isn't everyone about to start getting tired of going out of our way to be some tolerant of those that show absolutely no tolerance to anyone different than they are?
Do some counting. Americans have killed a lot more innocent muslims in the middle east than muslims have killed innocent westerners. You are far more evil than those you claim to hate.
Ah, the good old "it doesn't happen to me, he's a liar" reasoning.
There are enough examples of the placebo effect that this reasoning is a fair place to start. If you claim to observe an effect that most people cannot, you need to produce data that shows you can discriminate the effect under blind conditions. Otherwise we have no reason to believe you are any different from EM hypersensitives, etc.
No, what I'm saying is that black people are disproportionately affected by those laws. Rates of drug use are roughly the same between white and black communities. Black people get arrested for drugs 4-5x more often than white people. You can figure the rest out for yourself.
Perhaps the best way to get society to demand the war on drugs end is to prosecute the middle and upper class like we do the lower class
If you could do that, it would solve most of our problems. The whole point of government is to protect the weak from the strong, but in practice it protects the strong from the weak.
But unless and until he reads AND UNDERSTANDS every line of the source he is always going to have to be trusting somebody somewhere.
Even if he reads and undertands every line of the source, he's still trusting someone. He has to read and understand every line of the source code of the complier he is using, and the compiler that compiled that compiler, and so on.
And what has he done for the black community that even comes close to approaching the gifts he's given to the overwhelmingly white upper class? Electing an Uncle Tom does not prove that there is no institutional racism. The truth of the matter is that Obama's presidency is nothing more than a means of getting black people to support policies that harm black people.
To enlighten you, here's afewarticles discussing just how little Obama has done for his most dedicated supporters.
And yes, there's the argument that he is the "president of all Americans, not just African Americans". Which is very true. But the right way to help Americans is to help those who need it the most.
Do you see that "practically" in there? They exist, but they are vastly underrepresented. There is exactly one African American in the Senate. There are only 6 African American CEOs in the Fortune 500. I could go on, but why?
Prohibition is bad policy. There's no "at least he's" when he's implementing bad policy. The right thing to do is advocate against bad policy. If he can't do that as AG, then he should quit. Keeping his job and implementing bad policy should earn him nothing but contempt.
If you get sued for violating a contract you signed, then that is on you. And before you bring up the inevitable claim of suing for cross pollination, wrong.
From your NPR story:
As an experiment, he'd actually sprayed Roundup on about three acres of the field that was closest to a neighbor's Roundup Ready canola. Many plants survived the spraying, showing that they contained Monsanto's resistance gene â" and when Schmeiser's hired hand harvested the field, months later, he kept seed from that part of the field and used it for planting the next year.
This convinced the judge that Schmeiser intentionally planted Roundup Ready canola.
That sounds exactly like what you said doesn't happen. Grow crops. Pick the ones with the best traits and replant them. Get sued.
Because it's human nature to target the outgroup. Whether they actually stop any terrorist plots is secondary to them appearing to make people safer by harassing people who look and act differently.
Why don't they try the "Ha! I'll show the mud races what's what by being a successful human being!" a bit more often?
They do. Have you not noticed how practically all of our leaders are old, rich, white men? The "biggest fans of the white race" are not rednecks who fly the Confederate flag, they're the rich white assholes who make policies that keep black people from becoming successful. e.g. the war on drugs, three strikes laws, welfare reform, and just investing more in white people than other people in general.
The KKK could disappear from the face of the Earth, and it would make no difference to the vast majority of blacks. It's the institutional racism, supported by supposedly respectable people that's the real problem.
The best way to encourage children to get STEM degrees is to create high paying STEM jobs. Pay scientists and engineers what we pay CEOs and sports stars, and you'll start to see the culture change.
Actually you can - all you have to do is offer the same product/service as someone else and do it for less.
Think about it in terms of cash flow. Like Kirchoff's law applied to dollars instead of current. All the dollars that go into the system have to come out of the system. If some of those dollars end up in an HFT traders pocket, that's less for the rest of the traders. It's mathematically impossible for this to be anything other than zero sum. We're not talking about fractional reserve banking or anything else that actually creates dollars.
Slashdot Mirror
And why would that be a bad thing? We already have the biggest prison population in the world. Perhaps our injustice system needs to work a little less efficiently?
Hell, with all the money it takes to keep people incarcerated, we would probably save money by giving everyone a trial and incarcerating fewer people. There's a big "peace dividend" in it for all of us when we stop waging war on our own citizens.
Plea bargaining was created as i understand it so that it could alleviate some pressure from the court system
If you want to reduce pressure on the court system, reduce the number of offences, or reduce the incentives people have to commit offences. Both solutions will lead to a healthier society than allowing the powerful to bully common people into prison sentences they don't deserve. Punishing people for exercising their right to a trial is off the table for any society that wants their justice system to actually deliver justice.
If enforcing a law isn't important enough to justify paying for the trials, then the law isn't important enough to be on the books.
so that it could be used as a bargaining chip to get them to comply with providing information about associates.
By giving people an incentive to lie about their fellow citizens. How is that supposed to be a good thing?
But abuse of the system does not mean it should be thrown out entirely.
Every use of plea bargaining is an abuse. Everyone has a right to a trial, even those who are most definitely guilty of a crime.
A better reform to honor Aaron Swartz would be the abolition of plea bargaining. Nobody should be coereced out of their right to a trial by an overzealous prosecutor with trumped up charges. Every prisoner, every single one, deserves a trial.
So, why don't we quit pretending and searching them so closely and turn our attention more directly on islamists around us in our countries and focus more on containing and pushing back against their countries that are openly antagonistic against us.
Because violence begets more violence. The greatest marketing tool for Al Qaeda is the claim that America is in a war against Islam. There is nothing to be gained by making that claim factual.
When is the rest of the world, going to finally have enough of these 'pease loving' American asshats and just start stomping them...HARD? They don't seem to want to play nice with the rest of the world, and frankly isn't everyone about to start getting tired of going out of our way to be some tolerant of those that show absolutely no tolerance to anyone different than they are?
Do some counting. Americans have killed a lot more innocent muslims in the middle east than muslims have killed innocent westerners. You are far more evil than those you claim to hate.
Ah, the good old "it doesn't happen to me, he's a liar" reasoning.
There are enough examples of the placebo effect that this reasoning is a fair place to start. If you claim to observe an effect that most people cannot, you need to produce data that shows you can discriminate the effect under blind conditions. Otherwise we have no reason to believe you are any different from EM hypersensitives, etc.
Can't think of a single use for this other than eves dropping where no electronics were allowed.
It would be nice to be able to turn the stereo on in the living room and hear it from the kitchen without cranking the volume up to eleven.
No, what I'm saying is that black people are disproportionately affected by those laws. Rates of drug use are roughly the same between white and black communities. Black people get arrested for drugs 4-5x more often than white people. You can figure the rest out for yourself.
Perhaps the best way to get society to demand the war on drugs end is to prosecute the middle and upper class like we do the lower class
If you could do that, it would solve most of our problems. The whole point of government is to protect the weak from the strong, but in practice it protects the strong from the weak.
But unless and until he reads AND UNDERSTANDS every line of the source he is
always going to have to be trusting somebody somewhere.
Even if he reads and undertands every line of the source, he's still trusting someone. He has to read and understand every line of the source code of the complier he is using, and the compiler that compiled that compiler, and so on.
Reflections on trusting trust is almost 30 years old now. It should be well known.
And what has he done for the black community that even comes close to approaching the gifts he's given to the overwhelmingly white upper class? Electing an Uncle Tom does not prove that there is no institutional racism. The truth of the matter is that Obama's presidency is nothing more than a means of getting black people to support policies that harm black people.
To enlighten you, here's a few articles discussing just how little Obama has done for his most dedicated supporters.
And yes, there's the argument that he is the "president of all Americans, not just African Americans". Which is very true. But the right way to help Americans is to help those who need it the most.
Do you see that "practically" in there? They exist, but they are vastly underrepresented. There is exactly one African American in the Senate. There are only 6 African American CEOs in the Fortune 500. I could go on, but why?
Prohibition is bad policy. There's no "at least he's" when he's implementing bad policy. The right thing to do is advocate against bad policy. If he can't do that as AG, then he should quit. Keeping his job and implementing bad policy should earn him nothing but contempt.
Sticking with a culture that glorifies a lot of bad things isn't going to get you far.
It seems to have worked pretty well for the old, rich, white men I mentioned above. The crips and bloods don't have shit on Goldman Sachs or Monsanto.
To be fair, Obama didn't win the Nobel prize for ending wars. He won the prize for not being Bush.
But, he is Bush.
Just because you can kick the can down the road for a few centuries doesn't mean you can do so forever.
If you get sued for violating a contract you signed, then that is on you. And before you bring up the inevitable claim of suing for cross pollination, wrong.
From your NPR story:
That sounds exactly like what you said doesn't happen. Grow crops. Pick the ones with the best traits and replant them. Get sued.
Actual constitutional law is defined by the actual constitution.
What is that supposed to prove other than that we have a government that doesn't even bother to maintain a pretense of obeying the constitution?
Because it's human nature to target the outgroup. Whether they actually stop any terrorist plots is secondary to them appearing to make people safer by harassing people who look and act differently.
Unless we eliminate the situations that motivate terrorists (politically very difficult)
Doing the right thing is hard. That's never a good excuse to do evil.
Why don't they try the "Ha! I'll show the mud races what's what by being a successful human being!" a bit more often?
They do. Have you not noticed how practically all of our leaders are old, rich, white men? The "biggest fans of the white race" are not rednecks who fly the Confederate flag, they're the rich white assholes who make policies that keep black people from becoming successful. e.g. the war on drugs, three strikes laws, welfare reform, and just investing more in white people than other people in general.
The KKK could disappear from the face of the Earth, and it would make no difference to the vast majority of blacks. It's the institutional racism, supported by supposedly respectable people that's the real problem.
Microsoft has made their fortune assuming their users are stupid.
Encouraging children to get into STEM Degrees.
The best way to encourage children to get STEM degrees is to create high paying STEM jobs. Pay scientists and engineers what we pay CEOs and sports stars, and you'll start to see the culture change.
Actually you can - all you have to do is offer the same product/service as someone else and do it for less.
Think about it in terms of cash flow. Like Kirchoff's law applied to dollars instead of current. All the dollars that go into the system have to come out of the system. If some of those dollars end up in an HFT traders pocket, that's less for the rest of the traders. It's mathematically impossible for this to be anything other than zero sum. We're not talking about fractional reserve banking or anything else that actually creates dollars.