Cashing In On Crime: The Dark Ages, Part II
The cornerstone of our current system of justice can be summed up in three words: Crime and Punishment. The focus on crime consists of a focus on guilt or innocence. Everything boils down to the focus of whether someone did something illegal. The focus on punishment consists of what is the proper infliction of suffering for a crime that has been committed. Crime = Punishment.
As any rational person can see, our criminal justice system has utterly failed. Likewise, any rational person would never commit crime because of the punishment, right? This is where the whole system breaks down: The founders of our criminal justice system believed it was rational when it is not.
This is not a minor distinction. This is the key to understanding the stupidity of our criminal justice system. The way we look at our criminal justice system is just as important as what we believe we see. What if our way of thinking were to become Crime Solution instead of Crime and Punishment?
In order to see the problem different, we must know something different. Something that the politicians, the media and the pressure groups want to hide from you: They don’t want you to know why we have crime I n the first place. Knowledge empowers. Belief enslaves. The less you know and the more you think you believe, the easier it is to use tricks of psychology to get your time, your vote and your money.
You have been fed crap and kept in the dark.
A prime example of being fed crap is the current hysteria, sex offenders. MSNBC has a popular series, To Catch a Predator. Here’s their spin:
“An ongoing hidden camera investigation into computer sex predators -- grown men, trolling the Web for young teenagers. This time, police are making arrests.”
Does that pass the smell test? I mean, really, does that sound like MSNBC is interested in solving the problem of sex crimes or that MSNBC is more interested in creating a climate of fear, scandal and higher ratings?
To Catch a Predator preys on your fears, preys on your emotion, preys on your logic and ensures a serious problem is transformed into cheap entertainment. If the show were a factual presentation of methods, techniques and strategies for keeping your family safe, that would be one thing. But it isn’t. To Catch a Predator is all about the chase, the titillation, and the big bust.
Although Doc Block and To Catch a Predator are criminal justice cable crap standouts, MSNBC is not the only offender.
CNN’s Headline News inflicts Nancy Grace upon us nightly.
Use the largest online attorney directory to quickly find detailed profiles of Florida lawyers and law firms in your area.
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn politicians. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn politicians. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Thứ Tư, 18 tháng 4, 2007
Thứ Tư, 11 tháng 4, 2007
Cashing in on Crime: The Dark Ages of Criminal Law, Part I
Long ago, during the middle ages, something was against the law simply because the king said so. There were no legislatures, no courts as we understand them today, and no check or balance of any kind. Law created by the Divine Right of Kings – God’s chosen representatives who could make up any law at will. Thus, in France, when a peasant whistled appreciatively at a young French queen, the king had the man imprisoned for life on the spot. This arbitrary system of “justice” was not very popular, and the problem was apparent to the intellectuals of the day: The system of governance was unfair and irrational.
Over the centuries, intellectuals began to postulate a new system of criminal justice as part of a new system of government. They argued that law should be created by group of elected leaders who would represent will of “the people.” They believed a rational group of men could create a rational system of government. Rational law could then be created by a rational representative government. Rational punishment would only occur after a rational legal proceeding with rational checks and balances to ensure the fairness of true justice. Rational people would not want violate laws they had a stake in creating. Some people would break the law, they reasoned, but policing and punishment would round out a fair system
The exact form of government varied – a parliamentary system in Great Britain, a republic in America – but the underlying theories were essentially the same: A democratic republic would produce a rational, fair system of justice.
Over time, the debate has shifted. The founders of our nation are long dead. Our memory of governmental legal abuse is gone. Today, our beliefs are influenced by the media, not a bad memory from the past. Instead of worrying over whether the government can force us to house troops in our homes and horses in our barns, we are whipped into a frenzy over whether the system is fair to the victims.
When you hear that someone has burned crying puppy to death, strangled a pregnant mother, or sodomized a little boy, doesn’t it make you angry? Of course, it does. The media, the politicians and the pressure groups are counting on it – angry people act without thinking. And the politicians, pressure groups and the media don’t ever want you to think, they want you to do something. They want your vote, your time, and your money.
Especially your money.
Long ago, during the middle ages, something was against the law simply because the king said so. There were no legislatures, no courts as we understand them today, and no check or balance of any kind. Law created by the Divine Right of Kings – God’s chosen representatives who could make up any law at will. Thus, in France, when a peasant whistled appreciatively at a young French queen, the king had the man imprisoned for life on the spot. This arbitrary system of “justice” was not very popular, and the problem was apparent to the intellectuals of the day: The system of governance was unfair and irrational.
Over the centuries, intellectuals began to postulate a new system of criminal justice as part of a new system of government. They argued that law should be created by group of elected leaders who would represent will of “the people.” They believed a rational group of men could create a rational system of government. Rational law could then be created by a rational representative government. Rational punishment would only occur after a rational legal proceeding with rational checks and balances to ensure the fairness of true justice. Rational people would not want violate laws they had a stake in creating. Some people would break the law, they reasoned, but policing and punishment would round out a fair system
The exact form of government varied – a parliamentary system in Great Britain, a republic in America – but the underlying theories were essentially the same: A democratic republic would produce a rational, fair system of justice.
Over time, the debate has shifted. The founders of our nation are long dead. Our memory of governmental legal abuse is gone. Today, our beliefs are influenced by the media, not a bad memory from the past. Instead of worrying over whether the government can force us to house troops in our homes and horses in our barns, we are whipped into a frenzy over whether the system is fair to the victims.
When you hear that someone has burned crying puppy to death, strangled a pregnant mother, or sodomized a little boy, doesn’t it make you angry? Of course, it does. The media, the politicians and the pressure groups are counting on it – angry people act without thinking. And the politicians, pressure groups and the media don’t ever want you to think, they want you to do something. They want your vote, your time, and your money.
Especially your money.
Đăng ký:
Bài đăng (Atom)
Bài đăng phổ biến
-
You would think after forty-seven thousand gazillion years of jurisprudence, litigators would be savvy enough to not argue the same re...
-
Here's an interesting opinion from Magistrate Judge Torres awarding defendants attorney's fees for opposing a copyright infringemen...
-
Federal Rule Violation If you have been charged with USCA0024 FEDERAL RULE VIOLATION you can call a Defense Attorney Tampa at 1-877-793-9290...
-
I don't know, I feel like we're getting a little Frank Jimenez chronic here, and yet more news keeps breaking. Now it's this , i...
-
The Second District Court of Appeal ruled yesterday in Payne v. Payne , a case in which the parties sought dissolution of a seventeen year m...
-
Shuster & Saben Defeats US Bank & Douglas Zahm PA in Foreclosure Appeal In 2011, firm attorney Richard Shuster obtained the dis...
-
In Atlantic Shores v. 507 South Street Corporation, here's the link , the court held that an objecting neighbor could not litigate a hei...
-
Tallahassee Police Department Cyber Crimes Unit tallahassee.com - www.tallahassee.com "Hard drive duplication is one of the first and m...
-
In Powell v. City of Sarasota, here's the link, http://www.2dca.org/opinion/September%2013,%202006/2D05-4850.pdf , the Second DCA held t...
-
"ANKARA, Turkey -- On Aug. 16, 2005, a CNN television news bulletin alerted viewers that computers at the network's New York and At...