Originally Posted by 03 white zx3 That sucks for them, doesn't it. Maybe they should have THOUGHT before they committed the crime. No sympathy for criminals from me. Not all "crimes" should be crimes. Maybe you should know the circumstances before passing judgment....
06-09-2007, 02:06 PM
| #121 | ||||
| Pinko Commie Bastard  Communist Moscow 
| Originally Posted by 03 white zx3 Not all "crimes" should be crimes. Maybe you should know the circumstances before passing judgment. 
__________________ Perhaps the sentiments contained in the preceding post, are not yet sufficiently favorable to procure them general favor; a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defence of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason. - slightly modified from Common Sense, Thomas Paine, 1776 I am Ron Paul, Congressman from Texas... I am the champion of the Constitution.  | ||||
     |
|
06-09-2007, 02:28 PM
| #122 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur.  Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by thomez Drug charges right?
__________________ No good decision was ever made in a swivel chair. Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid: As we look back in history, the Founding Fathers would be cringing to hear people talking about eliminating earmarks. | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 02:34 PM
| #123 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by IminWonderland People will less money usually have remorse and the understanding that they've done something wrong. Paris continues to play herself out to be the victim through all of this. The reason judges hand out punishments is to punish people. Monetary punishments often correlated to how much you're worth and the crime you were convicted of. But maximum fines would be a joke and wouldn't be justice. There is no such thing as punishing Paris through lenient means. They tried it and failed, repeatedly. She has received no punishment and she still does not understand she has done something wrong.
Jail time was a suiting punishment. She was sent home for "psychological" reasons that don't require medication or treatment. In other words she was very upset being in a jail and not her multi-million dollar lifestyle. The Sheriff receives political contributions from the Hiltons and has been involved in other similar issues in the past with other celebrities. | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 03:04 PM
| #124 | ||||
| Pinko Commie Bastard Communist Moscow
| Originally Posted by JaJae yes, with a bunch of bullshit in between
nothing that should actually be illegal | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 04:16 PM
| #125 | ||||
| Guest
| Originally Posted by thomez Did she break the law? Then she committed a crime. It doesn't matter what you *THINK* should be illegal or not. What she did was illegal, and she should be punished accordingly.
| ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 05:08 PM
| #126 | ||||
| Political Genius  Republican Yorba Linda Ca.
| Originally Posted by 03 white zx3
Driving under the influence is public endangerment! The judge does have a right to give jail time. But she got standard probation and flaunted that. Celebrities look at DUI as bragging rights. Now she is crying for her mommy! Too bad so sad....... 
__________________ Sock It To Me!  "Bureaucracy is a Parasite that Preys on Free Thought and Suffocates Free Spirit!" - Douglas Adams | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 05:15 PM
| #127 | ||||
| Pinko Commie Bastard Communist Moscow
| Originally Posted by 03 white zx3 He*
Using the law as a basis of right and wrong is a terrible idea. | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 05:38 PM
| #128 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by thomez That's the point of all criminal law.
| ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 06:13 PM
| #129 | ||||
| Pinko Commie Bastard Communist Moscow
| Originally Posted by JaJae It does not mean that the "law" is always correct. I believe that to suggest such is a very poor way of looking at the world.
| ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 06:15 PM
| #130 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by thomez I didn't say the law had to always be correct. I just disagree with the notion that using laws as basis of right and wrong is a bad idea. Because that basically rids us of all criminal law.
| ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 06:29 PM
| #131 | ||||
| Pinko Commie Bastard Communist Moscow
| Originally Posted by JaJae If something is illegal, that doesn't mean it is wrong. Is it illegal to have buttsex in many states? I'm sure it is.. but does that make it wrong? Hell no... who cares.
The law should not be looked at as an infallible source of information. I believe it is often wrong altogether. | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 06:57 PM
| #132 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| Originally Posted by thomez Often wrong and altogether are contradictory. Something can't be wrong altogether sometimes. There is nothing wrong with using the law to legislation morality, ethics, right and wrong, etc... especially when it comes to criminal offenses. The problem with this comes into play though when not everyone agrees with the morality the law describes.
You can't make everyone happy. The buttsex is the extreme role of laws that are on the books that people have typically stopped enforcing because society as a whole doesn't care. However, murder society does care about. So that one stays. A minority of people might prefer living in a society where murder wasn't illegal. However, we all here probably agree it should be illegal and don't complain. Now that the two extremes have been given, the gray area is often met with victimless crimes. A lot of libertarian ideals don't believe something should be a crime if someone is only hurting themselves. However, others believe that laws are meant to serve a society to keep a society running the way the people who live within it desire. They can also argue that these "victimless" crimes are not necessarily victimless because those who share the society with the individual are exposed to the behavior. For example, I can't pull my pants down and expose myself in a mall. Nobody is harmed by this behavior. But we as a society don't wish to tolerate it. We consider it wrong and there's laws against it. And yet even though there's no victim involved most of society don't feel it should be legal or acceptable to do so. And on and on into infinity we can give examples of laws based on "right or wrong", ethics and morality simply because our government, society and elected legislators decided it should be a certain way. Breaking down the entire criminal law system because people feel some crimes shouldn't be illegal has been the debate of criminal law classes since we started the judicial system. Everyone has different opinions of which laws shouldn't exist and which laws are acceptable to break whether they be speeding laws, levels of BAC while driving, amount of drugs (if any) a person should be allowed to possess, etc. In the end though I think our laws eventually adapt to society. And individuals of the society have a duty and an obligation to abide by the current rules of the land or deal with the consequences that have been provided. Unless of course they wish to break the law to make a stand. And in which case, the adverse is true. In short, I don't feel sorry for a kid who gets caught with some drugs once, twice, three times, etc and ends up in jail. Whether we wish it to be illegal or not doesn't excuse the fact that the law was broken and we should take responsibility for it rather than make excuses. People know the risks when they use drugs and they purposely take that risk. Just like I know the risks when I jaywalk or do 5mph over the speed limit. I know the risks and the consequences and I take my chances when I commit each offense. Now you're saying there's other stuff related to his drug charge. And I don't know the details. But I do know people who have been caught with drugs and they all have a story as to why they got punished more than they deserved. The simple solution would have been to not break the law in the first place. Everyone knows once they get involved with drugs and offenses are likely to be compounded to absurd levels. While I don't think it's necessarily right, I know this and choose not to possess or be in the presence of drugs. Really the only thing I can think of that's really unfair about drugs is when a driver takes on a passenger who has drugs and doesn't know. When they get stopped for a traffic violation the officer finds the drugs and the driver gets charged. That's really the only thing where I can say, yea that's not cool because the "criminal" had no knowledge of wrong-doing and really couldn't have prevented it. | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 07:05 PM
| #133 | ||||
| Guest
| Originally Posted by thomez He? He what? Last time I checked, Paris Hilton was female
 I disagree completely. The law is an excellent basis for right and wrong IMO (or at least a good start to it). | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 07:14 PM
| #134 | ||||
| Pinko Commie Bastard Communist Moscow
| Originally Posted by 03 white zx3 apparently you have jumped into a conversation and have no idea what the fuck is being talked about
 | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 07:39 PM
| #135 | ||||
| Braccae tuae aperiuntur. Reform Party NJ
| The Sheriff now claims Paris's condition is life threatening. For anyone who had doubts about his character and intentions I think they're starting to show now. Unless you think locking her into a medical room of a prison is life-threatening.
Last edited by JaJae; 06-09-2007 at 07:55 PM. | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 07:52 PM
| #136 | ||||
| Guest
| Originally Posted by thomez I was responding to your quote.
 Don't quote me then if you're talking about something else. | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 08:32 PM
| #137 | ||||
| Pinko Commie Bastard Communist Moscow
| Originally Posted by 03 white zx3 you quoted me
| ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 08:52 PM
| #138 | ||||
| One American Family at a Time.  Idealist The OC, California
| Originally Posted by RMNIXON
I understand the point you are making, but, what you are saying is that her income shouldn't be a determinate in her sentence, she should get sentenced like everyone else. By So Cal standards, they are not punishing her the same as they would an illegal alien, with no insurance either. Her sentence is far more extreme than people in poverty get, and I've been in traffic courts several times to see it.
__________________ "People are selfish. But they can also be compassionate and generous, and they care about the country. But not when they feel threatened. That's why this is such a crucial time. We can go in either direction. But if we don't make a choice soon, it will be too late to turn things around. I think people are willing to make the right choice. But they need leadership. They're hungry for leadership." BK/1968 | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 08:55 PM
| #139 | ||||
| One American Family at a Time. Idealist The OC, California
| Originally Posted by JaJae
If she shouldn't be given slack for her money, then she shouldn't be given harsher punishment for it either. Sorry, they are taking this this far because of who she is. I don't think that justice is being handed out correctly... And I don't even like the bitch. | ||||
| |
|
06-09-2007, 09:07 PM
| #140 |
| Guest |
No sympathy for criminals from me.
