Nike closes landmark Portland Factory Store due to theft

[Husker_Du]

Just now, Ban Basketball said:

Although I don't play the stupidity game of "red state vs. blue state, " (whatever that means), but without looking and going by what has almost always been true, homicide rates are higher in red states than blue states. 

Those numbers have always perfectly tracked with homicide rates by firearms.  Much higher in red states. 

so let's not bring red v. blue into it (even though the correlation is all up in your face - as in 'they literally ran on that platform' and 'cashless bail is now ubiquitous'.

but anyway - answer the question 

is it a good thing for society (regardless of the state or politics) that less violent crime is being penalized? 

[Ban Basketball]

7 minutes ago, jross said:

Yes -- takes less than 5 minutes.  

False.

[Husker_Du]

Just now, Ban Basketball said:

That would be false because of mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines.  The crimes are indeed being prosecuted, as or burgeoning prison population testifies to.

are you braindead? 

what do mandatory minimum sentences have to due with anything IF THEY'RE NOT PROSECUTING!!!??

[Ban Basketball]

1 minute ago, Husker_Du said:

so let's not bring red v. blue into it (even though the correlation is all up in your face - as in 'they literally ran on that platform' and 'cashless bail is now ubiquitous'.

but anyway - answer the question 

is it a good thing for society (regardless of the state or politics) that less violent crime is being penalized? 

Well, less of it, in fact,  is not being penalized. 

However,  if that was the case,  yes,  it would be awful.  No one would support that. 

[Ban Basketball]

3 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

are you braindead? 

what do mandatory minimum sentences have to due with anything IF THEY'RE NOT PROSECUTING!!!??

Because these sentencing guidelines,  in place since the 90's, require that inmates serve a minimum number of years for their offenses.  In Iowa, for instance,  first degree is mandatory life in prison and everyone is prosecuted. 

No violent crimes are being excused,  outside of not guilty verdicts. 

Edited October 4, 2023 by Ban Basketball

[jross]

6 minutes ago, Ban Basketball said:

False.

You need to ask the right question and you will find the answer quickly.

https://www.kwch.com/video/2023/09/04/sheriff-responds-murder-suspect-bonding-out-jail/

https://abc7chicago.com/chicago-shooting-vera-lounge-ricky-video/12568760/

...
A SHORT LIST OF MURDERERS RELEASED TO MURDER AGAIN
https://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html

Edited October 4, 2023 by jross
Dropping a link to repeat murderers

[Ban Basketball]

4 minutes ago, jross said:

You need to ask the right question and you will find the answer quickly.

https://www.kwch.com/video/2023/09/04/sheriff-responds-murder-suspect-bonding-out-jail/

https://abc7chicago.com/chicago-shooting-vera-lounge-ricky-video/12568760/

...

Neither case is speaking to what Husker and others are speaking to. He's saying people aren't being prosecuted. Baloney.

The first one the guy posted bond.  When has that not happened? Bond has been available to such offenders forever. 

The second case? Yep, a repeat offender.  Nearly 70% of our inmates return upon five years after release. 

Edited October 4, 2023 by Ban Basketball

[Plasmodium]

13 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

god, i hate that. one of the worst lines of all time. and inaccurate. the only people that use it are people that think they're smart.

anyway - how am i the one clutching pearls? i'm clutching pearls b/c, quite literally rapists and murders and violent assault criminals walk the street and commit even more horrific crimes? you think that's pearl clutching or you think that perhaps those victims should have been served better?

the real pearl clutching is from people like you that say 'but but but jails don't do anything'

and then murmur something about shoplifting while yet again refusing to acknowledge that this applies to violent crimes.

i could list, ad nauseam, case after case where someone was awaiting trial or recently released early from prison who repeatedly committed more violent crime.

what in your beetle brain leads to conclude that violent, repeat offenders walking the streets is a good policy? 

I hate people cutting other people's words out of context.  But I live with it.

Please provide examples of murderers walking away.

You are a pearl clutcher because the things that anger you so much don't even exist in the way you shout about them existing.  And you are angry about a lot of things.

[jross]

4 minutes ago, Ban Basketball said:

Neither case is speaking to what Husker and others are speaking to. He's saying people aren't being prosecuted. Baloney.

The first one the guy posted bond.  When has that not happened? Bond has been available to such offenders forever. 

The second case? Yep, a repeat offender.  Nearly 70% of our inmates return upon five years after release. 

WTF would release a murderer?

WTF releases a murder suspect with cashless bail?

https://nypost.com/2022/03/10/criminal-indicted-on-murder-charge-freed-without-bail-by-nyc-judge/

THIS IS soft on crime.

Edited October 4, 2023 by jross

[Husker_Du]

5 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

I hate people cutting other people's words out of context.  But I live with it.

Please provide examples of murderers walking away.

You are a pearl clutcher because the things that anger you so much don't even exist in the way you shout about them existing.  And you are angry about a lot of things.

i don't think you know the definition of 'pearl clutching'.

it means 'faux outrage in an attempt to get others to sympathize.'

that's not what i'm about. 

and it's not anger. it's me being utterly perplexed on why the concept of 'violent crime is terrible for the victims and makes society dangerous'

is met with 'well, see, here's the thing' from wokesters on the left. 

[Plasmodium]

Just now, Husker_Du said:

i don't think you know the definition of 'pearl clutching'.

it means 'faux outrage in an attempt to get others to sympathize.'

that's not what i'm about. 

and it's not anger. it's me being utterly perplexed on why the concept of 'violent crime is terrible for the victims and makes society dangerous'

is met with 'well, see, here's the thing' from wokesters on the left. 

When perplexed you lash out with insults?

[Ban Basketball]

14 minutes ago, jross said:

WTF would release a murderer?

WTF releases a murder suspect with cashless bail?

https://nypost.com/2022/03/10/criminal-indicted-on-murder-charge-freed-without-bail-by-nyc-judge/

THIS IS soft on crime.

That's a different matter than what we are all speaking to.  This is also exceptionally rare. 

In states and areas where they are reviewing their bail systems nearly all do not release the most violent offenders. 

And,  yes,  this was a bad mistake. 

Edited October 4, 2023 by Ban Basketball

[Husker_Du]

24 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

When perplexed you lash out with insults?

yes, b/c it's about as basic and elementary a topic as there is.

 

[Plasmodium]

30 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

yes, b/c it's about as basic and elementary a topic as there is.

 

When was the golden age of crime and punishment in the USA?  Was it immediately prior to the leftist takeover?  Or is there some type of reform happening because there is widespread discontent with the existing judicial system?

[Husker_Du]

i'm certainly no historical expert on the topic, Plas.

but on the heels of the George Floyd riots many DA candidates have ran on platforms of 'soft on crime'. Most of these were funded from a single financier. 

at the same time, prosecution rates have dropped and many states (illinois, colorado, new york) either partially or fully did away with cash bail or limited bonds (meaning more people awaiting trial for violent crimes were out on the street).

https://www.google.com/search?q=list+of+soros+backed+DA's&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS929US929&oq=list+of+soros+backed+DA's&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDQ0MDFqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[Plasmodium]

6 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

i'm certainly no historical expert on the topic, Plas.

but on the heels of the George Floyd riots many DA candidates have ran on platforms of 'soft on crime'. Most of these were funded from a single financier. 

at the same time, prosecution rates have dropped and many states (illinois, colorado, new york) either partially or fully did away with cash bail or limited bonds (meaning more people awaiting trial for violent crimes were out on the street).

https://www.google.com/search?q=list+of+soros+backed+DA's&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS929US929&oq=list+of+soros+backed+DA's&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDQ0MDFqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

Are you advocating for campaign finance reform?  I'm on board with that.

I'm not defending the cashless bail system but I don't think anyone can argue the existing system is fair.

[mspart]

 

4 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

Are you advocating for campaign finance reform?  I'm on board with that.

I'm not defending the cashless bail system but I don't think anyone can argue the existing system is fair.

If you are not defending cashless bail, but think the system is not fair currently, what do you propose?

mspart

[Bigbrog]

Funny who is posting facts and who is just trying to nitpick and attack words....LOL

[Plasmodium]

2 hours ago, mspart said:

 

If you are not defending cashless bail, but think the system is not fair currently, what do you propose?

mspart

We should look at model which is predicated on income and assets.  For serious crimes, especially violent ones, raise it dramatically for people with more resources rather than lower it for the ones with fewer resources.  For lesser crimes, cashless bail works for me.  There is an uncomfortable middle for me and I’m sure everyone else.

It shouldn’t be solely the bail system either.  Fines and penalties need to be income based as well.  For example, if Bill Gates got caught drunk driving why shouldn’t he pay a billion dollar fine or more?  10000 dollars means nothing to him so it is not punishment.

[Husker_Du]

2 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

Are you advocating for campaign finance reform? 

i'm sure you and your cronies will take potshots at me for this but...

i don't talk to talk. i don't know enough about campaign fundraising and laws to speak confidently on the subject.

knee jerk reaction: 'yes'. 

 

[GreatWhiteNorth]

13 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

I'm sure this is where him and I would diverge (like probably every other topic there is)...I am not a lenient person for criminals...especially repeat offenders.

Don't be so sure.

I'm a bit surprised that a post from some dummy like 'jross' would affect your opinion in any way.

[jross]

[Ban Basketball]

10 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

i'm sure you and your cronies will take potshots at me for this but...

i don't talk to talk. i don't know enough about campaign fundraising and laws to speak confidently on the subject.

knee jerk reaction: 'yes'. 

 

I can always respect that.  It may not seem like it but I have a ton of topics I don't speak to because I know little to nothing about. 

[Bigbrog]

11 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

It shouldn’t be solely the bail system either.  Fines and penalties need to be income based as well.  For example, if Bill Gates got caught drunk driving why shouldn’t he pay a billion dollar fine or more?  10000 dollars means nothing to him so it is not punishment.

This sorta of sounds good on paper until you really think about it...where does income-based pricing of things stop?  Should the cost of goods be income based as well...i.e., a car for Gates should cost $1.4 billion?  How about his groceries?  etc.  That is why it isn't a good idea to base things on cost.  Here is a better idea...just don't break laws...and if you do, you pay the price (jail and/or $$).  If someone has more money than another person that is a whole separate issue...which I have no problem with.

[Plasmodium]

17 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

This sorta of sounds good on paper until you really think about it...where does income-based pricing of things stop?  Should the cost of goods be income based as well...i.e., a car for Gates should cost $1.4 billion?  How about his groceries?  etc.  That is why it isn't a good idea to base things on cost.  Here is a better idea...just don't break laws...and if you do, you pay the price (jail and/or $$).  If someone has more money than another person that is a whole separate issue...which I have no problem with.

Just don't break the law? No fines and penalties?  Municipalities and counties throughout the land will go broke.

Totally disagree with you on every level, so all is right with the world today.