Whats going on in Chicago?

[BrianFantana]

They can use any defence they want the only thing they have set or should set stronger is the sentence they get if they are found guilty.

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/06/28/u...datory-life-term-is-upheld-in-drug-cases.html

If there is a mandentory sentence for rape that doesn't stop any defence the court allows.

You either don't understand, or are ignoring, the distinction between ABSOLUTE liability, and STRICT liability offences.

A mandatory sentence for an ABSOLUTE liability offence is entirely different than what I'm talking about.

 

[BrianFantana]

So is that a yes or no? I mean, isn't that better than protesting and screaming about guns until you're blue in the face?

What?

 

[Sir Galahad]

 

[oldshadow]

You either don't understand, or are ignoring, the distinction between ABSOLUTE liability, and STRICT liability offences.

A mandatory sentence for an ABSOLUTE liability offence is entirely different than what I'm talking about.

They knowingly broke the law when they carried the gun.

Progect Exile stood up and I think increasing the mandentory sentences will stand up.

 

[BrianFantana]

They knowingly broke the law when they carried the gun.

Progect Exile stood up and I think increasing the mandentory sentences will stand up.

And you're cut off. Peace.

Come back when you are willing to try to understand what you're responding to before blindly repeating the same nonsense.

 

[My Spot]

I wonder whose gimmick BrianFantana is. Just started posting here despite being a member since 06...

 

[oldshadow]

And you're cut off. Peace.

Come back when you are willing to try to understand what you're responding to before blindly repeating the same nonsense.

I understand what you are talking about but don't agree it applies how you are applying it. I think it would stand up to a supreme court review but maybe you don't.

If you want to end this then fine by me.

We are never going to convenience each other and may always disagree on this but its all good.

 

[BrianFantana]

I understand what you are talking about but don't agree it applies how you are applying it. I think it would stand up to a supreme court review but maybe you don't.

If you want to end this then fine by me.

We are never going to convenience each other and may always disagree on this but its all good.

Criminal law primer, folks: A typical felony requires two parts: actus reus (the guilty act) and mens rea (intent, or a guilty mind). There are limited felonies that do not require a mens rea element, like drunk driving. Those crimes are considered strict liability. To be convicted of drunk driving, you just need to be drunk, and driving. That was deemed OK due to overriding public safety concerns.

I do not believe that a proposal carrying a jail term up to five years ought to be dealt with by strict liability. That's a massive deprivation of liberty and should attract strong constitutional protection. I believe most courts would agree, as they have on cases of strict liability offences in the past.

The problem is you haven't told me why you think it would hold up. You just say it will. That's not an argument, it's a statement. A bald, unsupported statement.

 

[BrianFantana]

I wonder whose gimmick BrianFantana is. Just started posting here despite being a member since 06...

Ask around, Sherlock.

 

[oldshadow]

Criminal law primer, folks: A typical felony requires two parts: actus reus (the guilty act) and mens rea (intent, or a guilty mind). There are limited felonies that do not require a mens rea element, like drunk driving. Those crimes are considered strict liability. To be convicted of drunk driving, you just need to be drunk, and driving. That was deemed OK due to overriding public safety concerns.

I do not believe that a proposal carrying a jail term up to five years ought to be dealt with by strict liability. That's a massive deprivation of liberty and should attract strong constitutional protection. I believe most courts would agree, as they have on cases of strict liability offences in the past.

The problem is you haven't told me why you think it would hold up. You just say it will. That's not an argument, it's a statement. A bald, unsupported statement.

I know it's not a source you may like but we can start here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Exile

I can't find anywhere it was overturned.

I can find people that didn't lIke it but nowhere it was overturned.

And actually it was supported by a Democrat (Tim Kaine) when he was mayor (even a blind squirrel comes to mind).

 

[Avenger]

I wonder whose gimmick BrianFantana is. Just started posting here despite being a member since 06...

The dude got his shit pushed in back in the old Bareknuckle OT and banned afterwards. He was probably unbanned when Sherdog switch boards.

 

[BrianFantana]

I know it's not a source you may like but we can start here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Exile

I can't find anywhere it was overturned.

I can find people that didn't lIke it but nowhere it was overturned.

And actually it was supported by a Democrat (Tim Kaine) when he was mayor (even a blind squirrel comes to mind).

It's a government policy. A policy cannot be "overturned" by a court unless there is a test case brought that challenges the legislation on constitutional grounds. Even then, if a case was successful, the policy would be ruled of no force and effect, not vacated or overturned.

 

[spin]

Not sure what we can legally do about it.

Where gangs have taken over, I'd be ok with sending in the military to take back what as they've essentially seized American territory.

But there's a lot of precedents to think about with such an action that I haven't thought through.


I know the gangs have to go, to be killed to be more precise, I just don't know how to rightly do the deed.

 

[ralphc1]

Just seen the numbers for 2016 and surely these numbers cant be true?
4331 shooting victims
762 homicide

This place seems lawless and there seem to be so little talk about it. Is Americas way of dealing with places where there is no laws just pretend they dont exist? On average almost 12 shootings a day and more than 2 people get killed every day? I thought my hometown was a mess with 16 murder in 2016 and 30 murders in our whole state in Sweden.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-bloodiest-12-months-20-YEARS-Windy-City.html

The population of the Chicago area is about the same as the population of Sweden in a much smaller area. Most of the killings involve the sale and distribution of drugs and are criminals killing each other.

Past statistics show that 75% of those murdered are Black and 71% of the convicted murderers are Black. 77% of the victims had a prior arrest history.

The Black community doesn't like to work with the police so revenge killings escalate the problem. The police are weary of the bullshit they get for attempting to stop the killing.

 

[Philosopher_King]

Oh, I know what the idea is. The idea hasn't worked for two centuries, but they keep clinging to the notion it will work. The US has over 300 million guns, and the highest rate of gun violence anywhere in the world. The guns aren't protecting anyone to any significant degree.

But everyone knows that. They may be less familiar with what happened in Australia, after strict gun law reform was introduced in 1996 following a string of mass shootings: http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2530362.

I will let anyone and everyone peruse that study (they will not) and offer pointed criticisms of same (charming, I know).

You are ignoring some important things in your comments. For one, there is not a definite correlation between the number of guns available, gun laws, and gun violence. In the American context alone there are states with strict and lax gun laws, Chicago happens to have some of the strictest in the nation. International examples such as Canada and Switzerland show that there can be relatively high levels of gun ownership without an increase in gun crime. The problem in America boils down to poverty and demographics. If you look at gun violence, especially in Chicago, the vast majority of the murders and shootings come from a few neighborhoods which are poor and black. I am insinuating that blacks have been disenfranchised historically, not that they are genetically prone to violence, obviously. Given these facts I do not understand how banning guns can be seen as anything other than masking a deeper issue. The most obvious answer is not always the correct one.

 

[BrianFantana]

You are ignoring some important things in your comments. For one, there is not a definite correlation between the number of guns available, gun laws, and gun violence. In the American context alone there are states with strict and lax gun laws, Chicago happens to have some of the strictest in the nation. International examples such as Canada and Switzerland show that there can be relatively high levels of gun ownership without an increase in gun crime. The problem in America boils down to poverty and demographics. If you look at gun violence, especially in Chicago, the vast majority of the murders and shootings come from a few neighborhoods which are poor and black. I am insinuating that blacks have been disenfranchised historically, not that they are genetically prone to violence, obviously. Given these facts I do not understand how banning guns can be seen as anything other than masking a deeper issue. The most obvious answer is not always the correct one.

Read through the rest of my posts in this thread and you will come to the conclusion we agree. This was just one of a series of studies relating to gun violence I found interesting.

 

[Thunderchild]

Never change War Room, never change. Always entertaining.

 

[Philosopher_King]

Read through the rest of my posts in this thread and you will come to the conclusion we agree. This was just one of a series of studies relating to gun violence I found interesting.

gotcha

 

[TeTe]

It's cuz these fat fucks think that fucking pizza has to be a fucking real pie

This is what real pizza should look like

You're delusional

 

[TeTe]

Also, people also dump on Chicago because of the murders here.. but keep in mind that per capita murder rate is much lower here than a lot of other US cities including St. Louis and Detroit.

Not saying that the number of shooting we have here is a good thing.. but the numbers that are posted are for a city of 3 million people.