Police ? unarmed kid holding Wii controller...
Options
Comments
-
on the other hand, i absolutely DON'T want to poll America and run with the result when it comes to resolving verdicts or ? knows what elsePoll America and I bet they did not agree with the Trayvon Martin verdict and others. You don't need kings or people making decisions for everyone.
Agreed. you start doing things that way then whoever has control of the media makes all of the decisions because they can censor and spin things however they want. -
i mean, you know that's what i am basically saying, right?housemouse wrote: »Any officer foolish enough to speak out on the injustices of the police department get's rode on mafia style. Look at what they did to Christopher Dorner.
but also, ? Christopher Dorner. you're not morally justified in going on a killing spree in this circumstance. we can get into his weird manifesto later.
-
on the other hand, i absolutely DON'T want to poll America and run with the result when it comes to resolving verdicts or ? knows what elsePoll America and I bet they did not agree with the Trayvon Martin verdict and others. You don't need kings or people making decisions for everyone.
I agree that polling American's or voting to come up with verdicts may not be ideal but I would rather that than some group of lawyers coming together deciding for the jury what can be heard and what they should ignore and pay attention to in order to decide a case. At the end of these cases all they ever have to justify these verdicts that people don't agree with is there hold cards of being professionals and knowing the laws better than the average citizens. -
well, right or wrong, lawyers and judges are supposed to have expertise in the field and a knowledge of the law, so honestly, they're better suited to make the calls than the average dude on the street. doesn't mean the system doesn't have issues, to be sure.I agree that polling American's or voting to come up with verdicts may not be ideal but I would rather that than some group of lawyers coming together deciding for the jury what can be heard and what they should ignore and pay attention to in order to decide a case.
-
well, right or wrong, lawyers and judges are supposed to have expertise in the field and a knowledge of the law, so honestly, they're better suited to make the calls than the average dude on the street. doesn't mean the system doesn't have issues, to be sure.I agree that polling American's or voting to come up with verdicts may not be ideal but I would rather that than some group of lawyers coming together deciding for the jury what can be heard and what they should ignore and pay attention to in order to decide a case.
I disagree with that. Lawyers and judges do not always exhibit professionalism and they do not exhibit superior knowledge of the system. Judges get in groups in backrooms and make decisions on how to interpret things when they are not clear cut. The interpretation then comes from the opinions of a judge not facts. They all come to agreement and that is what goes even if it is a straight up distortion of the law which happens frequently. -
...which is why i stated "doesn't mean the system doesn't have issues, to be sure."I disagree with that. Lawyers and judges do not always exhibit professionalism and they do not exhibit superior knowledge of the system.
but it's not like you're going to get anything other than "opinions, not facts" if you're polling the masses on legal decisions. the idea is that lawyers/judges SHOULD be able to make actual legal arguments. the average man in the street simply cannot do that.
