namelesstavern.net

Would you do it?

First and foremost I would abolish the jury system. Nothing spells disaster like twelve slobbering baboons who can't tell the difference between DNA and a baseball deciding the fate of the accused. The average American is a moron, yes that's pretty cynical, but true. In no way shape or form should the fate of a man / woman's life be determined by a panel of imbeciles. Rather than 12 drooling fools, I would create a system where cases are determined by an odd number of judges (say 3), who would sit through the proceedings, and determine guilt or innocences based on the evidence.

Secondly, I would create a law that mandates prison sentences for attorneys who are caught violating the law to increase their chances of winning cases. If you're an attorney who is caught prompting your client to commit perjury, or blatantly hiding evidence you will get 10 years in a federal prison.

I would remove cable TV, gyms and law libraries from all prisons. We would return to the days of breaking big rocks into little rocks. You would get zero assistance for a college education. I would, however, offer some type of job training for those who commit lesser offenses. I would also reduce the amount of health care you would receive. Need a heart transplant? Poor baby should have thought about that before you did what you did. I would, however, provide you with a band aid for whatever boo boo's you might acquire while being a guest of the state or fed gov.

I would also crack down on punishments (here's just a few).

DUI would get you 5 years on your first offense.
Killing someone while behind the wheel drunk would get you life with no parole.
First and Second degree (depending on the situation) murder would get you death.
Child molestation would get you death.
Major drug dealing would get you death.
Rape would get you death.
Using a weapon (of ANY type) in a violent crime would get you life with no parole.
Repeat offenders would get life with no parole.

And by life I mean just that... for the rest of your pathetic natural life.

Now of course each case has to be determined on its own merits. A man who breaks into a convenience store to steal a loaf of bread to feed his family isn't going to get life, or even a prison sentence. He'd be put on probation and ordered to pay for the cost of the items he stole (whether through work, or other). However, da homie in da hood who shots and kills someone for their shoes... you guessed it... a nice big fat syringe of potassium chloride has his name all over it.

And, I have more... but all in all I had people so scared shitless to commit crime they might actually reconsider do it in the first place. And, if they do, then we simply get rid of them, period.

Any crime whose only victim is the perpetrator (ie not wearing a motorcycle helmet, no seat belt, drug use/possession, etc) would no longer be a crime. Remove all the useless laws on the books and get down to the basics.

I like the idea of a "fair fight" in the old western days. Duels can be held publicly and fairly at a certain place/time.

Everyone over the age of 18 should be allowed and possibly be encouraged to carry a weapon. If you misuse that weapon well pay the price.

If you sue someone frivolously (IE you loose your suit) then you should be forced to pay an equal sum to the person you sued. This would hopefully eradicate frivolous lawsuits. If you cannot afford to pay it then you would be allowed to work for the company you sued or you could perform some menial civil job to work off your debt to the individual.

Any crime perpetrated by an adult against a minor would automatically double the sentence. This is within reason, if a 18 year old robs a 17 year old then there is not a significant difference between ages to jsutify doubling the sentence. If the sentence for that crime is already death, then the perpetrator gets "life" (I think "life" is currently a 40 year sentence?) and if they survive long enough to complete the term then execute them at the end of the term.

If a prisoner wants something more than basic life support (bread and water) either they or family/friends must pay for it, maybe a blanket could be rewarded for good behavior. no perks, no rewards, nothing but a cold dark cell and some slop thown in once or twice a day. We arent here to rehabilitate you, we are here to punish you for your crimes against society,if you really wanted to learn to read then you should have done so befoer you commited your crime. No finding Jesus does not constitute rehabilitation, serving your term is about as close to being rehabilitated you are going to get.

Prison time is not socialization time. If you are sentenced to prison then you can serve your term making little rocks from big rocks or performing a task for society (cleaning up highways, building roads, something that has some civil value) during the day and once you return from work duty you go back into solitary (read item above, cold dark cell w/ some slop thrown in once or twice a day)

Murder=death, rape=death, assault with intent to kill=death, theft= long damn time in prison, violent crimes=death, any repeat crime=double the sentence, Any sentence over 40 years=death

Parole is a thing of the past, you are sentenced to 30 years then you serve 30 years if you misbehave in prison, then "hello old Sparky"

The only money the gov't should have to pay for your upkeep is the prison itself and the guards that populate it and that cost can be offset by the work the prisoners perform. Taxpayers should not be saddled with the cost of miscreants.

Prison guards found going above and beyond the harshness of normal prison get to join the prisoners. Any lawyers caught trying to stretch the law in the favor of their client get an equal sentence. Anyone found abusing their position (IE politicians who steal or manipulate the system for their own gain) gets charged with an appropriate crime (in that case theft)

Lock'em down boys

Hey, what about statutory rape guys? DEATH FOR SOME UNDERAGE KIDS FUCKING? GG.

I'd just invent a drug that made people tell the 100% truth, give it to the accused, then ask them if they did it


npnp

Enact the Judge System.

The Judges are police, judge, and executioner if necessary, and their word is absolute. The only thing preventing them from being a totally oppressive police state is the psychological conditioning they receive.

10sun wrote:Hey, what about statutory rape guys? DEATH FOR SOME UNDERAGE KIDS FUCKING? GG.

I am pretty sure that statutory rape is only when an adult has sex with a minor, not if 2 minors are bumping uglies.

veeneedefeesh wrote:

10sun wrote:Hey, what about statutory rape guys? DEATH FOR SOME UNDERAGE KIDS FUCKING? GG.

I am pretty sure that statutory rape is only when an adult has sex with a minor, not if 2 minors are bumping uglies.

no.

well then that falls under the category of useless laws that should be revoked. Its not like that if 50 years ago you were unmarried at the age of 19 you were considered an old maid. For the purpose of this discussion define rape as an adult forcefully having sex with a non-consenting adult.

Abolish the death penalty.

I'd like to see all drugs made legal, but if I couldn't have that, reduce small time posession and dealing charges to a slap on the wrist. The only exception is drug dealing to minors, which should be dealt with very harshly. If all drugs were made legal, I would add laws against doing anything stupid while intoxicated and make the penalties for such laws very very harsh.

Make cases of statutory rape that have two people who are obviously able to make their own choices (ie 19 year old and 16 year old) no longer illegal.

Legalize victimless crimes of prostitution and gambling.

Increase prison time murderers, child molestors, and violent rapists by a lot.

Abolish hate crime laws.


Im braindead right now, so I might come up with more later.

Pretty much agree with Yamori.

Abolish or severely reduce penalties for most 'victimless' crimes ie drug use and prostitution. Legalize, regulate and tax most drugs, like we do with tobacco and alcohol now.

Abolish the death penalty.

Severely increase the penalties for violent/negligent crimes. Im not talking just prison time increases. Im talkin chain gangs and such. Make all prisoners convicted of violent crimes work at least 40 hours a week, hard labor, skilled work, whatever. Just keep them busy and producing.

Lastly (liberal alert!), I would redouble our efforts on rehabilitation of criminals. Probably would involve a total redesign of the prison system. No more anal rape, no more being forced to join racist gangs or any of that shit. Just dont see how anyone can come out of a maximum security prison rehabilitated as they stand now.

I also agree with Yamori.

Make Jail time solely for violent criminals.

Make Drug possession and nonviolent crimes punishable with more monetary and civil duty requirements.

I've always been against the Death Penalty. It is not a deterrent and the appeals process is overtly costly.

Although Scoota's Judge Dredd plan does have merit, also

Public executions! Put them on the television on a seperate channel. Death TV? People who watch might think twice before commiting serious crimes.

Also, I would limit appeals. 2 would be it. After that, you do the time.

All drugs should be legal. Let the government tax the hell out of it and make a profit.

I also believe that ALL cars should be made with that handy, dandy on board breathalizer. If you still get pulled over for a DUI (because you had a friend "blow" for you) then you AND the person who started your car should lose your licenses forever! On a side note, I think it should be a hell of a lot harder and more expensive to get a driver's license in the first place. In Germany, it can cost up to 1000.00 Euro (over $1200.00 US) to get a license. This includes mandatory driving schools.

Trivial lawsuits, such as the old lady who spilled hot coffee in her lap at MacDonalds and sued, burglers who hurt themselves breaking into someone's house and sueing and people slipping on wet spots in supermarkets and sueing, should be thrown out IMMEDIATELY! Common sense has left the building...

And last, but not least, there should be more tolerance. All this crap about people getting in trouble at work from telling a dirty or racial joke is nonsense. If you don't like what you hear, WALK THE FUCK AWAY! Or ignore it and consider the source.

Agrajag wrote:Trivial lawsuits, such as the old lady who spilled hot coffee in her lap at MacDonalds and sued.

You don't know what <i>actually</i> happened in that case, do you? Not that there aren't loads of trivial lawsuits out there, but this wasn't exactly trivial.

Abolish "trial by jury", instead do 3 judges. (12 amateurs have no right to deside case)

Abolish "desigion by precident" and figure out case by case. (just cause some idiot made stupid desigion 30 years ago, should not affect the case)

Amend "lying under oath" to give false vitnes same punishment, the convicted received due to his testimony.

Reform prisons to be manufacturing/labor camps. Prisoners will work to pay for upkeep and imprisoment, as well as paying victims. Rest of money goes to pay for country needs.

No paroles.

Muder = Death Penalty
Rape = Death Penalty
Kidnaping= Death Penalty
Terrorism= Death Penalty
Drug Dealing = Death Penalty
Any type of Theft/Robbery= Prison untill refunded victim double ammount.


Much clearer definition of laws, where "average joe" can read any legal document and understand it.

I'll come up with more later

Agrajag wrote:I also believe that ALL cars should be made with that handy, dandy on board breathalizer.

hey, i like this idea!

it's called InterLock, and you have to blow into it to unlock the ignition. if you blow anything above a .000, the thing shuts down and won't let you try again for 15 minutes. ingenious device, really-- i read somewhere that the arizona legislature passed a bill requiring that all cars sold in AZ after 2006 had to have one installed. the bill is kind of extreme so i don't know if it'll survive long enough, but they're on the right track IMHO.

although .000 is a bit too demanding i must say. if it were mandatory for all drivers, i'd say raise the shutoff threshold to .020 (the legal limit for minors) because seriously, if you're at a .015 and it's 3am and the party's over and you just want to go home, you shouldn't have to wait half an hour

Diabolik wrote:

Agrajag wrote:Trivial lawsuits, such as the old lady who spilled hot coffee in her lap at MacDonalds and sued.

You don't know what <i>actually</i> happened in that case, do you? Not that there aren't loads of trivial lawsuits out there, but this wasn't exactly trivial.

Are you fucking retarded?

I don't care if they heated the coffee until it turned into plasma, she's the stupid bitch who spilled it on herself. Who's at fault?

HER! Ding ding ding, you guessed it!

Make all judges and aspiring judges take an exam which would reveal their political standings and views on social issues. If they they are liberal and/or atheistic, then disbar the current judges, and if it is found that they are liberal and/or atheistic aspiring judges, then throw their resumes in the trash because they will be nothing but future trouble-makers.

Harrison wrote:Are you fucking retarded?

I don't care if they heated the coffee until it turned into plasma, she's the stupid bitch who spilled it on herself. Who's at fault?

HER! Ding ding ding, you guessed it!

So if Coca-Cola created an unnecessarily dangerous condition in their product... say, cyanide in the glass bottles, and if someone cut themselves with a broken glass and died, it's their fault for cutting themselves?

That restaurant was warned *numerous times* that their coffee was too hot to serve and they did nothing. No one said she wasn't a fucktard for spilling it on herself, but what should have just been an "ow, I spilled hot coffee on myself! gotta change my blouse now" situation became a "MOTHER OF ALL THAT IS GOOD AND PURE IN THIS WORLD, MY LABIA ARE MELTING TOGETHER FROM THE 200 DEGREE COFFEE AND I REQUIRE MEDICAL ASSISTANCE" situation because of that restaurant's negligence.

I'd call *you* a retard, but that would be insulting retards. Your stupidity has officially been upgraded to "Oh my God, someone call 911, he is terminally stupid and may forget to breathe soon."

*shrug* I'm just not going to agree here.

Mindia wrote:Make all judges and aspiring judges take an exam which would reveal their political standings and views on social issues. If they they are liberal and/or atheistic, then disbar the current judges, and if it is found that they are liberal and/or atheistic aspiring judges, then throw their resumes in the trash because they will be nothing but future trouble-makers.

Ah, Mindia. I <3 you in the gayest way imaginable.

Diabolik wrote:So if Coca-Cola created an unnecessarily dangerous condition in their product... say, cyanide in the glass bottles, and if someone cut themselves with a broken glass and died, it's their fault for cutting themselves?

If they cut themselves because their banging the class bottle against a wall then maybe it is .
If you decide to take the top off your coffee in the car, who is to blame? I will admit the coffee was surved to hot, though it did meat the comanys regulations for coffe temperature, and those reulations have not changed to this day. Just today they have those nifty litle "Caution, contents may be hot" written across them in all kinds of languages so you cant even claim you couldn't read it.
On a related note, 2 years later a women sued for the same incident, except she burned her ancle, she also sued Walmart because they sold the cup holder the coffee was in, she sued the cup manufacturer and Get this, she sued her mother who was the driver because as the driver she was responsible for everyone in the car.

Diabolik wrote:

Agrajag wrote:Trivial lawsuits, such as the old lady who spilled hot coffee in her lap at MacDonalds and sued.

You don't know what actually happened in that case, do you? Not that there aren't loads of trivial lawsuits out there, but this wasn't exactly trivial.

Not to beat a dead horse, but in my eyes this was a trivial lawsuit. She purchased the coffee. Coffee is served HOT. She received the coffee and proceeded to spill it on herself. Common sense would put her at fault. The MacDonald's employee didn't spill it on her. She did it herself.

It's people who think like you, Diabolik, that make a mockery of the legal system by condoning these trivial lawsuits. Either that or you have no common sense and cannot see the flaw. Your choice.

Now see if there was the threat that if she lost this lawsuit she would have to pay McD's the amount she was suing for then I doubt she would be spending so much time cluttering up the court system.

In criminal cases I would add something I believe the English have.
Instead of just guilty and not guilty like we have now,
add the concept of 'not proven'
Guilty means they are guilty as one would expect that mean.
Not Guilty means just that, not a mistrial, but that the jury decides that person didn't do it and can't be tried for that crime again, unlike a mistrial or similar we have now.
Not proven, is basically what we think of as not guilty in the USA now. The case was inconclusive or mistrail or some other such thing, but the defendant was found neither guilty nor non-guilty and thus if more evidences shows up, the trial can be done again.

That would be another thing. If you lose a lawsuit, then you should have to pay all court costs. That might keep the idiots from filing.