NPR - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for NPR:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
cop puts himself in front of a vehicle so he can shoot the driver... its like southpark when they have to shout 'theyre coming right at us' before wildly shooting whatever it is they want dead.
for stolen liquor. this cop thought it was ok to shoot a human being over stolen liquor.
Even in South Park, they took that away from them. They had to do it to control the populations in a later episode. Of course, that is the true reason they are doing it in real life, just a different type of controlling the population
I’m one of them. Been converting entire chunks of an otherwise bland, uninteresting lawn to pollinator friendly patches. We have a certified milkweed garden for monarchs, entire sections full of drought-tolerant native plants, and rabbits have started living underneath the “canopy” of the flowering shrubs. The half of our lawn that’s still grass is easily 10x the maintenance burden that our gardens are, and we’ve already developed a plan to phase out our front lawn entirely. Some of the grass in the back is good for picnics and dog play, but we’re going to get rid of anything that’s not actually used. Only problem is most of it’s bermuda, which is a fucking PAIN to get rid of by hand.
How it started when we first dug up the grass, and how it’s going. We didn’t realize butterfly bushes were bad when we first started, so we’re killing them off one-by-one. The first dead one is in the background (tall bare twigs), and the dwarf BB is keeping our nectar supply up while most of the other plants have stopped flowering for the summer. It’s still very much a work in progress, but it’s starting to stabilize with some of the plants being more resilient than others.
Only problem is most of it’s bermuda, which is a fucking PAIN to get rid of by hand
Get yourself an Action Hoe, you basically run it back and forth and it digs/cuts the roots out. It’s very upsetting how easy it makes weeding the first time you use it, turns an hour long job to something you can do in 15 min.
I don’t understand how arbitration ever came to be. It completely bypass the court systems, the very court systems that are put in place exactly for the purpose of making these type of decisions.
It’s meant for B2B lawsuits, so they can both avoid extra litigation costs. They forced it onto consumers because they wanted to win more. They get to choose their arbitrator and avoid more public cases.
There has been some push back in recent years. This article by Consumer Reports shows some ways as to how people have been fighting back.
It’s a perversion of justice because of how its used to oppress people, that’s for sure. The last two places I rented had mandatory binding arbitration by an entity of the Landlord’s choosing, and in practice that means you’re completely at the legal mercy and whim of someone else.
It might as well read that I agree to sign away all my rights, and yet, people need a place to live. What choice do we have?
It doesn’t completely bypass the courts. Arbitrators don’t have the authority to enforce anything by themselves.
After both sides present their case, an arbitrator will write an opinion. That opinion must still be sent to an actual judge who checks it for errors and who has to take responsibility for enforcing it. Though it’s rare, judges have on occasion thrown out the arbitrator’s opinion.
Foreign Affairs - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Foreign Affairs:
> MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Boy, for a state which prides itself for its self-reliance and independence, Texas sure does depend upon the federal government and its neighboring states a lot.
This is more a “the cruelty is the point” situation. Dividing up families, keeping prisoners out of reach of their lawyers, and ferreting away anyone who might implicate the state in liability for criminal abuse is what’s driving a lot of this.
The goal is to convince people to “self-deport” rather than endure a Kafka-esque legal state.
The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for The Guardian:
> MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
> Wikipedia about this source
Children tried as adults were sentenced to a little more than three years in prison on average for third-degree felonies — around 50% longer than the average sentence given to adults for the same class of offense. The vast majority of all felony charges are third-degree offenses, which are the lowest class of felony crimes and include burglary, some types of assault, drug possession and certain DUI offenses.
Children and adults had similar average sentences for more serious offenses that fall under first and second-degree felonies.
Seriousness of charges isn’t necessarily the same as seriousness of crime. I read more about Knight’s case and it sounds like them departing from sentencing guidelines for armed robbery happened for the same reason as them wanting to charge him as an adult - I.e. that his actions were worse than you would think just from reading the name of the charge.
For serious offenses, they get treated the same. The only difference is for third-degree felonies, which it sounds like would be the main circumstance where that correlation would come into play. Why wouldn’t there be a difference in sentencing, when you’re specifically selecting for the more serious circumstances on the juvenile side and not on the adult side of the data you’re comparing?
Because if you are selecting for more serious circumstances, higher charges would apply. Giving them a lesser charge, but a longer sentence, doesn’t make sense.
That is the entire point of the article, disproportionate sentencing for the same charges.
Seriousness of charges isn’t necessarily the same as seriousness of crime.
And:
it sounds like them departing from sentencing guidelines for armed robbery happened for the same reason as them wanting to charge him as an adult - I.e. that his actions were worse than you would think just from reading the name of the charge.
Not every third degree felony is identical to every other third degree felony. There are ones where the circumstances of the case are going to warrant a longer sentence, and those are probably going to overlap with the ones where the circumstances of the case would warrant charging a juvenile as an adult.
And, the least serious category of felonies are going to have more "space" for more serious circumstances to exist, and so it would make sense how those have this anomalous thing exist with them, that doesn't exist with the more serious felonies where the charge better encompasses the full seriousness of the crime.
What is more likely is that more of the minors who are charged as adults are minorities, which is already known to result in disproportionately longer sentences. That is aligned with racist assumptions that minorities commit more crimes or the way they commit crimes is worse.
So as long as we are both speculating, mine is based on actual disproportionate outcomes in criminal sentencing and yours is based on an assumption that the disparity had a logical explanation. Disproportionate sentencing tends to be based on racism and sexism, not reasonable logic.
What is more likely is that more of the minors who are charged as adults are minorities, which is already known to result in disproportionately longer sentences.
Why in your theory doesn't that happen for 1st and 2nd degree felonies?
The racism in the system applies across all levels -- for adults and kids, for 1st and 2nd and 3rd degree felonies. It could be that this particular effect is a result of some kind of unequal application, sure. But I wouldn't automatically assume that racism applies very specifically to 3rd degree felonies committed by juveniles in a way it doesn't for 2nd degree felonies, or for 3rd degree felonies committed by adults, or what have you.
It sort of sounds like you're assuming that something you already know (that the system is racist) is definitely responsible for anything and everything about the system, and anyone who doesn't see it that way automatically must just not know the system is racist, and you need to explain that to them. Yes, I know the system is racist.
So as long as we are both speculating, mine is based on actual disproportionate outcomes in criminal sentencing and yours is based on an assumption that the disparity had a logical explanation.
It seems like you're just not grasping the mathematical concept I'm trying to explain (or maybe, just not even understanding that there might be anything to grasp other than that the system is racist.) And then saying the only explanation for anything in the criminal justice system is always racism. IDK man. I tried twice to explain it, and it seems like it failed both times.
If you want to understand, let me know, and I'll try again. If you just want to tell me that the system is racist (which, again, it is) and the problem is just that I'm too stupid to know that it is racist and need you to explain it to me, I think I'll go off and do something else instead.
Why in your theory doesn’t that happen for 1st and 2nd degree felonies?
Because longer sentences don’t have as much proportional variance as a shorter sentence.
When a sentencing range is 1-5 years, some people will have sentences that are 5 times as long as others. When the sentencing range is 25-40 years, nobody will have a sentence that is even twice the duration of someone else.
I understand the point you are trying to make on math. I am saying your point is based on flawed assumptions.
Yes, I am also saying that racism and sexism are the most likely explanation for any disproportionate outcome when looking at the legal system. Single judges might have their own personal variance, but when looking at state levels and above it always ends up being racism or sexism that drives the trends.
Pew Research - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Pew Research:
> MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
Gallup - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Gallup:
> MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
> Wikipedia about this source
It’s okay, my mom’s in her 80s and my dad made it to his 80s and their parents all made it to their 90s, so I have a good 5-15 years to degrade once I turn 60.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.