Shoud you be able to buy your way out of jail time? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 15, 2024, 02:57:03 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Shoud you be able to buy your way out of jail time? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: ?
#1
yes
 
#2
no
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 44

Author Topic: Shoud you be able to buy your way out of jail time?  (Read 7897 times)
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,704
United Kingdom


« on: June 29, 2005, 03:32:40 AM »

yes, if you paid restitution.
I don't care about fees.
This was teh system in saxonic England, and it's a shame that those pesky Normans got rid of it.
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,704
United Kingdom


« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2005, 04:24:55 PM »

I agree with that. Victims of fraud for example would probably be happier getting their money back than seeing the perpetrator in jail, as long as the amount of restitution is enough to cover the loss and provide sufficient deterrent to future crimes. This would also be less expensive to the state than imprisonment.

That's actually a good point, although there might also be victims of fraud who would be much happier seeing the guy do jail time than getting their money back.  Maybe we could leave it up to the victim?  It seems like it isn't exactly justice to just give the victim back his money with compensation if the victim doesn't even care about it.
How about crimes that don't have victims?
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,704
United Kingdom


« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2005, 04:26:11 PM »
« Edited: June 29, 2005, 04:51:53 PM by Bono »


However, a crime is an offense not only against the victim, but also an offense against society, against the People.
I'd like to see a philosophical justification of that.
How is it an offense against me that some guy in teh otehr end of the country pickpockets someone.
And don't use hipotheticals, as they are worthless.
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,704
United Kingdom


« Reply #3 on: June 30, 2005, 03:54:56 PM »

I'd like to see a philosophical justification of that.
How is it an offense against me that some guy in teh otehr end of the country pickpockets someone.
And don't use hipotheticals, as they are worthless.
It is not a philosophical argument, but an assumption of the law. The entity in which ultimate sovereignty and power is vested is the one against whom the crime is committed. Under the common law, for instance, a crime is an offense against The Crown, the ultimate repository of power. Similarly, in the U.S., a crime is assumed to be an offense against the People. The issue is not philosophical, but legal.

Actually, no. in primitive anglo-saxon common law, there were no offenses against magican entities like "The People" or "The Crown", as suits, even criminal, were among several parts, and the punishment was usually restitution.
What happened was when the Norman kings started to change the saxonic laws.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 13 queries.