Shocking news about UtterAccess owner

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted Bruce 182381
  • Start date Start date
Well that's all true, but states have a patchwork of different laws attacking certain crimes with certain sentencing guidelines too. Arizona just unfortunately passed a referendum by voters that anyone who is convicted of any kind of trafficking is sentenced to automatic life in prison. I feel like it's a bad idea because too many people get caught up in those charges
 
"Any kind of trafficking" can't be the full text description. After all, I could be trafficking in knock-off copies of Chinese fortune cookies whereas someone else was trafficking humans across state lines for illicit purposes. Or they could be raiding aquariums in order to fulfill a request made by collectors of infant aquatic mammals in a desert state - trafficking minors across state lines for illegal porpoises. Only one of those should get life in prison. The punishment for the others should be less. So what did you leave out?
 
Moke, you and I both know that the correct response should have been "<groan>" because of my bad pun. Can't help it, I have a congenital predilection for bad jokes.
 
Isaac said:
Well that's all true, but states have a patchwork of different laws attacking certain crimes with certain sentencing guidelines too. Arizona just unfortunately passed a referendum by voters that anyone who is convicted of any kind of trafficking is sentenced to automatic life in prison. I feel like it's a bad idea because too many people get caught up in those charges
Click to expand...
The problem with that law is that many, if not most, trafficking arrest are the result of LE stings. There is no "Victim" per se. Just responding or agreeing to a meet is sufficient for arrest, even if there was no actual intent to meet.
 
moke123 said:
The problem with that law is that many, if not most, trafficking arrest are the result of LE stings. There is no "Victim" per se. Just responding or agreeing to a meet is sufficient for arrest, even if there was no actual intent to meet.
Click to expand...
My problem with the law is well not only what you said, but there are many gangs druggie prostitute type groups where there is a woman or two involved and then men who are protectors and collect the money. There is no coercion involved in any direction of any kind, but when they all get arrested the women claim to be victims and the men look like traffickers. And people immediately assume that they are and there you go life in prison for something that was nothing more than solicitation
 
The_Doc_Man said:
"Any kind of trafficking" can't be the full text description. After all, I could be trafficking in knock-off copies of Chinese fortune cookies whereas someone else was trafficking humans across state lines for illicit purposes. Or they could be raiding aquariums in order to fulfill a request made by collectors of infant aquatic mammals in a desert state - trafficking minors across state lines for illegal porpoises. Only one of those should get life in prison. The punishment for the others should be less. So what did you leave out?
Click to expand...
Child trafficking.
So use the example I gave in my last post, but assume the girls involved are 17. Same analogy applies and same conclusion applies in my opinion
 
Pat Hartman said:
The latest idiocy is a young girl who's father tried to murder her in front of her school because she refused to marry an older man.
Click to expand...
Yes, I saw that news in Instagram the other day. It was a honor kill. The case was so disturbing that I wasn't able to read to the end o the article. I simply gave up.

One last question if you don't mind.
The procecutor in the case I explained (murdering dad) had demanded 7 years. When the verdict came out as parole with zero prison time, his face was filled with disbelief. Is procecutor allowed to appeal the sentence too (the same as defendants who are allowed to appeal 30 days after the verdict)
 
Last edited:
Yes, prosecutors can sometimes appeal a light sentence. But the standard of review is high – courts are deferential to sentencing judges I think usually unless there is a clear error (usually an error in law, not just their discretion)
 
Islam-ization of America is a serious problem and should be addressed unapologetically by leaders. Unfortunately, there's a problem with our ability to do that. If you're the governor of Michigan how DO you do that? You've already let 10's of 1000's of hardcore Muslims into our country who disagree with you, and they have voting rights..

When you've allowed your voting constituency to become majority Muslim, you've got a problem on your hands
 
Pat Hartman said:
No matter what the polls say, there should be enough Jewish voters in NYC to elect someone else, assuming the Jews voted as a block and picked the same one. My preference of course is Curtis Silwa but Adams would be acceptable if they can't bring themselves to vote for a Republican. The point is they can't just stay home and not vote. And they can't split their vote if they care about the outcome. That is like laying down and playing dead the way they did in Nazi Germany.
Click to expand...
Honestly thank God for NYC Jews, they may be the closest thing we hvae to a voice of reason in the area, EVEN if they sometimes vote Democrat.
 
There is also the issue that "age of majority" is not uniform across the USA. Some claim 16, others say 17 or 18. However, some states split age of majority for marriage vs. work vs. owning a gun vs. drinking alcohol. It is possible, given variability of state laws, to get four different ages for the four topics I just named. Though the Supremes recently weighed in on the "owning a gun" age and it might now be uniform at 18 across the USA.

Considering that folks of age 18 are eligible for military service, one could quickly see how silly it would be to say you can go to the front lines for your country but can't carry a gun when you get there.
 
Jack's Indictment:

1.png

2.png

3.png

4.png
 
BlueSpruce said:
Do you think any Jews are going to vote for Mamdani?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think young people in general like his message. They've been told by their professors to reject the current model in favor of a new model socialism/Marxism, young people have no frame of reference so it seems new.
 
BlueSpruce said:
No Way!... Show me proof
Click to expand...
I think the key aspect is with parental permission.

Still, I'd be hard pressed to marry a dang 9 year old and then laws change and sentiments get updated and be accused of (obviously) grooming.
And in case you're wondering, don't worry - I'd be hard pressed to marry a 9 year old under any circumstances LOL !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom