Baltimore Calmer; 6 Officers Indicted

[Novorobo]

Well, the issue with that is charging people with arson still hasn't been enough to deter people from starting fires.

I suppose there's room for toughening the penalties for arson before we resort to anything more drastic, though. It's just that in the face of all this rioting these days one cannot help but doubt whether or not America's legal traditions were adequate to deal with the circumstances it has now.

Toughening penalties won't deter these things more than they currently do. Such actions rarely result in intended results.

What sorts of intention-results comparison are you referring to?

[Page]

Eloquently stated.

What worries me is that the Baltimore police will take this less as "Justice Comes to Baltimore" and more "Sacrificial Lamb Given to the Masses."

IE, we all move on and go back to the status quo.

Why should I give a shit what the police think? I'm not going to lick their boots. They're not heroes, they're not "putting their lives on the line" - they're putting OUR lives on the line with their reckless behavior and utter disregard for human decency. They're paid by us, the taxpayers, and they're beholden to us. Let them whine. Offending the police is a concern so low I'd dig a hole to China before finding it.

[Mavorpen]

Toughening penalties won't deter these things more than they currently do. Such actions rarely result in intended results.

What sorts of intention-results comparison are you referring to?

Nothing specific. I'm going by basic psychological research. These types of crimes often don't have any significant logic to them and, especially when it comes to crowds, can often occur because of a mob mentality. Not only would harsher penalties not do anything to stop people who are essentially engaging in "crimes of passion," but it wouldn't help to make sure they wouldn't do it again in the future because we know that mild punishments are the most effective at changing behavior.

[The United Colonies of Earth]

I saw the video of the city's state attorney general reading out the report. I felt vindicated, and guilty at the same time.
And I don't regret hoping that these charges will be confirmed.

[Novorobo]

What sorts of intention-results comparison are you referring to?

Nothing specific. I'm going by basic psychological research. These types of crimes often don't have any significant logic to them and, especially when it comes to crowds, can often occur because of a mob mentality. Not only would harsher penalties not do anything to stop people who are essentially engaging in "crimes of passion," but it wouldn't help to make sure they wouldn't do it again in the future because we know that mild punishments are the most effective at changing behavior.

Then the question is whether or not the possibility of a harsh punishment would make someone a lot more careful to avoid getting caught up in a mob mentality in the first place.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

So, Freddie Gray's death has officially been ruled a homicide. They've got warrants out for the cops involved.

Not to be "that guy", but I believe that we've been discussing this already.

Too bad, you're that guy.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

So, Freddie Gray's death has officially been ruled a homicide. They've got warrants out for the cops involved.

I heard this information some time ago, did they not already know where they are? Or have they already been arrested?

Oh well.

And I haven't the slightest clue.

[Patridam]

And in my opinion a very wrongful mindset. They have a right to protest of course but breaking into stores and businesses and stealing from them is a big no no. I mean that once happened here in Ponce in a store my sister works and my sister and some of her coworkers were laid off because couldn't afford the loss of their equipment. I mean seriously people it's not that fucking complicated, if you wanna protest go protest peacefully like good old MLK did and don't go fucking up others people stuff.

Every time I see the line "They have a right to protest, but...", I think that I'm going to stop reading. It's a sign that the person isn't open to seriously considering why this might have happened, and is far more concerned with the aggrieved parties expressing their anger in a socially acceptable manner than they are in ensuring that the conditions that led to it aren't repeated.

The presence of many opportunistic and morally bankrupt people willing to riot, loot, and commit arson is a condition leading to riots, more necessary than even a perceived injustice.

It would have been more unethical to force through an indictment against a man he felt was not able to be convicted.

It would have been ethical to represent the interests of the state in the matter, and not intentionally sabotage the indictment process through giving inaccurate legal information to the jurors, refusing to explain, and dumping enormous amounts of information in their laps without any context given. It would have been ethical for him to challenge all of the witnesses, not just the ones favorable to the prosecution, and to not handhold defense witnesses. But I'm sure that prosecutorial misconduct is okay when it's for the police, right?

So the interest of the state is kowtowing to the demands of violent rioters?

A trial, presumably.

No I mean after the conviction.

That's assuming there is a conviction, which is far from guaranteed. Well, based on law and order they face sentencing from a judge, some of them probably having to serve decades in jail.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

So the interest of the state is kowtowing to the demands of violent rioters?

If the state was, say, obviously burning homeless people to death, and this incited a riot, would it be inappropriate for the state to react by ceasing the policy of burning homeless people to death?

Alternatively, do you have any reason to believe that the homicide charges being brought are not based on legitimate evidence? That a just and rational society would not feel the need to bring such charges in this case?

[United Marxist Nations]

There is probable cause to support a charge of unpremeditated murder, with malice. The driver, who faces the most serious charges, could get 63 years.

Well, it's a lot better than how the DA Handled things in Ferguson.

Yeah, it seems more or less fair to me. The driver was probably the most culpable, and the department has had problems with this in the past. Whereas it is hard to tell just how much the others (arresting officers) had to do with what happened in the van (or during the arrest, should injury have come to him before the ride).

[Neutraligon]

Nothing specific. I'm going by basic psychological research. These types of crimes often don't have any significant logic to them and, especially when it comes to crowds, can often occur because of a mob mentality. Not only would harsher penalties not do anything to stop people who are essentially engaging in "crimes of passion," but it wouldn't help to make sure they wouldn't do it again in the future because we know that mild punishments are the most effective at changing behavior.

Then the question is whether or not the possibility of a harsh punishment would make someone a lot more careful to avoid getting caught up in a mob mentality in the first place.

You think it is that easy to prevent mob mentality, especially when it is the law enforces who people have an issue with? Punishment will not prevent mob mentality from forming, since there is nothing of logic when it comes to said mentality.

[Cyllea]

What worries me is that the Baltimore police will take this less as "Justice Comes to Baltimore" and more "Sacrificial Lamb Given to the Masses."

IE, we all move on and go back to the status quo.

Why should I give a shit what the police think? I'm not going to lick their boots. They're not heroes, they're not "putting their lives on the line" - they're putting OUR lives on the line with their reckless behavior and utter disregard for human decency. They're paid by us, the taxpayers, and they're beholden to us. Let them whine. Offending the police is a concern so low I'd dig a hole to China before finding it.

you literally just summed up my thoughts on this with that sentence, holy shit that is a good quote. To the signature!

[Galloism]

What worries me is that the Baltimore police will take this less as "Justice Comes to Baltimore" and more "Sacrificial Lamb Given to the Masses."

IE, we all move on and go back to the status quo.

Why should I give a shit what the police think? I'm not going to lick their boots. They're not heroes, they're not "putting their lives on the line" - they're putting OUR lives on the line with their reckless behavior and utter disregard for human decency. They're paid by us, the taxpayers, and they're beholden to us. Let them whine. Offending the police is a concern so low I'd dig a hole to China before finding it.

I'm interested in the brutalized killings stopping. To do so, the police must understand that we're really fucking serious about stopping it.

If they think it's a sacrificial lamb thing and it'll all blow over, the killings won't stop.

[Ifreann]

And the people who set them should be charged with arson. This doesn't mean that those responsible for the death of Freddie Gray, (who, I should note, was unable to defend himself at the time of the injury that resulted in his death) should not face charges.

Seriously, what part of "All men are created equal" do you not understand?

Well, the issue with that is charging people with arson still hasn't been enough to deter people from starting fires.

I suppose there's room for toughening the penalties for arson before we resort to anything more drastic, though. It's just that in the face of all this rioting these days one cannot help but doubt whether or not America's legal traditions were adequate to deal with the circumstances it has now.

Oh yes, clearly the worry is that America's legal traditions can't handle rioting. What's that? Police brutality? Oh pshaw, who cares about that? Yes, a man is dead, but other people might have died, and that's far more important.

[Page]

Why should I give a shit what the police think? I'm not going to lick their boots. They're not heroes, they're not "putting their lives on the line" - they're putting OUR lives on the line with their reckless behavior and utter disregard for human decency. They're paid by us, the taxpayers, and they're beholden to us. Let them whine. Offending the police is a concern so low I'd dig a hole to China before finding it.

I'm interested in the brutalized killings stopping. To do so, the police must understand that we're really fucking serious about stopping it.

If they think it's a sacrificial lamb thing and it'll all blow over, the killings won't stop.

It's also because they NEVER get convicted.

[Fartsniffage]

Well, the issue with that is charging people with arson still hasn't been enough to deter people from starting fires.

I suppose there's room for toughening the penalties for arson before we resort to anything more drastic, though. It's just that in the face of all this rioting these days one cannot help but doubt whether or not America's legal traditions were adequate to deal with the circumstances it has now.

Oh yes, clearly the worry is that America's legal traditions can't handle rioting. What's that? Police brutality? Oh pshaw, who cares about that? Yes, a man is dead, but other people might have died, and that's far more important.

No, no, no. People maybe dying isn't the concern. Property damage is the real worry. People come a distant second to stuff.

[Galloism]

I'm interested in the brutalized killings stopping. To do so, the police must understand that we're really fucking serious about stopping it.

If they think it's a sacrificial lamb thing and it'll all blow over, the killings won't stop.

It's also because they NEVER get convicted.

You're missing the point.

Even if they are, if it's perceived to be a once every fifty years sacrificial lamb, it still won't make any difference.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Oh yes, clearly the worry is that America's legal traditions can't handle rioting. What's that? Police brutality? Oh pshaw, who cares about that? Yes, a man is dead, but other people might have died, and that's far more important.

No, no, no. People maybe dying isn't the concern. Property damage is the real worry. People come a distant second to stuff.

Arson can kill people, so yes, property damage is a real worry based around the 'people maybe dying' that can arise out of it.

Of course, police issues is more relevant in this case and many others. Arson already being heavily condemned by most folks who value human life while police posses a problematic aura of in-culpability in deaths.

[Ifreann]

Oh yes, clearly the worry is that America's legal traditions can't handle rioting. What's that? Police brutality? Oh pshaw, who cares about that? Yes, a man is dead, but other people might have died, and that's far more important.

No, no, no. People maybe dying isn't the concern. Property damage is the real worry. People come a distant second to stuff.

Especially if they're, you know, criminal people.

[United Russian Soviet States]

I actually sympathize with the protestors somewhat now. Police can be brutal. I do not sympathize with the rioters though.

[Greed and Death]

It's also because they NEVER get convicted.

You're missing the point.

Even if they are, if it's perceived to be a once every fifty years sacrificial lamb, it still won't make any difference.

2 or 3 more of these sorts of events and america will be desensitized to them like with school shootings and that will be that no sacrifice required.

[Jamzmania]

What worries me is that the Baltimore police will take this less as "Justice Comes to Baltimore" and more "Sacrificial Lamb Given to the Masses."

IE, we all move on and go back to the status quo.

Why should I give a shit what the police think? I'm not going to lick their boots. They're not heroes, they're not "putting their lives on the line" - they're putting OUR lives on the line with their reckless behavior and utter disregard for human decency. They're paid by us, the taxpayers, and they're beholden to us. Let them whine. Offending the police is a concern so low I'd dig a hole to China before finding it.

Well, I guess the world would just be a better place without police. Would you like to sign my petition to abolish all police departments? Since they are obviously such a threat to our safety.

[The balkens]

Why should I give a shit what the police think? I'm not going to lick their boots. They're not heroes, they're not "putting their lives on the line" - they're putting OUR lives on the line with their reckless behavior and utter disregard for human decency. They're paid by us, the taxpayers, and they're beholden to us. Let them whine. Offending the police is a concern so low I'd dig a hole to China before finding it.

Well, I guess the world would just be a better place without police. Would you like to sign my petition to abolish all police departments? Since they are obviously such a threat to our safety.

People can police themselves! they'll just form trusted groups to do it, they'll be armed, paid and work for their local city. Oh and they'll be in uniform.

[Galloism]

Why should I give a shit what the police think? I'm not going to lick their boots. They're not heroes, they're not "putting their lives on the line" - they're putting OUR lives on the line with their reckless behavior and utter disregard for human decency. They're paid by us, the taxpayers, and they're beholden to us. Let them whine. Offending the police is a concern so low I'd dig a hole to China before finding it.

Well, I guess the world would just be a better place without police. Would you like to sign my petition to abolish all police departments? Since they are obviously such a threat to our safety.

Or, you know, you could actually argue against a position someone actually took, instead of leaving a farm somewhere at the mercy of crows.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Not to be "that guy", but I believe that we've been discussing this already.

Too bad, you're that guy.

Dammit.

Time to find a way to come to terms with my that guy-ness.

"That Guy" Pride!