Quote:
BD said..."(liberalism) has overtaken our court system that now measures crime in pragmatic examples of perception instead of having the same and "equal" punishment handed out to all, regardless of social position"
and you responded..."That's also not really true, given the current incarceration rate, I'd say that punishment is handed out both unevenly and frequently."
What am I missing here?
You say "that's not true" and then you appear to agree with him considering he says "instead of same" and you say "is uneven".
|
Ah, a fair point. I suppose I would have to clarify by stating that I may have falsely assumed that BD was arguing from the conservative viewpoint (i.e. Hardcore criminals all get away scot free while hard-working americans are unfairly persecuted for not being Politically correct.)
If my assumption was correct, my statement stands in terms of such a high population of poor minority offenders and low population of white-collar criminals. In a sense, I'm agreeing its unequal, but not in the way I'm assuming BD means.
If however BD is equally appalled at dispreportionate arrest, conviction, and sentancing rates of poor and/or minority offenders, then I don't actually disagree. But I also don't really see what liberalism has to do with it... good liberals tend to advocate preventative and rehabilitative justice over emphasis on hard time, so I don't see how one could lay dispreportionality in the prison population at our feet.
And as for you Takuan SoHo, I'm not sure if you're a true libretarian or not. While I admire libretarians for their consistancy (government out of EVERYWHERE, including the bedroom) I don't tend to agree with their viewpoint, since I believe government can be a positive force in a great many things. At least certainly more than conservatives and libretarians tend to give credit for.