Real News. Real Funny.

Comments

  • It's a bit of a shame that we couldn't also get the death penalty repealed, in spite of the fact that it's just flat-out pointless in this state, but I'll take this as evidence that the voters aren't always going to be duped by tough-on-crime rhetoric.
  • I wanted the death penalty overturned as well, but 1 for 2 on undoing some of our draconian laws here is OK. And I don't think I saw a single ad about the death penalty prop -- maybe with some money behind it next time it will do better. I was more bothered by the severe three-strikes law than I was about the death penalty, since I think it probably affects more people, so I'll take it.
  • One of my best friends I grew up with, George, thanks you for this 16 years later.
  • We didn't erase it, we made penalties more flexible for non-violent crimes. Because it was stupid to put people away for life for shoplifting and such. "But we have to be TOUGH ON CRIMEEEEEEEEEE" Yeah, get real.
  • Meanwhile, prop 35 passes with 81.2% because of THINK OF THE CHILDREN and is already tied up in court.

    Link
  • Wow surprised. CA even though the rest of nation thinks it's very liberal, it seems to go crazy about crime and about taxes.

    And prop 30 passed and so did this. CA is really changing.
  • ProfessorOhki: Meanwhile, prop 35 passes with 81.2% because of THINK OF THE CHILDREN and is already tied up in court.

    Link


    Yeah. I voted no on that. It's like anything that does like 4 or more different things to change criminal law I don't think should be passed by referendum. It's too complicated to know what all the repercussion are.
  • We still have more prisons than ANYONE! USA! USA! CA! CA!
  • I also voted against 35 because stupid, but I was still surprised to see the ACLU challenging it. Weird. All weird.
  • StopLurkListen: We didn't erase it, we made penalties more flexible for non-violent crimes. Because it was stupid to put people away for life for shoplifting and such. "But we have to be TOUGH ON CRIMEEEEEEEEEE" Yeah, get real.


    I support "tough on crimea" legislation. Someone has to teach those uppity bastards some respect.

    americanmonsters.comView Full Size
  • muck4doo: One of my best friends I grew up with, George, thanks you for this 16 years later.


    To elaborate, he made a couple of mistakes by the time he was 21 with fights, and got locked up. He got out at 25, and got into a nasty custody dispute between his ex-wife and parents. He made threats at his father, who called the cops, and George has been sitting in prison since 1996 for that. They called it a felony, and that was his 3rd strike. His father cried to me that he wish he never called the cops if he knew what they were going to do to George. I hope George gets out, but I fear he is a ruined person now. When he last came out he had joined the Aryan Brotherhood, and had all his tats showing that off, yet he still hung out with us Mexicans and Blacks from the neighborhood when he got out. From what he told me is you do what you gotta do as an explanation. He loves the people he grew up with. 16 years later I doubt he still has that innocent part of him left.
  • Some 'Splainin' To Do: It's a bit of a shame that we couldn't also get the death penalty repealed, in spite of the fact that it's just flat-out pointless in this state, but I'll take this as evidence that the voters aren't always going to be duped by tough-on-crime rhetoric.


    1 out of 2 is better than nothing. Things are changing.
  • muck4doo: muck4doo: One of my best friends I grew up with, George, thanks you for this 16 years later.

    To elaborate, he made a couple of mistakes by the time he was 21 with fights, and got locked up. He got out at 25, and got into a nasty custody dispute between his ex-wife and parents. He made threats at his father, who called the cops, and George has been sitting in prison since 1996 for that. They called it a felony, and that was his 3rd strike. His father cried to me that he wish he never called the cops if he knew what they were going to do to George. I hope George gets out, but I fear he is a ruined person now. When he last came out he had joined the Aryan Brotherhood, and had all his tats showing that off, yet he still hung out with us Mexicans and Blacks from the neighborhood when he got out. From what he told me is you do what you gotta do as an explanation. He loves the people he grew up with. 16 years later I doubt he still has that innocent part of him left.


    Sorry to hear about that. Hope he comes out alright.
  • As long as these criminals stay in California, I have no problem with this at all. They will target their crimes on the dumbass liberals who let them out. In fact, half-way houses should be placed right in the middle of liberal, middle class, suburban soccer mom territory for great justice.
  • zorgon: I also voted against 35 because stupid, but I was still surprised to see the ACLU challenging it. Weird. All weird.


    I was also one of the 20% that voted against it because I thought it was unnecessary. It's already illegal. Passing a measure to make it double-plus bad is just silly. It won't help police identify situations where exploitation is occurring nor will it help prevent its occurrence.
  • Corvus: ProfessorOhki: Meanwhile, prop 35 passes with 81.2% because of THINK OF THE CHILDREN and is already tied up in court.

    Link

    Yeah. I voted no on that. It's like anything that does like 4 or more different things to change criminal law I don't think should be passed by referendum. It's too complicated to know what all the repercussion are.


    Yeah, the out-of-band on it is a bit weird too. Most of the funding and support came from a Facebook ex-exec who tried to run for AG in 2010 and lost 16% to 33% If I had to guess, I'd say he sees this as a sure-fire bill that will let him show how "tough on crime" he is for when he takes a second shot at office. He also created the "Safer California Foundation," which I can't find any stories on before 2011 and seems to be involved in nothing besides this proposition Besides, like you say, criminal sentencing guidelines have no place going through initiative like that. I farking hate politics.

    Corvus: Wow surprised. CA even though the rest of nation thinks it's very liberal, it seems to go crazy about crime and about taxes.

    And prop 30 passed and so did this. CA is really changing.


    30 passed in part because the universities were stalling everything out to see what happened to funding. Some were only accepting out-of-state students because they pay higher tuition. I hate tax hikes as much as the next guy, but I didn't see much of a choice. Feels bad being strong-armed like that, but if higher education for CA residents was slashed for a while, the economic impact in a year or two wouldn't be great and I know too many people dealing with admissions/tuition BS.
  • FTFA -The list includes people who committed misdemeanor indecent exposure years ago or whose crimes never involved the Internet, he said.

    A sex offender's rights should be restricted only on an individual basis, Risher said, taking into account the offender's history and likelihood of using the Internet to commit new crimes: "It can't dump them all into a category."

    **
    This drives me crazy. Maybe it's time for the term 'sex offender' to be revisited. A guy who jacks off at a porno theater or exposed himself while drunk is not the same as a guy who raped someone.
  • Please note, this post will set off sarcasm detectors. Ensure yours is calibrated correctly before proceeding.

    I voted no on 35 as well. It seemed to be a pointless proposition. There are already laws on the books that punish human traffickers at both the State and Federal level. Im sure all of the traffickers are up to speed on the laws, and will now all avoid California, kind of like how the death penalty cuts down on murder.

    I hate propositions like this one, to most people it is like asking, 'When did you stop beating your spouse?' There is only one answer that is socially acceptable, and in the end it won't have any effect on the problem.
  • Some 'Splainin' To Do: It's a bit of a shame that we couldn't also get the death penalty repealed, in spite of the fact that it's just flat-out pointless in this state, but I'll take this as evidence that the voters aren't always going to be duped by tough-on-crime rhetoric.


    Texas has the highest execution rate but we also have the lowest murder rate so that proves it works.
    /facts
    //I don't have them.
  • Turns out that putting people in jail for life for stealing a candy bar not only didn't reduce crime, but it cost the state a lot of money.
  • ConConHead: A guy who jacks off at a porno theater or exposed himself while drunk is not the same as a guy who raped someone.


    www.thefablife.comView Full Size

    This.
  • Corvus: ProfessorOhki: Meanwhile, prop 35 passes with 81.2% because of THINK OF THE CHILDREN and is already tied up in court.

    Link

    Yeah. I voted no on that. It's like anything that does like 4 or more different things to change criminal law I don't think should be passed by referendum. It's too complicated to know what all the repercussion are.


    I also voted "no" on that. Because of the mandatory online registration of sex offenders thing (I forget the exact language). Until they start changing sex offender laws so that some 18 year old who shows his weiner to a 16 year old doesn't get FFL, I'm voting no on this type of thing.
  • ProfessorOhki: Some were only accepting out-of-state students because they pay higher tuition.


    Interesting because my university gives automatic acceptance to local students (though not necessarily to a particular program).
  • StopLurkListen: We didn't erase it, we made penalties more flexible for non-violent crimes. Because it was stupid to put people away for life for shoplifting and such. "But we have to be TOUGH ON CRIMEEEEEEEEEE" Yeah, get real.


    The first two crimes that preceded the third "pizza theft" crime were serious ones. What the backers of this law sought and got was that somebody has to get hurt now before we put one of these career recidivists away for good. I don't know why you consider the fact that yet another person will have to be injured a triumph, but congratulations. Better hope that it isn't somebody you care about who ends up as the third victim.
  • Load 25 of 115 newer comments

This thread is closed to new comments.