Fine. Stop Working.

[candycorn]

They should shutdown all prison industries. Put law abiding Americans to work.

Great idea

Just leave those poor misunderstood felons with nothing to do but pump iron, watch television, and plan ways to escape.

Makes a lot of sense.

My plan saves jobs.
Your plan costs jobs.

Therefore my plan makes a lot more sense than yours. But then again....outsmarting you is no great feat.

Actually, your plan is nonsense ... it saves no jobs. Linear thinking is one thing, tunnel vision is something else.

The guys at Aramark would differ with you but then again, they know what they are talking about. You? Don't be silly.
Michigan cancels Aramark contract to provide food service at state prisons

Next time, why don't you actually read your reference?

Aramak lost the contract to another company ... no jobs were eliminated. They were taken over by a different company, who have the same number of slots - most of which are invariably filled by workers already in place (former Aramak employees).

This, of course, had absolutely nothing to do with your supposition that prisoners shouldn't be required to work because they are taking jobs from other people.

Next time, why don't you actually try to understand the context? The argument was that there are no jobs at stake if a Prison doesn't buy food from the outside. Be it Aramark or whomever, jobs are certainly at stake. Are they wonderful and high paying? Likely not but a job is a job.

 

[candycorn]

I often wonder why we have prison industries at all. They take jobs away from non criminal workers.

As for the strike itself, the justice system is a travesty and needs overhaul from front to back. It will go nowhere until someone with influence is incarcerated and is treated like just another arrestee.

I'm guessing you have had no personal interaction with the criminal element in this country, nor have you visited one of our penal institutions.

So, that pretty much makes you distinctly unqualified to pass judgement, don't you think?

You'd guess wrong but don't feel bad; you're usually wrong when you're not guessing also.

But just as an example of what I'm talking about...a guy is arrested for criminal trespassing because he's homeless. Now that he has a misdemeanor on his record, he can no longer go to many shelters. So he's homeless and not able to go to the Salvation Army for example. They let him out on a PR bond and he's wandering the streets until his court date comes about. He doesn't show up (hard to find a calendar or a tree to hang it on) and is now hit with an FTA on top of the original charge when he's arrested again. This time the judge sentences him to time in the clink so now the original criminal trespass has blossomed into jail time at taxpayers expense.

Just one of several examples of how out of whack the system is.

The only thing out of whack is your manipulation of the feasibility of such a scenario.

1) Your guy is arrested for criminal trespassing. He doesn't have a misdemeanor on his record YET, so all the rest of the folderol about calendars, Salvation Army, etc. don't apply.

2) You have created an impossible scenario that can't happen ...

3) It is extremely unlikely that a homeless person would actually be charged. No one in the judicial/prosecutorial system is interested in clogging up the process with cases that have no resolution. In fact, the only time you will see DAs move forward on a case like this is if they can figure out a way to help the guy .... getting him dried out, off the weed, or hospitalization.

4) Your scenario is fictitious... as is your feigned concern for the homeless guy.

Sad that the facts whisper louder than your enumerated moronic statements:

As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price

"In Grand Rapids, Mich., Stephen Papa, a homeless Iraq War veteran, spent 22 days in jail, not for what he calls his "embarrassing behavior" after he got drunk with friends and climbed into an abandoned building, but because he had only $25 the day he went to court."

Sorry to burst your bubble (yet again).

 

[Spare_change]

Great idea

Just leave those poor misunderstood felons with nothing to do but pump iron, watch television, and plan ways to escape.

Makes a lot of sense.

My plan saves jobs.
Your plan costs jobs.

Therefore my plan makes a lot more sense than yours. But then again....outsmarting you is no great feat.

Actually, your plan is nonsense ... it saves no jobs. Linear thinking is one thing, tunnel vision is something else.

The guys at Aramark would differ with you but then again, they know what they are talking about. You? Don't be silly.
Michigan cancels Aramark contract to provide food service at state prisons

Next time, why don't you actually read your reference?

Aramak lost the contract to another company ... no jobs were eliminated. They were taken over by a different company, who have the same number of slots - most of which are invariably filled by workers already in place (former Aramak employees).

This, of course, had absolutely nothing to do with your supposition that prisoners shouldn't be required to work because they are taking jobs from other people.

Next time, why don't you actually try to understand the context? The argument was that there are no jobs at stake if a Prison doesn't buy food from the outside. Be it Aramark or whomever, jobs are certainly at stake. Are they wonderful and high paying? Likely not but a job is a job.

You flip flop more than a dying fish.

 

[Spare_change]

I often wonder why we have prison industries at all. They take jobs away from non criminal workers.

As for the strike itself, the justice system is a travesty and needs overhaul from front to back. It will go nowhere until someone with influence is incarcerated and is treated like just another arrestee.

I'm guessing you have had no personal interaction with the criminal element in this country, nor have you visited one of our penal institutions.

So, that pretty much makes you distinctly unqualified to pass judgement, don't you think?

You'd guess wrong but don't feel bad; you're usually wrong when you're not guessing also.

But just as an example of what I'm talking about...a guy is arrested for criminal trespassing because he's homeless. Now that he has a misdemeanor on his record, he can no longer go to many shelters. So he's homeless and not able to go to the Salvation Army for example. They let him out on a PR bond and he's wandering the streets until his court date comes about. He doesn't show up (hard to find a calendar or a tree to hang it on) and is now hit with an FTA on top of the original charge when he's arrested again. This time the judge sentences him to time in the clink so now the original criminal trespass has blossomed into jail time at taxpayers expense.

Just one of several examples of how out of whack the system is.

The only thing out of whack is your manipulation of the feasibility of such a scenario.

1) Your guy is arrested for criminal trespassing. He doesn't have a misdemeanor on his record YET, so all the rest of the folderol about calendars, Salvation Army, etc. don't apply.

2) You have created an impossible scenario that can't happen ...

3) It is extremely unlikely that a homeless person would actually be charged. No one in the judicial/prosecutorial system is interested in clogging up the process with cases that have no resolution. In fact, the only time you will see DAs move forward on a case like this is if they can figure out a way to help the guy .... getting him dried out, off the weed, or hospitalization.

4) Your scenario is fictitious... as is your feigned concern for the homeless guy.

Sad that the facts whisper louder than your enumerated moronic statements:

As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price

"In Grand Rapids, Mich., Stephen Papa, a homeless Iraq War veteran, spent 22 days in jail, not for what he calls his "embarrassing behavior" after he got drunk with friends and climbed into an abandoned building, but because he had only $25 the day he went to court."

Sorry to burst your bubble (yet again).

LOL ---- this is somehow an example of some kind of prejudicial behavior by the justice system against the homeless???

Give me a break.

i truly am entertained about how you misrepresent the situation, trying to paint it with emotional keywords, and ignoring the totality of the situation.

Papa broke into an abandoned warehouse while drunk. Last time I checked - that is a crime. As a result of his actions, he went to court, and was fined $2,600. When he explained to the court that he couldn't pay his fine, the court was faced with two options: 1) confine him for the duration of his alternative sentence, of 2) set up some kind of payment plan to pay off his debt to the county.

They chose the second action. They directed him to work with the Clerk of Courts to establish a monthly payment plan. (Contrary to the heart-tugging attempt to paint him as a poor, homeless, veteran - in actuality, Papa had just started a new job at $12/hour and was staying with a friend of his)

HOWEVER - it is against the law for the courts to allow court costs to be negotiated into any negotiated settlement plan. In other words, those have to be paid immediately. The normal court costs in that court were $125. The judge lowered that to $50. When Papa said that he didn't have the $50 on him, he was told that he would remain in custody until he arranged for it to be paid.

THAT is the reality of the situation - all he had to do is call his friend, borrow $25 and he gets out of jail. Failing that, he can contact any number of lending agencies (to include numerous government social agencies) who would have funded it for him (in fact, I can think of 7 veterans charities, right off hand, that would have done it).

So, despite your bleeding heart attempt to confuse the situation with emotion, reality says something else completely different.

More interestingly, how do you justify this attack on the government processes against your constant drumbeat for bigger, larger, and more intrusive government control of our personal lives??

The word for today: dichotomy

Secondary word for today: bullshit.

 

[candycorn]

I often wonder why we have prison industries at all. They take jobs away from non criminal workers.

As for the strike itself, the justice system is a travesty and needs overhaul from front to back. It will go nowhere until someone with influence is incarcerated and is treated like just another arrestee.

I'm guessing you have had no personal interaction with the criminal element in this country, nor have you visited one of our penal institutions.

So, that pretty much makes you distinctly unqualified to pass judgement, don't you think?

You'd guess wrong but don't feel bad; you're usually wrong when you're not guessing also.

But just as an example of what I'm talking about...a guy is arrested for criminal trespassing because he's homeless. Now that he has a misdemeanor on his record, he can no longer go to many shelters. So he's homeless and not able to go to the Salvation Army for example. They let him out on a PR bond and he's wandering the streets until his court date comes about. He doesn't show up (hard to find a calendar or a tree to hang it on) and is now hit with an FTA on top of the original charge when he's arrested again. This time the judge sentences him to time in the clink so now the original criminal trespass has blossomed into jail time at taxpayers expense.

Just one of several examples of how out of whack the system is.

The only thing out of whack is your manipulation of the feasibility of such a scenario.

1) Your guy is arrested for criminal trespassing. He doesn't have a misdemeanor on his record YET, so all the rest of the folderol about calendars, Salvation Army, etc. don't apply.

2) You have created an impossible scenario that can't happen ...

3) It is extremely unlikely that a homeless person would actually be charged. No one in the judicial/prosecutorial system is interested in clogging up the process with cases that have no resolution. In fact, the only time you will see DAs move forward on a case like this is if they can figure out a way to help the guy .... getting him dried out, off the weed, or hospitalization.

4) Your scenario is fictitious... as is your feigned concern for the homeless guy.

Sad that the facts whisper louder than your enumerated moronic statements:

As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price

"In Grand Rapids, Mich., Stephen Papa, a homeless Iraq War veteran, spent 22 days in jail, not for what he calls his "embarrassing behavior" after he got drunk with friends and climbed into an abandoned building, but because he had only $25 the day he went to court."

Sorry to burst your bubble (yet again).

LOL ---- this is somehow an example of some kind of prejudicial behavior by the justice system against the homeless???

Give me a break.

i truly am entertained about how you misrepresent the situation, trying to paint it with emotional keywords, and ignoring the totality of the situation.

Papa broke into an abandoned warehouse while drunk. Last time I checked - that is a crime. As a result of his actions, he went to court, and was fined $2,600. When he explained to the court that he couldn't pay his fine, the court was faced with two options: 1) confine him for the duration of his alternative sentence, of 2) set up some kind of payment plan to pay off his debt to the county.

They chose the second action. They directed him to work with the Clerk of Courts to establish a monthly payment plan. (Contrary to the heart-tugging attempt to paint him as a poor, homeless, veteran - in actuality, Papa had just started a new job at $12/hour and was staying with a friend of his)

HOWEVER - it is against the law for the courts to allow court costs to be negotiated into any negotiated settlement plan. In other words, those have to be paid immediately. The normal court costs in that court were $125. The judge lowered that to $50. When Papa said that he didn't have the $50 on him, he was told that he would remain in custody until he arranged for it to be paid.

THAT is the reality of the situation - all he had to do is call his friend, borrow $25 and he gets out of jail. Failing that, he can contact any number of lending agencies (to include numerous government social agencies) who would have funded it for him (in fact, I can think of 7 veterans charities, right off hand, that would have done it).

So, despite your bleeding heart attempt to confuse the situation with emotion, reality says something else completely different.

More interestingly, how do you justify this attack on the government processes against your constant drumbeat for bigger, larger, and more intrusive government control of our personal lives??

The word for today: dichotomy

Secondary word for today: bullshit.

Bullshit. As in what you're full of.

You said the homeless never get persecuted.
I showed it to you.

Your move.

 

[August West]

Stay in your cell.

Rely on your families to provides funds for necessities.

'This is slavery': U.S. inmates strike in what activists call one of the biggest prison protests in modern history

I saw this puff piece at CNN. Liberals and their love affair with thugs. We're supposed to feel sorry for rapists and murderers because they are put to work? God forbid prisoners be forced to offset the tax dollars spent to keep them locked up for their whole lives. Most of these thugs should be put to death quickly in order to save taxpayer money, they are getting off easy by being allowed to live and work behind bars.

Liberals have a love affair with thugs? I think it`s the other side that arms them.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Stay in your cell.

Rely on your families to provides funds for necessities.

'This is slavery': U.S. inmates strike in what activists call one of the biggest prison protests in modern history

I saw this puff piece at CNN. Liberals and their love affair with thugs. We're supposed to feel sorry for rapists and murderers because they are put to work? God forbid prisoners be forced to offset the tax dollars spent to keep them locked up for their whole lives. Most of these thugs should be put to death quickly in order to save taxpayer money, they are getting off easy by being allowed to live and work behind bars.

Liberals have a love affair with thugs? I think it`s the other side that arms them.

How stupid.

"The other side" has nothing to do with it. Your thugs simply break more of your ineffective laws to get armed.

You people keep putting them back on the street. How fucking dense is that?

 

[esthermoon]

America has a terrible prison system. There some prisons that are better, but as a whole they fail in the purpose they are supposed to accomplish.

By your definition, we have a “good” system; we try to rehab these thugs who have no interest in rehab. Which is why I say, let them read old textbooks. If they need to get a diploma, televise a teacher into the class and use scan/e-mail technology for them to examine and grade… Beyond that; we shouldn’t be spending a dime helping these folks get a leg up on students who can’t afford/don’t have access to training like the prison industries give these people for free.

Your ignorance is noted.

My ignorance? You say that we should be rehabilitating people who have no interest in rehabilitation. So I’ll take your indignation as a badge of honor.

My ignorance? You say that we should be rehabilitating people who have no interest in rehabilitation.

I made no such statement. The thread is there for all to see.
But the purpose of prison is to people to repent and do better when they get out. Prison is derived from the word penance.

No. the purpose of prison is to punish criminals.

That's right the purpose of prison is to punish those who do crime for a living
That said if you can make them better persons the community will be safer

 

[Weatherman2020]

America has a terrible prison system. There some prisons that are better, but as a whole they fail in the purpose they are supposed to accomplish.

By your definition, we have a “good” system; we try to rehab these thugs who have no interest in rehab. Which is why I say, let them read old textbooks. If they need to get a diploma, televise a teacher into the class and use scan/e-mail technology for them to examine and grade… Beyond that; we shouldn’t be spending a dime helping these folks get a leg up on students who can’t afford/don’t have access to training like the prison industries give these people for free.

Your ignorance is noted.

My ignorance? You say that we should be rehabilitating people who have no interest in rehabilitation. So I’ll take your indignation as a badge of honor.

My ignorance? You say that we should be rehabilitating people who have no interest in rehabilitation.

I made no such statement. The thread is there for all to see.
But the purpose of prison is to people to repent and do better when they get out. Prison is derived from the word penance.

No. the purpose of prison is to punish criminals.

From the BOP:
"The Bureau of Prisons provides a myriad of inmate programs to address criminogenic needs related to substance abuse, education, employment and more, thereby ensuring inmates' successful transition to the community."

 

[miketx]

By your definition, we have a “good” system; we try to rehab these thugs who have no interest in rehab. Which is why I say, let them read old textbooks. If they need to get a diploma, televise a teacher into the class and use scan/e-mail technology for them to examine and grade… Beyond that; we shouldn’t be spending a dime helping these folks get a leg up on students who can’t afford/don’t have access to training like the prison industries give these people for free.

Your ignorance is noted.

My ignorance? You say that we should be rehabilitating people who have no interest in rehabilitation. So I’ll take your indignation as a badge of honor.

My ignorance? You say that we should be rehabilitating people who have no interest in rehabilitation.

I made no such statement. The thread is there for all to see.
But the purpose of prison is to people to repent and do better when they get out. Prison is derived from the word penance.

No. the purpose of prison is to punish criminals.

From the BOP:
"The Bureau of Prisons provides a myriad of inmate programs to address criminogenic needs related to substance abuse, education, employment and more, thereby ensuring inmates' successful transition to the community."

The purpose of prisons are to punish criminals. No one has said that theyr cannot be programs to help them, but the reason prisons exist is to punish criminals. Get over it, stop your crying. If it were not true, then why in the hell send them to prison? LOL!

 

[Weatherman2020]

Your ignorance is noted.

My ignorance? You say that we should be rehabilitating people who have no interest in rehabilitation. So I’ll take your indignation as a badge of honor.

My ignorance? You say that we should be rehabilitating people who have no interest in rehabilitation.

I made no such statement. The thread is there for all to see.
But the purpose of prison is to people to repent and do better when they get out. Prison is derived from the word penance.

No. the purpose of prison is to punish criminals.

From the BOP:
"The Bureau of Prisons provides a myriad of inmate programs to address criminogenic needs related to substance abuse, education, employment and more, thereby ensuring inmates' successful transition to the community."

The purpose of prisons are to punish criminals. No one has said that theyr cannot be programs to help them, but the reason prisons exist is to punish criminals. Get over it, stop your crying. If it were not true, then why in the hell send them to prison? LOL!

Barbed wire wrapped around the testicles? Dislocation of the shoulders?
I quoted the BOP, their job and rightfully so is to ensure a successful transition of inmates back into the community.

 

[Spare_change]

I'm guessing you have had no personal interaction with the criminal element in this country, nor have you visited one of our penal institutions.

So, that pretty much makes you distinctly unqualified to pass judgement, don't you think?

You'd guess wrong but don't feel bad; you're usually wrong when you're not guessing also.

But just as an example of what I'm talking about...a guy is arrested for criminal trespassing because he's homeless. Now that he has a misdemeanor on his record, he can no longer go to many shelters. So he's homeless and not able to go to the Salvation Army for example. They let him out on a PR bond and he's wandering the streets until his court date comes about. He doesn't show up (hard to find a calendar or a tree to hang it on) and is now hit with an FTA on top of the original charge when he's arrested again. This time the judge sentences him to time in the clink so now the original criminal trespass has blossomed into jail time at taxpayers expense.

Just one of several examples of how out of whack the system is.

The only thing out of whack is your manipulation of the feasibility of such a scenario.

1) Your guy is arrested for criminal trespassing. He doesn't have a misdemeanor on his record YET, so all the rest of the folderol about calendars, Salvation Army, etc. don't apply.

2) You have created an impossible scenario that can't happen ...

3) It is extremely unlikely that a homeless person would actually be charged. No one in the judicial/prosecutorial system is interested in clogging up the process with cases that have no resolution. In fact, the only time you will see DAs move forward on a case like this is if they can figure out a way to help the guy .... getting him dried out, off the weed, or hospitalization.

4) Your scenario is fictitious... as is your feigned concern for the homeless guy.

Sad that the facts whisper louder than your enumerated moronic statements:

As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price

"In Grand Rapids, Mich., Stephen Papa, a homeless Iraq War veteran, spent 22 days in jail, not for what he calls his "embarrassing behavior" after he got drunk with friends and climbed into an abandoned building, but because he had only $25 the day he went to court."

Sorry to burst your bubble (yet again).

LOL ---- this is somehow an example of some kind of prejudicial behavior by the justice system against the homeless???

Give me a break.

i truly am entertained about how you misrepresent the situation, trying to paint it with emotional keywords, and ignoring the totality of the situation.

Papa broke into an abandoned warehouse while drunk. Last time I checked - that is a crime. As a result of his actions, he went to court, and was fined $2,600. When he explained to the court that he couldn't pay his fine, the court was faced with two options: 1) confine him for the duration of his alternative sentence, of 2) set up some kind of payment plan to pay off his debt to the county.

They chose the second action. They directed him to work with the Clerk of Courts to establish a monthly payment plan. (Contrary to the heart-tugging attempt to paint him as a poor, homeless, veteran - in actuality, Papa had just started a new job at $12/hour and was staying with a friend of his)

HOWEVER - it is against the law for the courts to allow court costs to be negotiated into any negotiated settlement plan. In other words, those have to be paid immediately. The normal court costs in that court were $125. The judge lowered that to $50. When Papa said that he didn't have the $50 on him, he was told that he would remain in custody until he arranged for it to be paid.

THAT is the reality of the situation - all he had to do is call his friend, borrow $25 and he gets out of jail. Failing that, he can contact any number of lending agencies (to include numerous government social agencies) who would have funded it for him (in fact, I can think of 7 veterans charities, right off hand, that would have done it).

So, despite your bleeding heart attempt to confuse the situation with emotion, reality says something else completely different.

More interestingly, how do you justify this attack on the government processes against your constant drumbeat for bigger, larger, and more intrusive government control of our personal lives??

The word for today: dichotomy

Secondary word for today: bullshit.

Bullshit. As in what you're full of.

You said the homeless never get persecuted.
I showed it to you.

Your move.

Punishment for a crime committed is not persecution ... it is justice.

Grow the hell up.

 

[candycorn]

You'd guess wrong but don't feel bad; you're usually wrong when you're not guessing also.

But just as an example of what I'm talking about...a guy is arrested for criminal trespassing because he's homeless. Now that he has a misdemeanor on his record, he can no longer go to many shelters. So he's homeless and not able to go to the Salvation Army for example. They let him out on a PR bond and he's wandering the streets until his court date comes about. He doesn't show up (hard to find a calendar or a tree to hang it on) and is now hit with an FTA on top of the original charge when he's arrested again. This time the judge sentences him to time in the clink so now the original criminal trespass has blossomed into jail time at taxpayers expense.

Just one of several examples of how out of whack the system is.

The only thing out of whack is your manipulation of the feasibility of such a scenario.

1) Your guy is arrested for criminal trespassing. He doesn't have a misdemeanor on his record YET, so all the rest of the folderol about calendars, Salvation Army, etc. don't apply.

2) You have created an impossible scenario that can't happen ...

3) It is extremely unlikely that a homeless person would actually be charged. No one in the judicial/prosecutorial system is interested in clogging up the process with cases that have no resolution. In fact, the only time you will see DAs move forward on a case like this is if they can figure out a way to help the guy .... getting him dried out, off the weed, or hospitalization.

4) Your scenario is fictitious... as is your feigned concern for the homeless guy.

Sad that the facts whisper louder than your enumerated moronic statements:

As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price

"In Grand Rapids, Mich., Stephen Papa, a homeless Iraq War veteran, spent 22 days in jail, not for what he calls his "embarrassing behavior" after he got drunk with friends and climbed into an abandoned building, but because he had only $25 the day he went to court."

Sorry to burst your bubble (yet again).

LOL ---- this is somehow an example of some kind of prejudicial behavior by the justice system against the homeless???

Give me a break.

i truly am entertained about how you misrepresent the situation, trying to paint it with emotional keywords, and ignoring the totality of the situation.

Papa broke into an abandoned warehouse while drunk. Last time I checked - that is a crime. As a result of his actions, he went to court, and was fined $2,600. When he explained to the court that he couldn't pay his fine, the court was faced with two options: 1) confine him for the duration of his alternative sentence, of 2) set up some kind of payment plan to pay off his debt to the county.

They chose the second action. They directed him to work with the Clerk of Courts to establish a monthly payment plan. (Contrary to the heart-tugging attempt to paint him as a poor, homeless, veteran - in actuality, Papa had just started a new job at $12/hour and was staying with a friend of his)

HOWEVER - it is against the law for the courts to allow court costs to be negotiated into any negotiated settlement plan. In other words, those have to be paid immediately. The normal court costs in that court were $125. The judge lowered that to $50. When Papa said that he didn't have the $50 on him, he was told that he would remain in custody until he arranged for it to be paid.

THAT is the reality of the situation - all he had to do is call his friend, borrow $25 and he gets out of jail. Failing that, he can contact any number of lending agencies (to include numerous government social agencies) who would have funded it for him (in fact, I can think of 7 veterans charities, right off hand, that would have done it).

So, despite your bleeding heart attempt to confuse the situation with emotion, reality says something else completely different.

More interestingly, how do you justify this attack on the government processes against your constant drumbeat for bigger, larger, and more intrusive government control of our personal lives??

The word for today: dichotomy

Secondary word for today: bullshit.

Bullshit. As in what you're full of.

You said the homeless never get persecuted.
I showed it to you.

Your move.

Punishment for a crime committed is not persecution ... it is justice.

Grow the hell up.

So he was just in jail voluntarily…gotcha.

 

[Spare_change]

The only thing out of whack is your manipulation of the feasibility of such a scenario.

1) Your guy is arrested for criminal trespassing. He doesn't have a misdemeanor on his record YET, so all the rest of the folderol about calendars, Salvation Army, etc. don't apply.

2) You have created an impossible scenario that can't happen ...

3) It is extremely unlikely that a homeless person would actually be charged. No one in the judicial/prosecutorial system is interested in clogging up the process with cases that have no resolution. In fact, the only time you will see DAs move forward on a case like this is if they can figure out a way to help the guy .... getting him dried out, off the weed, or hospitalization.

4) Your scenario is fictitious... as is your feigned concern for the homeless guy.

Sad that the facts whisper louder than your enumerated moronic statements:

As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price

"In Grand Rapids, Mich., Stephen Papa, a homeless Iraq War veteran, spent 22 days in jail, not for what he calls his "embarrassing behavior" after he got drunk with friends and climbed into an abandoned building, but because he had only $25 the day he went to court."

Sorry to burst your bubble (yet again).

LOL ---- this is somehow an example of some kind of prejudicial behavior by the justice system against the homeless???

Give me a break.

i truly am entertained about how you misrepresent the situation, trying to paint it with emotional keywords, and ignoring the totality of the situation.

Papa broke into an abandoned warehouse while drunk. Last time I checked - that is a crime. As a result of his actions, he went to court, and was fined $2,600. When he explained to the court that he couldn't pay his fine, the court was faced with two options: 1) confine him for the duration of his alternative sentence, of 2) set up some kind of payment plan to pay off his debt to the county.

They chose the second action. They directed him to work with the Clerk of Courts to establish a monthly payment plan. (Contrary to the heart-tugging attempt to paint him as a poor, homeless, veteran - in actuality, Papa had just started a new job at $12/hour and was staying with a friend of his)

HOWEVER - it is against the law for the courts to allow court costs to be negotiated into any negotiated settlement plan. In other words, those have to be paid immediately. The normal court costs in that court were $125. The judge lowered that to $50. When Papa said that he didn't have the $50 on him, he was told that he would remain in custody until he arranged for it to be paid.

THAT is the reality of the situation - all he had to do is call his friend, borrow $25 and he gets out of jail. Failing that, he can contact any number of lending agencies (to include numerous government social agencies) who would have funded it for him (in fact, I can think of 7 veterans charities, right off hand, that would have done it).

So, despite your bleeding heart attempt to confuse the situation with emotion, reality says something else completely different.

More interestingly, how do you justify this attack on the government processes against your constant drumbeat for bigger, larger, and more intrusive government control of our personal lives??

The word for today: dichotomy

Secondary word for today: bullshit.

Bullshit. As in what you're full of.

You said the homeless never get persecuted.
I showed it to you.

Your move.

Punishment for a crime committed is not persecution ... it is justice.

Grow the hell up.

So he was just in jail voluntarily…gotcha.

No. He was in jail for having committed a crime ... period.

Not sure why that is so difficult for you to comprehend.

 

[candycorn]

Sad that the facts whisper louder than your enumerated moronic statements:

As Court Fees Rise, The Poor Are Paying The Price

"In Grand Rapids, Mich., Stephen Papa, a homeless Iraq War veteran, spent 22 days in jail, not for what he calls his "embarrassing behavior" after he got drunk with friends and climbed into an abandoned building, but because he had only $25 the day he went to court."

Sorry to burst your bubble (yet again).

LOL ---- this is somehow an example of some kind of prejudicial behavior by the justice system against the homeless???

Give me a break.

i truly am entertained about how you misrepresent the situation, trying to paint it with emotional keywords, and ignoring the totality of the situation.

Papa broke into an abandoned warehouse while drunk. Last time I checked - that is a crime. As a result of his actions, he went to court, and was fined $2,600. When he explained to the court that he couldn't pay his fine, the court was faced with two options: 1) confine him for the duration of his alternative sentence, of 2) set up some kind of payment plan to pay off his debt to the county.

They chose the second action. They directed him to work with the Clerk of Courts to establish a monthly payment plan. (Contrary to the heart-tugging attempt to paint him as a poor, homeless, veteran - in actuality, Papa had just started a new job at $12/hour and was staying with a friend of his)

HOWEVER - it is against the law for the courts to allow court costs to be negotiated into any negotiated settlement plan. In other words, those have to be paid immediately. The normal court costs in that court were $125. The judge lowered that to $50. When Papa said that he didn't have the $50 on him, he was told that he would remain in custody until he arranged for it to be paid.

THAT is the reality of the situation - all he had to do is call his friend, borrow $25 and he gets out of jail. Failing that, he can contact any number of lending agencies (to include numerous government social agencies) who would have funded it for him (in fact, I can think of 7 veterans charities, right off hand, that would have done it).

So, despite your bleeding heart attempt to confuse the situation with emotion, reality says something else completely different.

More interestingly, how do you justify this attack on the government processes against your constant drumbeat for bigger, larger, and more intrusive government control of our personal lives??

The word for today: dichotomy

Secondary word for today: bullshit.

Bullshit. As in what you're full of.

You said the homeless never get persecuted.
I showed it to you.

Your move.

Punishment for a crime committed is not persecution ... it is justice.

Grow the hell up.

So he was just in jail voluntarily…gotcha.

No. He was in jail for having committed a crime ... period.

Not sure why that is so difficult for you to comprehend.

Wait, you said the homeless aren't prosecuted. Maybe I'll buy you a mirror so you can debate yourself.

 

[Spare_change]

LOL ---- this is somehow an example of some kind of prejudicial behavior by the justice system against the homeless???

Give me a break.

i truly am entertained about how you misrepresent the situation, trying to paint it with emotional keywords, and ignoring the totality of the situation.

Papa broke into an abandoned warehouse while drunk. Last time I checked - that is a crime. As a result of his actions, he went to court, and was fined $2,600. When he explained to the court that he couldn't pay his fine, the court was faced with two options: 1) confine him for the duration of his alternative sentence, of 2) set up some kind of payment plan to pay off his debt to the county.

They chose the second action. They directed him to work with the Clerk of Courts to establish a monthly payment plan. (Contrary to the heart-tugging attempt to paint him as a poor, homeless, veteran - in actuality, Papa had just started a new job at $12/hour and was staying with a friend of his)

HOWEVER - it is against the law for the courts to allow court costs to be negotiated into any negotiated settlement plan. In other words, those have to be paid immediately. The normal court costs in that court were $125. The judge lowered that to $50. When Papa said that he didn't have the $50 on him, he was told that he would remain in custody until he arranged for it to be paid.

THAT is the reality of the situation - all he had to do is call his friend, borrow $25 and he gets out of jail. Failing that, he can contact any number of lending agencies (to include numerous government social agencies) who would have funded it for him (in fact, I can think of 7 veterans charities, right off hand, that would have done it).

So, despite your bleeding heart attempt to confuse the situation with emotion, reality says something else completely different.

More interestingly, how do you justify this attack on the government processes against your constant drumbeat for bigger, larger, and more intrusive government control of our personal lives??

The word for today: dichotomy

Secondary word for today: bullshit.

Bullshit. As in what you're full of.

You said the homeless never get persecuted.
I showed it to you.

Your move.

Punishment for a crime committed is not persecution ... it is justice.

Grow the hell up.

So he was just in jail voluntarily…gotcha.

No. He was in jail for having committed a crime ... period.

Not sure why that is so difficult for you to comprehend.

Wait, you said the homeless aren't prosecuted. Maybe I'll buy you a mirror so you can debate yourself.

YOU said they were persecuted, not prosecuted.

Keep your mirror.

 

[candycorn]

Bullshit. As in what you're full of.

You said the homeless never get persecuted.
I showed it to you.

Your move.

Punishment for a crime committed is not persecution ... it is justice.

Grow the hell up.

So he was just in jail voluntarily…gotcha.

No. He was in jail for having committed a crime ... period.

Not sure why that is so difficult for you to comprehend.

Wait, you said the homeless aren't prosecuted. Maybe I'll buy you a mirror so you can debate yourself.

YOU said they were persecuted, not prosecuted.

Keep your mirror.

You lost the argument 3 days ago. You’re welcome.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Great idea

Just leave those poor misunderstood felons with nothing to do but pump iron, watch television, and plan ways to escape.

Makes a lot of sense.

My plan saves jobs.
Your plan costs jobs.

Therefore my plan makes a lot more sense than yours. But then again....outsmarting you is no great feat.

They can do the jobs Americans dont want to do.

Prisons can be self supporting when it comes to food and they can sell whatever produce or meat left over to help offset the cost of running the prison.
The prisoners learn the value of hard work,they eat and it defrays the cost to the tax payer...win,win.

Total garbage:

There are prisons in Colorado raising talapia.
Whole Foods will no longer sell fish produced by Colorado prisoners – The Denver Post

According to wikipedia, it is a $60B industry (fish farming in general). Obviously it is a job that Americans can and are doing.

There is no "win win". The non criminals who were growing the fish sold by Whole Foods in the link were losing out to the slave labor from the State. Furthermore, the prisons are there to punish those who break the law; not become a jobs program where they get free training while others who are not incarcerated have to pay for such training.

Who said anything about tilapia in Colorado?

Just educating you of why prison industries should be shut down. Some farmer somewhere is not able to sell (or wasn’t able to) his/her tilapia to Whole Foods because they can’t match the slave labor of the prison in Colorado that was selling them tilapia.

Of course you have to want to learn before you learn anything. I’m pretty sure you’re in the ignorance is bliss crowd being a Trump knob polisher and all.

I would rather have tilapia farmed at prisons in Colorado than in China!