4 ms·

> again after assaulting someone. They haven't been to court yet, they might be innocent.

cloakandswagger 9y ago
True, but it's more likely they're guilty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate#cite_note-5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate#cite_note-5
- sincerely 9y ago
  oh dear. the presumption of innocence is an international human right. justice-by-statistics is an extremely bad idea.
  - cloakandswagger 9y ago
    At the core of this is the old, philosophical question of, "Is it better to let one hundred criminals go free if it means not wrongfully convicting one innocent man?" Considering that we are talking about bail (meaning 1-2 weeks in jail, not a lifetime in prison) and we have justice systems that are right 80-90% of the time, I lean towards the more pragmatic statistical approach. The "internationally recognized human right" thing seems like a thought terminating cliche, not sure why that should be the end of the discussion.
    - sincerely 9y ago
      i do not think you understand the reality of someone living, for instance, paycheck-to-paycheck. "1-2 weeks in jail", which you seem to suggest is not that big of a deal, is a lost job and unpaid rent, to say nothing of other responsibilities (for instance, children or pets). does this seem like a reasonable consequence for being merely accused of a crime? i brought up the human rights angle because your line of thought appears to run counter to article 11 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights...but it's interesting that you can dismiss that by calling it a "cliche".
      - cloakandswagger 9y ago
        So what if my thoughts run counter to some UN document? It's interesting that you evoke it in such a religious manner, as if that alone should shut out any discussion.
        bfuller 9y ago
        So what if your thoughts run counter to the universal declaration of human rights? Are you serious?
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        That's the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” not “UN Declaration of Human Rights”.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
    - s73ver_ 9y ago
      So someone should have to spend 1-2 weeks in jail, thus losing their job, losing their ability to pay rent, so likely losing their house, despite the fact that it has not been proven that they've done anything?
    - bfuller 9y ago
      It's not always 1-2 weeks, it can be months.

True, but it's more likely they're guilty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate#cite_note-5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate#cite_note-5

sincerely 9y ago
oh dear. the presumption of innocence is an international human right. justice-by-statistics is an extremely bad idea.
- cloakandswagger 9y ago
  At the core of this is the old, philosophical question of, "Is it better to let one hundred criminals go free if it means not wrongfully convicting one innocent man?" Considering that we are talking about bail (meaning 1-2 weeks in jail, not a lifetime in prison) and we have justice systems that are right 80-90% of the time, I lean towards the more pragmatic statistical approach. The "internationally recognized human right" thing seems like a thought terminating cliche, not sure why that should be the end of the discussion.
  - sincerely 9y ago
    i do not think you understand the reality of someone living, for instance, paycheck-to-paycheck. "1-2 weeks in jail", which you seem to suggest is not that big of a deal, is a lost job and unpaid rent, to say nothing of other responsibilities (for instance, children or pets). does this seem like a reasonable consequence for being merely accused of a crime? i brought up the human rights angle because your line of thought appears to run counter to article 11 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights...but it's interesting that you can dismiss that by calling it a "cliche".
    - cloakandswagger 9y ago
      So what if my thoughts run counter to some UN document? It's interesting that you evoke it in such a religious manner, as if that alone should shut out any discussion.
      - bfuller 9y ago
        So what if your thoughts run counter to the universal declaration of human rights? Are you serious?
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      That's the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” not “UN Declaration of Human Rights”.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    So someone should have to spend 1-2 weeks in jail, thus losing their job, losing their ability to pay rent, so likely losing their house, despite the fact that it has not been proven that they've done anything?
  - bfuller 9y ago
    It's not always 1-2 weeks, it can be months.