5 ms·

I've downvoted you because: Arbitration applies to civil suits. Criminal suits are not civil suits.

• ransom1538 8y ago
  Plea bargains exist. The jails are filled with people that have not gone through trial. (It is over %90). Criminals these days don't see a trial. You can't be serious or even remotely correct. But yes, use your powerful downvote.
  • Matticus_Rex 8y ago
    What? He's totally correct that arbitration only applies to civil suits. That has nothing to do with plea bargains, which are part of criminal suits, and don't involve someone losing their right to a trial.
    • ransom1538 8y ago
      Signing away trial, is the signing away trial. Criminal vs civil is irrelevant.
      • Matticus_Rex 8y ago
        Deciding not to have a trial is not giving up your right to a trial any more than deciding not to vote in an election is giving up your right to vote. Choosing not to exercise a right is not giving up your right.
        • tialaramex 8y ago
          A system that says "Oh yes, you're entitled to a trial... But if we go to trial you're facing a minimum of eighteen years in person, instead of six months, also you're going to be held in prison anyway for six weeks, hope you don't lose your job" isn't giving you a "right to trial" in any meaningful sense and they know it.
  • andrewla 8y ago
    I think the point you're making has some validity, but a plea bargain is a lot more analogous to an "out-of-court" settlement in a civil suit than it is to contractually agreeing to binding arbitration. That is, I cannot sign away my right to a criminal trial right now, not having committed or been accused of any criminal offense. Whereas I can sign away my right to a civil trial now, not having yet committed any breach of contract.
  • NegativeK 8y ago
    In the context of what we're talking about -- which is agreeing to arbitration to use a service -- plea bargains aren't relevant at _all_.