6 ms·

The US is a leader in many respects, due largely to our Constitutionally-protected rights. I'm not a fan of the US prison system. But are you seriously claimin

The US is a leader in many respects, due largely to our Constitutionally-protected rights. I'm not a fan of the US prison system. But are you seriously claiming that the whole justice system is worse than Venezuela or Honduras?

kick 7y ago
It's not as clear-cut as you think. Venezuela was the first country to abolish the death penalty, and it's still gone. The United States still willingly, and gleefully in some cases, executes citizens. For non-citizens, whether you get justice or not is a toss-up. We have three types of penal systems here in the United States: the actual court system, the unconstitutional-yet-protected-in-court 100-miles-from-the-border Constitution-exemption zone that contains two thirds of the US population (and a large portion of the country's non-citizens),[1-2] and the unconstitutional-yet-barred-from-being-contested-in-court intelligence agencies.[3-5] It's hard to claim that you're doing that much better when you're only so far from Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay, or one of the other hundreds of black sites. Worst is when these systems mix, but it happens more and more often now.[6] [1-2 I realized this is a weird claim, but it's true, and here are two of the outlets furthest from one another politically claiming it's true to give evidence that it is] [1] https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone [2] https://www.rt.com/usa/court-upholds-laptop-border-searches-041/ https://www.rt.com/usa/court-upholds-laptop-border-searches-... [3] https://www.wired.com/2015/08/hard-sue-nsa-prove-spied/ https://www.wired.com/2015/08/hard-sue-nsa-prove-spied/ [4] https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/privacy-and-surveillance/nsa-using-secrecy-avoid-courtroom-reckoning-its https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/privacy-and-surv... [5] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/04/judge-dodges-legality-nsa-mass-spying-citing-secrecy-claims https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/04/judge-dodges-legality-... [6] https://theintercept.com/2017/11/30/nsa-surveillance-fisa-section-702/ https://theintercept.com/2017/11/30/nsa-surveillance-fisa-se...
SahAssar 7y ago
That's not what s/he said. The quote is "most cruel justice system in the West, and by quite a margin, too. It is one of a few aspects in which the US is far closer to today's developing and third world countries than to the Western average." So it says that it is the worst in the west (a term that usually does not include south/central america, even though they are west on a map), and that it is closer to a third world country than many in the west. From my casual reading that seems pretty much on point. The justice system does not just mean the prison system, it encompasses laws, police, courts, correctional facilities, some portions of mental health treatment. If we are bringing up the freedoms enjoyed by citizens in different countries I'd also point out that how the constitution is interpreted seems pretty arbitrary over time depending on who is in the supreme court and what the political climate is. As an example I'm not even sure how solitary confinement can not be considered a "cruel and unusual punishment" under the eighth amendment. I don't get how NSA data collection is not a impacting the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" of Fourth Amendment. The second amendment seems pretty cut-and-dry in the text that any American should be allowed to have a rocket launcher and that background checks are illegal. I'd hate for that to come true, but if you are following the principle that the constitution supersedes all lower law then it seems logical. Most western democracies seem to have similar freedoms and similar guarantees that the government will follow similarly given that they are also enshrined in law. Please correct me if I am wrong, but when I hear americans talk about their freedoms they seem to talk in absolutes, but in practice it's no more free or secure than similar freedoms given by laws in many other western countries.
btilly 7y ago
Our Constitutionally protected rights??? Amendment 1: Why is "In God We Trust" on our money? Amendment 3: The only time it ever was litigated (in Engblom v. Carey) the government won because a bureaucrat cannot be faulted for not knowing such an obscure law. Amendment 4: Have you seen what the NSA is doing? Also "unreasonable search and seizure" is, under the doctrine of civil forfeiture, perfectly permissible as long as it is your assets being sued and not you. Amendment 6: Our out of control plea bargaining system makes a joke out of "fair trial". Amendment 7: The point of a jury trial is that the jury can choose not to enforce a bad law. The legal system misinforms jurors about this to keep jury trial from being meaningful. Amendment 8: The overuse of solitary confinement, recognized the world over as a form of torture, certainly qualifies as "cruel and unusual punishment". I don't see that the USA has kept the spirit of this one! Amendment 10: I'm guessing that you are not familiar with the massive growth of power of the government due to the systemic misinterpretation of the Commerce Clause starting in the 1930s. But the ability of the federal government to regulate local workplaces was not intended by anyone. It is easy to wave a phrase like "our Constitutionally protected rights" around and believe that things are OK. But if you actually pay attention, you'll find that that Constitution has been a lot less protection than most Americans believe it has.
- catalogia 7y ago
  Amendment 1: Gives me the right to viciously mock ""In God We Trust" on our money" (Which is worth a lot more to me than money without some pithy religious crap on it, which realistically impacts me not an iota.)
- RankingMember 7y ago
  > Amendment 7: The point of a jury trial is that the jury can choose not to enforce a bad law. The legal system misinforms jurors about this to keep jury trial from being meaningful. I lean in favor of the practice of jury nullification, but I can't see how you can make the argument that juries exist expressly to judge good vs bad laws.
  - btilly 7y ago
    I say it because the historical debate on the 7th amendment centered on jury nullification. People from Benjamin Franklin to Thomas Jefferson cited the fact that juries could refuse to convict under bad laws as a final defense against unjust government.
tripzilch 7y ago
Are you seriously confused about what they meant by "worst in the West"? What do you expect, a pat on the back for not being as bad as those? Prisons are meant as a way to take people's freedom away for some amount of time, not to sneak in extra corporeal punishment by making them as shitty as possible. What is happening in the US is definitely the latter, and what's worse, many people seem to cheer for it.

kick 7y ago

It's not as clear-cut as you think. Venezuela was the first country to abolish the death penalty, and it's still gone. The United States still willingly, and gleefully in some cases, executes citizens. For non-citizens, whether you get justice or not is a toss-up. We have three types of penal systems here in the United States: the actual court system, the unconstitutional-yet-protected-in-court 100-miles-from-the-border Constitution-exemption zone that contains two thirds of the US population (and a large portion of the country's non-citizens),[1-2] and the unconstitutional-yet-barred-from-being-contested-in-court intelligence agencies.[3-5] It's hard to claim that you're doing that much better when you're only so far from Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay, or one of the other hundreds of black sites. Worst is when these systems mix, but it happens more and more often now.[6] [1-2 I realized this is a weird claim, but it's true, and here are two of the outlets furthest from one another politically claiming it's true to give evidence that it is] [1] https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone [2] https://www.rt.com/usa/court-upholds-laptop-border-searches-041/ https://www.rt.com/usa/court-upholds-laptop-border-searches-... [3] https://www.wired.com/2015/08/hard-sue-nsa-prove-spied/ https://www.wired.com/2015/08/hard-sue-nsa-prove-spied/ [4] https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/privacy-and-surveillance/nsa-using-secrecy-avoid-courtroom-reckoning-its https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/privacy-and-surv... [5] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/04/judge-dodges-legality-nsa-mass-spying-citing-secrecy-claims https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/04/judge-dodges-legality-... [6] https://theintercept.com/2017/11/30/nsa-surveillance-fisa-section-702/ https://theintercept.com/2017/11/30/nsa-surveillance-fisa-se...

SahAssar 7y ago

That's not what s/he said. The quote is "most cruel justice system in the West, and by quite a margin, too. It is one of a few aspects in which the US is far closer to today's developing and third world countries than to the Western average." So it says that it is the worst in the west (a term that usually does not include south/central america, even though they are west on a map), and that it is closer to a third world country than many in the west. From my casual reading that seems pretty much on point. The justice system does not just mean the prison system, it encompasses laws, police, courts, correctional facilities, some portions of mental health treatment. If we are bringing up the freedoms enjoyed by citizens in different countries I'd also point out that how the constitution is interpreted seems pretty arbitrary over time depending on who is in the supreme court and what the political climate is. As an example I'm not even sure how solitary confinement can not be considered a "cruel and unusual punishment" under the eighth amendment. I don't get how NSA data collection is not a impacting the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" of Fourth Amendment. The second amendment seems pretty cut-and-dry in the text that any American should be allowed to have a rocket launcher and that background checks are illegal. I'd hate for that to come true, but if you are following the principle that the constitution supersedes all lower law then it seems logical. Most western democracies seem to have similar freedoms and similar guarantees that the government will follow similarly given that they are also enshrined in law. Please correct me if I am wrong, but when I hear americans talk about their freedoms they seem to talk in absolutes, but in practice it's no more free or secure than similar freedoms given by laws in many other western countries.

btilly 7y ago

Our Constitutionally protected rights??? Amendment 1: Why is "In God We Trust" on our money? Amendment 3: The only time it ever was litigated (in Engblom v. Carey) the government won because a bureaucrat cannot be faulted for not knowing such an obscure law. Amendment 4: Have you seen what the NSA is doing? Also "unreasonable search and seizure" is, under the doctrine of civil forfeiture, perfectly permissible as long as it is your assets being sued and not you. Amendment 6: Our out of control plea bargaining system makes a joke out of "fair trial". Amendment 7: The point of a jury trial is that the jury can choose not to enforce a bad law. The legal system misinforms jurors about this to keep jury trial from being meaningful. Amendment 8: The overuse of solitary confinement, recognized the world over as a form of torture, certainly qualifies as "cruel and unusual punishment". I don't see that the USA has kept the spirit of this one! Amendment 10: I'm guessing that you are not familiar with the massive growth of power of the government due to the systemic misinterpretation of the Commerce Clause starting in the 1930s. But the ability of the federal government to regulate local workplaces was not intended by anyone. It is easy to wave a phrase like "our Constitutionally protected rights" around and believe that things are OK. But if you actually pay attention, you'll find that that Constitution has been a lot less protection than most Americans believe it has.

catalogia 7y ago
Amendment 1: Gives me the right to viciously mock ""In God We Trust" on our money" (Which is worth a lot more to me than money without some pithy religious crap on it, which realistically impacts me not an iota.)
RankingMember 7y ago
> Amendment 7: The point of a jury trial is that the jury can choose not to enforce a bad law. The legal system misinforms jurors about this to keep jury trial from being meaningful. I lean in favor of the practice of jury nullification, but I can't see how you can make the argument that juries exist expressly to judge good vs bad laws.
- btilly 7y ago
  I say it because the historical debate on the 7th amendment centered on jury nullification. People from Benjamin Franklin to Thomas Jefferson cited the fact that juries could refuse to convict under bad laws as a final defense against unjust government.

tripzilch 7y ago

Are you seriously confused about what they meant by "worst in the West"? What do you expect, a pat on the back for not being as bad as those? Prisons are meant as a way to take people's freedom away for some amount of time, not to sneak in extra corporeal punishment by making them as shitty as possible. What is happening in the US is definitely the latter, and what's worse, many people seem to cheer for it.