4 ms·

It seems he was sentenced not for stealing ribs, but because the threatened the store owner that confronted him, which is, in fact, a violent act. It also appe

It seems he was sentenced not for stealing ribs, but because the threatened the store owner that confronted him, which is, in fact, a violent act. It also appears he was somewhat of a habitual offender, having been convincted of various violent and non-violent crimes many times previously. The sentence is somewhat harsh (eligible for parole in 12.5), but your comparison to the Taliban is absurd. EDIT: somewhat harsh in relative comparison to normal American sentencing standards, since the goal is apparently to single out Texas as some horrible place where sentencing is too harsh. I will now point out draconian three-strikes laws in other more progressive states that would have had him in jail for life. Make no mistake, I think American criminal courts and sentencing are too harsh in general and our prisons are horrible travesties of justice. But the singling out of this state is what I'm calling absurd - all of American criminal sentencing is broken.

jbooth 13y ago
SOMEWHAT????????????
bobwaycott 13y ago
The clarification here on the details is certainly nice to have. However, are you seriously suggesting that 50 years imprisonment is only somewhat harsh?! Taking 12.5 years at the minimum before being eligible for parole for stealing $35 ribs and "threatening" someone? By the way, saying "I've got a knife" and calling that a threat is both a stretch of what it means to threaten and what it means to call something a "violent act". $35 food theft != 50 years imprisonment. That is fucking insane, not somewhat harsh.
- CamperBob2 13y ago
  (Shrug) I'm guessing the rest of us can get along OK without this enterprising young gentleman. It's not as if he's likely to cure cancer or start the next Google.
  - bobwaycott 13y ago
    > * It's not as if he's likely to cure cancer or start the next Google.* Why in the fuck does that have anything to do with the severity of the sentence? Should we start valuing people based on their probability to cure cancer or start the next Google?
    - CamperBob2 13y ago
      Just saying that his case sounds pretty far down the list of things that call for howls of injustice, IMHO.
      - alexqgb 13y ago
        Your grasp of justice is about as firm as Attila the Hun's understanding of orbital mechanics.
        CamperBob2 13y ago
        I could fit in a disgruntled mutter or two next Tuesday morning between 9 and 11. Would that help?
- talmand 13y ago
  I would think the sentence reflects more his continuing criminal career than the immediate crime at hand. I'm not sure about this case, but it could much like the three strike laws mentioned above. He only got five years for the robbery, five years for the threat, and forty years for his habitual criminal activity. As stated, in three-strike territory he possibly would have gotten life simply for the robbery of $35 worth of ribs. I agree with the above, singling out Texas as some kind of outlier for this type of thing doesn't seem quite right.
  - bobwaycott 13y ago
    I'm not picking on or singling Texas out. I don't care which state it is. Life imprisonment for stealing $35 of food is bullshit. Repeat offender or not. There's a fundamental problem with a society that is okay with an increasing prison population spending their entire adult lives there because of terminal sentences on the basis of recidivism. Increasing sentences for recidivism itself is constitutionally debatable, I think, though I'm not sure if it has been challenged on that basis. This is America, though. It'd probably stand cos we like the idea of systemic incarceration as a means to low crime rates.
    - talmand 13y ago
      Not that I necessarily disagree with you, but some might complain there's little difference between stealing $1000 over ten criminal acts or all of it in one robbery.
      - bobwaycott 13y ago
        That point is debatable, certainly. I don't like to harp on things that have become politicized too often, but this particular case stands in such stark contrast to bankers who made off with billions, none of whom to my knowledge are spending the rest of their lives in a common prison. That's why the howls of injustice, to quote another commenter. $35 in ribs, taken by repeat offender, is apparently a greater crime against society than the repeat offense of fleecing the entire society.

jbooth 13y ago

SOMEWHAT????????????

bobwaycott 13y ago

The clarification here on the details is certainly nice to have. However, are you seriously suggesting that 50 years imprisonment is only somewhat harsh?! Taking 12.5 years at the minimum before being eligible for parole for stealing $35 ribs and "threatening" someone? By the way, saying "I've got a knife" and calling that a threat is both a stretch of what it means to threaten and what it means to call something a "violent act". $35 food theft != 50 years imprisonment. That is fucking insane, not somewhat harsh.

CamperBob2 13y ago
(Shrug) I'm guessing the rest of us can get along OK without this enterprising young gentleman. It's not as if he's likely to cure cancer or start the next Google.
- bobwaycott 13y ago
  > * It's not as if he's likely to cure cancer or start the next Google.* Why in the fuck does that have anything to do with the severity of the sentence? Should we start valuing people based on their probability to cure cancer or start the next Google?
  - CamperBob2 13y ago
    Just saying that his case sounds pretty far down the list of things that call for howls of injustice, IMHO.
    - alexqgb 13y ago
      Your grasp of justice is about as firm as Attila the Hun's understanding of orbital mechanics.
      - CamperBob2 13y ago
        I could fit in a disgruntled mutter or two next Tuesday morning between 9 and 11. Would that help?
talmand 13y ago
I would think the sentence reflects more his continuing criminal career than the immediate crime at hand. I'm not sure about this case, but it could much like the three strike laws mentioned above. He only got five years for the robbery, five years for the threat, and forty years for his habitual criminal activity. As stated, in three-strike territory he possibly would have gotten life simply for the robbery of $35 worth of ribs. I agree with the above, singling out Texas as some kind of outlier for this type of thing doesn't seem quite right.
- bobwaycott 13y ago
  I'm not picking on or singling Texas out. I don't care which state it is. Life imprisonment for stealing $35 of food is bullshit. Repeat offender or not. There's a fundamental problem with a society that is okay with an increasing prison population spending their entire adult lives there because of terminal sentences on the basis of recidivism. Increasing sentences for recidivism itself is constitutionally debatable, I think, though I'm not sure if it has been challenged on that basis. This is America, though. It'd probably stand cos we like the idea of systemic incarceration as a means to low crime rates.
  - talmand 13y ago
    Not that I necessarily disagree with you, but some might complain there's little difference between stealing $1000 over ten criminal acts or all of it in one robbery.
    - bobwaycott 13y ago
      That point is debatable, certainly. I don't like to harp on things that have become politicized too often, but this particular case stands in such stark contrast to bankers who made off with billions, none of whom to my knowledge are spending the rest of their lives in a common prison. That's why the howls of injustice, to quote another commenter. $35 in ribs, taken by repeat offender, is apparently a greater crime against society than the repeat offense of fleecing the entire society.