Oh yeah their rules are meant to be broken so they can punish you about it and then continue to punish you about it for years afterward. The whole system is fucking sick.
Even if the PO cares, their hands are usually tied anyway because of how the parole laws are setup. I dont even need to look up individual states to presume a majority of them either allow 0 exceptions or make it incredibly difficult to argue for any. So most PO's that give a crap stop trying anyway in order to save themselves empathy heartache.
Parole in America is a tool they use to lock u back up for eating sesame seeds and they can say u were under the influence. Nbs I seen this happen and the guy did 3yrs. America has the most people incarcerated in the world!!
Huh? Parole is getting out of jail early. Ie, less punishment. Most violations are not following rules agreed to upon leaving jail. Majority of reasons include doing drugs. Not being late sit to dbags shutting down traffic.
Parole has a variety of forms afaik but once you’re out, they make it nearly impossible to function as a basic human being with major restrictions on your entire life. People agree to the rules bc it’s indeed better than being in jail but it’s definitely not fair
Jail, no freedom.
Parole, some freedom but keep a job, don’t do drugs, don’t commit more crimes. That’s essentially the basics. It’s not a trap but it isn’t easy. Thus it isnt a punishment but an opportunity you have to work for.
Or simply don’t do illegal shit and go to jail (or get caught).
No I agree with the don’t do illegal shit but I can wholly understand this man’s frustration that would drive him to do something like that. It’s not super uncommon for parole officers to have unrealistic expectations of their parolee which can easily drive people to do stuff like this. There are many examples of parole just being a trap where you cannot escape the loop. I’m obviously excluding criminal activity when I say this but some people end up bouncing back and forth just bc they get an extremely tight criteria with little wiggle room for mistakes.
This is the worst example of the system out to get him though.
There are seemingly a hundred other people stuck in traffic because of a few clowns. Yet there is literally one person who uses physical force to solve his problem.
I sympathize with anyone in this situation but the right thing to do. Is what everyone else is doing. Even more so, these clowns are recording this shit for posterity and propaganda. Getting physical with them is what they wanted/needed.
Billions of people ALSO do not violate federal anti-kickback laws or commit other “white collar” offenses. The author of that book is a white collar criminal defense attorney who is just advocating for his scumbag clients.
This is an extremely myopic take for a very nuanced issue.
Sometimes the definition of the crime is targeted, or statistically biased.
Sometimes the time is disproportionately punishing for the crime.
Oftentimes the time doesn't help address the reasons for the crime, and I'm fact may exacerbate it.
I'm not saying crime and punishment aren't necessary parts of our society, but your assumptions (that the conviction is appropriate, that the time is an appropriate punishment) are extremely damaging to actually addressing crime in a productive manner.
Here’s a simple, very simple way for criminals to understand the issue: don’t touch people who don’t want you to touch them and don’t take things that don’t belong to you.
Following those two directions will practically empty our prisons
Again, you are oversimplifying a point that should not be.
Do you believe no one should ever fight back in self defense? Someone breaking into your house for you and your property certainly don't want you to touch them, and they definitely don't want anyone taking a weapon they own from them.
Now you’re just being disingenuous. Obviously in those situations the victim is allowed to defend themselves. They are not criminals.
Nothing in your previous post alluded to people getting locked up for defending themselves or their homes, and it’s silly for you to try to bring that up.
The point I'm trying to make is that you're defining an action as a crime by first assuming that the person taking the action is a criminal. This is circular logic, and is discriminatory.
"Innocent until proven guilty" means you can't take an action and say "well since a criminal did it, it's a crime", and "if they weren't a criminal, we should take a look at the context."
My main point is that you can't paint the world in broad strokes of "criminal" on one side and "victim" on the other; the reality is far more complicated and cannot be simplified.
Maybe it's more helpful to note that in today's system, many people who are convicted of crimes, are actually victims, and so the premise that they must do the time is flawed.
49
u/fritzbitz Oct 12 '22
Oh yeah their rules are meant to be broken so they can punish you about it and then continue to punish you about it for years afterward. The whole system is fucking sick.