Texas Woman Jailed for Overdue Library Books

Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

1) I couldn't care less of what Washington did. Were he put in jail -- fine, now it's too late anyhow
2) What part of flipping the court don't you understand? Let's say I would be for MJ legalization and emptying the prisons on that grounds, but -- as many said -- flip the court and you must suffer consequences. I really don't see how it doesn't sink.

So why do you care what this woman did?

The truth is Washington's estate likely has plenty of money to pay the fine. Oh but the Royalties to his writings and manuscript probably go to some other corporation. No use in taking them to court with all their lawyers who will claim they aren't responsible for the debt. Costs too much money.

Better to pick on a poor woman by adding insult to injury to pick up a couple hundred dollars through armed henchmen and extortion.

The truth is none of us are safe from this system, and it's totally out of control with 600,000 laws on the books 280,000 of them with criminal penalty attached, and 1 and 1/2 more added every week, our system has become a danger to the freedom and liberty of all.

This is a rediculous matter to take to court, and no less rediculous than taking George Washington's Estate to court for failure to return books and pay the Founding Father's fines.

If it's not worth litigating in his case, then it's wrong to litigate in this case. Dual standards, selectively applied, are a mennace and and a danger to us all.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by buddhasystem

failed to show up in court

...what part of that did you fail to understand?

What part of being taken to court for over due Library books didn't you get?

No court charges, no failure to appear. See how that works?

Probably not, but the fact remains that had the City's Attorney not taken the case to court, she couldn't be arrested for not showing up.

Then everyone would take a library book and not return it if there was NO consequence..

Originally posted by Becoming
reply to post by PeasantRebellion

 

You're saying that everything I listed never happened or are you just being hard headed?

Either way, I don't care if you believe what I posted. Even if I was going to find sources (I'm not by the way) I would have listed them in my first post.

Aww come on, you can do it. What I implied was that you weren't comparing democracy to democracy. What I requested was proof of most other democracies being this way.

Originally posted by PeasantRebellion
The US has incarcerated more of it's own people than any other known civilization in history. Both per capita and in sheer numbers (2 mil and counting).

And still, on this site, in this thread, people are willing to bend over and say thank you afterwards.

You was not talking about democracy civiliztions. Your exact quote says ANY OTHER KNOWN CIVILIZATIONS.

I probably could do it, but I'm not and this is my last post to you on the subject.

Originally posted by thecinic

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by buddhasystem

failed to show up in court

...what part of that did you fail to understand?

What part of being taken to court for over due Library books didn't you get?

No court charges, no failure to appear. See how that works?

Probably not, but the fact remains that had the City's Attorney not taken the case to court, she couldn't be arrested for not showing up.

Then everyone would take a library book and not return it if there was NO consequence..

Really do you imagine some bright young entrepenuer will start a charter bus service to ferry people from the inner city to the libraries to clean them out?

This kind of thinking is nonsensical, the woman lost the books, she reported that she lost the books, she lost the books along with her home in a fire.

So are we too believe then based on your thinking that everyone who takes 'one' library book is going to burn down their homes so they don't have to return it?

That this is really a fire prevention ordinance.

Originally posted by Becoming

Originally posted by PeasantRebellion
The US has incarcerated more of it's own people than any other known civilization in history. Both per capita and in sheer numbers (2 mil and counting).

And still, on this site, in this thread, people are willing to bend over and say thank you afterwards.

You was not talking about democracy civiliztions. Your exact quote says ANY OTHER KNOWN CIVILIZATIONS.

I probably could do it, but I'm not and this is my last post to you on the subject.

Can you at least admit that there is room for improvement?

A lovable little ATS Doggie left this on my profile a few moments ago that I think is aprapos for those who feel these measures are sane.

There should be another way of dealing with something like this than sending that poor woman to prison. It is getting to be like Victorian Times in England when you could be jailed or transported for stealing a loaf of bread or a hanky.

So... let me get this straight,

A woman who was responsible for material she borrowed from the local library, failed to return it. Over time, the fee elevated the penalty to the threshold set by library administrators and the case was referred to the justice system.

The prosecutor, a state paid employee making a fine salary, no doubt, engages the court, (at it's own generously funded rate) - including all the persons involved and the administrative costs of the action we are probably talking about the state spending perhaps over $10,000 to prosecute this "criminal."

Now, add to this the state-funded jail stay....

... how is this reasonable again? How is this action 'a rational response' commensurate to the "crime"?

Justice is not about black and white lines on a page. If it were most of us would be compelled to turns ourselves in for driving at vehicular speeds 1 and 2 mph over the limit, no?

The idea of personal responsibility and civic duty MUST be tempered with HUMAN judgment, not some mechanistic regimentation you would expect in a prison camp..... but then that's the whole point isn't it?

This is an example of what our forefathers called "cruel and unusual punishment."

Paying for the books, and the fine would be cheaper than going to court, I think. I'm sure the library would have worked with the lady, but she chose to ignore everything. It seems they are making a example of her, and yes, that is unjust. Without these people being prosecuted nobody would pay for books they lose. I'm sure some rich guy would love to pay George Washington's fine. His estate is remis in not paying the fine.

Originally posted by keldas
There should be another way of dealing with something like this than sending that poor woman to prison. It is getting to be like Victorian Times in England when you could be jailed or transported for stealing a loaf of bread or a hanky.

The more laws, the less Justice - Marcus Tulius Cicero

This is the problem we have just way too many laws all designed to favor the State and the Corporations and few designed to actually protect the citizens.

Originally posted by Maxmars
So... let me get this straight,

A woman who was responsible for material she borrowed from the local library, failed to return it. Over time, the fee elevated the penalty to the threshold set by library administrators and the case was referred to the justice system.

The prosecutor, a state paid employee making a fine salary, no doubt, engages the court, (at it's own generously funded rate) - including all the persons involved and the administrative costs of the action we are probably talking about the state spending perhaps over $10,000 to prosecute this "criminal."

Now, add to this the state-funded jail stay....

... how is this reasonable again? How is this action 'a rational response' commensurate to the "crime"?

Where do you draw the line? If somebody wrecks my car and it's not my fault, I would use the justice system to rectify the situation as is practically possible. I might get $5000 for repairs to the car, and yes it will cost money for the case to be heard etc. Is that a reason that justice not be done? Seriously?

Originally posted by Maxmars

This is an example of what our forefathers called "cruel and unusual punishment."

Yep, the punishment was not equal to the crime. The very definition.

Sure the lady doesn't seem like the brightest bulb, but either do most people IMO. I'll still defend the dumb*ss over the bully any day.

Justg for clarification. It appears that she wasn't jailed for the overdue books.

She was jailed for not showing up for a court summons. BIG difference.

reply to post by Maxmars


Please stop cluttering up the thread with common sense!



This woman must be burned at the stake and suffer the same fate she allowed to befall the tomes entrusted to her.

An eye for an eye! This is the American way, and the only way others here in Salem can learn from their most egregious offences and irresponsible ways.

It is hereby ordered this woman be burned to the death at the stake, in a public place forthwith and all property of the condemned’s estate to be forfeit to the state, and all heirs of the condemned stripped of their citizenship and sold into bondage.

We will end library book abuse in our time, and set America back on the proper path to learning.

Originally posted by babybunnies
Justg for clarification. It appears that she wasn't jailed for the overdue books.

She was jailed for not showing up for a court summons. BIG difference.

True. To me it's similar to people having to jump hurdles that slowly get raised higher and higher. First the weak are picked off, but eventually we'll all hit a hurdle we can't clear. Because no human is perfect 100% of the time, and the pressure doesn't let up, ever (see graphs earlier in thread).

Right now we have a bunch of mediocre hurdlers patting themselves on the back like they've won the godd*mn Olympics. "Oh look at that woman that fell, she was so stupid. It's her fault, we wouldn't have done that..."

And if you do make it and manage never to be incarcerated, congrats, you're a lap dog. What use do you think the world has for a creature like that? Nothing good.

Originally posted by Maxmars
So... let me get this straight,

A woman who was responsible for material she borrowed from the local library, failed to return it. Over time, the fee elevated the penalty to the threshold set by library administrators and the case was referred to the justice system.

So good, so far....

The prosecutor, a state paid employee making a fine salary, no doubt, engages the court, (at it's own generously funded rate) - including all the persons involved and the administrative costs of the action we are probably talking about the state spending perhaps over $10,000 to prosecute this "criminal."

Key word being "salary"- they were paid to be there whether they prosecuted her or not...

Now, add to this the state-funded jail stay....

Some laundry and food?

... how is this reasonable again? How is this action 'a rational response' commensurate to the "crime"?

How is it not? Save for the laundry and food, everything else from the peoples' salaries to the jailhouse itself is already being paid for out of the budget of the city, funded in part by taxpayer dollars, sales taxes, fines from others' previous citations.

Justice is not about black and white lines on a page. If it were most of us would be compelled to turns ourselves in for driving at vehicular speeds 1 and 2 mph over the limit, no?

The idea of personal responsibility and civic duty MUST be tempered with HUMAN judgment, not some mechanistic regimentation you would expect in a prison camp..... but then that's the whole point isn't it?

This is an example of what our forefathers called "cruel and unusual punishment."

No. Justice is supposed to be blind, not supportive of the underdog, not supportive of the system. Blind to the status of the accuser and the accused. EXACTLY what the forefathers intended. Cruel and unusual would be sentencing her to 5 years for 200 dollars, not barely one week in jail for avoiding the situation including appearing in court to defend herself; something she was legally entitled to do while having somewhat compelling information that the charges should be lessened if not dropped entirely. She had sufficient opportunity to use the system as it was designed and possibly against itself yet failed to do so leaving her in the situation she has found herself in.

The judge had the opportunity to be lenient with the punishment... once her guilt or innocence was established he was able to administer a verdict and punishment, if any. The system working exactly as intended.

Originally posted by PeasantRebellion
Right now we have a bunch of mediocre hurdlers patting themselves on the back like they've won the godd*mn Olympics.

...I rather see a mediocrity posing as a rebel and refusing to practice common sense because it doesn't suite the image.

And if you do make it and manage never to be incarcerated, congrats, you're a lap dog.

There is no telling whether one will or won't be incarcerated, but going to jail for simply being stupid is the last thing on my list of priorities

reply to post by buddhasystem


There are a lot of assumptions that your arguments fail to consider.

Were there other factors that prevented the woman from going to court.

An inability to take the time off of work from a job she might have feared loosing.

A lack of ability to get to court due to transportation problems.

I know a lot of people in these present economic bad times who might be challenged to that extent.

Once again are we simply waging a war against the poor. It's easy to assume that everyone would have the ability to show up to court at their own time and expense, until you consider that no, not everyone is in such a position.

Has the state now further damaged this woman's life moving forward in it's zeal to collect book fines? Does she now have the job that maybe she was hoping to not loose by not taking the time off work to go to court on a rediculous charge?

Has she lost revenue while sitting in jail that she desperately might need to maintain her home, or other vital necessities?

When justice becomes so blind as to consider the individual's plight then justice no longer serves the people.

It's pretty simple, and you can argue all day long on what a person should of could of would of ought to be able to have done but life is not so simple or easy for everyone burdened with the insane rules of our state and the limited opportunities it provides.

A minimum of 1 in 10 Americans are unemployed, with at least 2 out of 10 underemployed working at part time or poor paying jobs that don't even meet their true cost of living. How are the people served during such times by placing undue and extra burdens on them by the state?

The answer is they aren't.

When people in general loose the ability to think and say "there but for good fortune go I" and fail to display compassion and empathy for those not so fortunate then ultimately we all become less fortunate in a system that spirals out of control with standards and laws fewer and fewer people can live up too.

Obviously this woman could not afford to pay these fines or she would not be sitting in jail.

Failure to appear does not earn jail time, if you simply then pay any outstanding fines when a bench warrant is executed.

We are in fact allowing this woman to be punished for bad luck and being poor.

That's reprehensible and something tells me those who fail to recognize that are more interested in ego driven notions of what's right, as opposed to what's really wrong.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
It's easy to assume that everyone would have the ability to show up to court at their own time and expense, until you consider that no, not everyone is in such a position.

She went to the library to pick books she never returned, right? So she has some mobility.
Then, she never paid the fees over a long period of time. Negligence?

Again, how is it taxpayers' fault that she removed/stole/lost/destroyed the property bought with their hard earned money? Most of them aren't rich either. Not fair to them.

It's not a serious crime but not a victimless one. Akin to shoplifting.