Should the rich be better protected under law?

After cases such as Ethan couch and Morgan Stanley I have been thinking.

Is it fair for those at the top to get away with crimes that those who are poorer would be thrown in prison for? Is it fair they get leniet sentances?
Is there anyone too "big to jail"?
Should everyone be enititled to equal treatment under the law?
Should everyone be entiled to a competent defence?
Is it fair the rich and powerfull can hire top teams of lawyers in criminal cases which allow them to get away with crimes?

What does ATS think?

To answer your question; "is there anyone too big to jail?"

Wall Street, Big Pharma, Banks, their political puppets?

Too big to fail, too big to jail, they have absolute impunity of the law.

You know, I think the real reason why the symbol for justice is blindfolded is so she doesn't have to watch as she's raped, all the while we stand by idly.

NO!!!

-Peace-

reply to post by crazyewok


I think I see your point, but it's a very very dangerous road we'd travel to solve a symptom, not the problem, I fear.

yes..rich can just about buy their way out of things, and too often? There is no "just about" about it. Likewise tho..you know how many of the many many tickets I got while trucking over my lifetime, you'll find on a record? 2, if I'm not terribly mistaken. Just two. The two I didn't fight. The others? We have the best system money can buy, from traffic court to the Supreme Court.

What's the fix though? Remove the ability to buy superior legal council? That won't hurt the rich as much as it'll insure everyone has 100% equal access to Public Defense level ...which means, just plead guilty and make a bargain. You're going down either way when THAT shows up to introduce itself on something really critical for a case.

I think the problem lay in WHAT the high paid lawyers can use as levers to get their people off. Lets whack out the loopholes, technicalities that fill libraries and try a good faith approach to hunting Truth in court, not just "Justice", which is nothing more than a game of who's lawyer can B.S. the court better.

You'd have to put a limit on the amount of money any one person could spend on lawyers, since if you spend enough money you can tie up the court forever and never see a day of jail time, no matter what you've done.
Judges and Attorney Generals can also be bought and paid for, or threatened with violence by people who can hire hit men with impunity. As we've seen with the police and Blackwater-style mercenaries, there are many low level sociopaths in the world willing to commit violence for a paycheck from a high level sociopath.

And you'd have to make the CEOs and Boards of Directors held accountable personally for the actions of their (now called people) corporations.

Good luck with that, since they make the rules and even then, the rules don't apply to them.

The problem is the capitalist system, but people are so acquisitive and greedy, nobody wants to hear about it, socialism is demonized even though the socialist countries tend to be the happiest, and few see the solution (look into the Zeitgeist Movement).

signalfire
The problem is the capitalist system, but people are so acquisitive and greedy, nobody wants to hear about it, socialism is demonized even though the socialist countries tend to be the happiest, and few see the solution (look into the Zeitgeist Movement).

It's demonized because it's a resounding failure.
It's demonized because it says it's proper for one man to rightly deserve the fruits of another's labour.
As for happy?
North Korea and China don't look very happy to me.
As for Zeitgeist?
I think I would prefer a future where R2-D2 doesn't get to pick the days of the month that I can eat meat on.
No offence.

-Peace-

reply to post by signalfire

You'd have to put a limit on the amount of money any one person could spend on lawyers, since if you spend enough money you can tie up the court forever and never see a day of jail time, no matter what you've done.

How does that work and stay right with the entire purpose of the legal system as it's designed? If any limitations are placed on the defendant, rich or not, the system has officially removed any hope of fair challenge to charges. It's only a degree of damage after that.

What I mean is that, we have the system we do because they recognized the State has unlimited money, power, manpower and time to pursue against anyone it chooses to pursue. If that same system determines the level and nature of representation with an upward limit? They've predetermined outcome.

That happens to some degree now, but it's happenstance and greed of private attorneys setting their fees, not decreed by Government and made formal law of the land.

Wrabbit2000


That happens to some degree now, but it's happenstance and greed of private attorneys setting their fees, not decreed by Government and made formal law of the land.

"Greed of private attorneys" That's what capitalism and free enterprise is all about. You want govt. putting a limit on your paycheck? Sounds sort of like.........[gasp].....socialism.

Seems to me the answer of unequal justice is to become wealthy and reap the benefits.

RomeByFire


You know, I think the real reason why the symbol for justice is blindfolded is so she doesn't have to watch as she's raped, all the while we stand by idly.

True in a sad sad way

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by crazyewok

I think the problem lay in WHAT the high paid lawyers can use as levers to get their people off. Lets whack out the loopholes, technicalities that fill libraries and try a good faith approach to hunting Truth in court, not just "Justice", which is nothing more than a game of who's lawyer can B.S. the court better.

Yup that would solve the issue.
Simplify the law as such as possible. The more complicated I find the more loopholes.
I also think there needs to be mandatory sentaceing, no allowing the judge to come up with alternative sentances. If your caught stealing and found guilty you get the same punnishment as everyone else who is guilty of the same.

Eryiedes

It's demonized because it's a resounding failure.
It's demonized because it says it's proper for one man to rightly deserve the fruits of another's labour.
As for happy?
North Korea and China don't look very happy to me.
As for Zeitgeist?
I think I would prefer a future where R2-D2 doesn't get to pick the days of the month that I can eat meat on.
No offence.

-Peace-

But does caiptlism have any place in our courts?

As for socialism being a resounding faliure? I wouldnt go THAT far......Norway has a capitlist and socialist hybrid and acording to most surveys is the happest place on the planet...................
Socialist doesnt have to mean North Korea and Capitlist doesnt have to mean mad max survival of the fittest.

Captlism is ok as a economic system but is it really good as alegal system?

olaru12


"Greed of private attorneys" That's what capitalism and free enterprise is all about.

But does free enterprise have a place in the court room?
In my opinion NO!
Its a economic principle not a legal one!

olaru12
You want govt. putting a limit on your paycheck? Sounds sort of like.........[gasp].....socialism.

Who talking about wage caps?

RomeByFire


You know, I think the real reason why the symbol for justice is blindfolded is so she doesn't have to watch as she's raped, all the while we stand by idly.

It never fails to amaze how symbols like the blindfold take on the opposite of their intended meaning in a corrupt society.

How in the h#ll does a blindfolded person determine if the scales are right anyway or even see to read the law? It would be more accurate to put a fat stack on one side of the scale and a rolled up copy of the constitution on the other side.

Lets face it the blindfold is for the ignorant masses.....like an opiate for the masses. Stupid designer propaganda in a statue.

crazyewok
As for socialism being a resounding faliure? I wouldnt go THAT far......Norway has a capitlist and socialist hybrid and acording to most surveys is the happest place on the planet...................
Socialist doesnt have to mean North Korea and Capitlist doesnt have to mean mad max survival of the fittest.

Norway is a Monarchy at heart so you're barking up the wrong tree there. Socialism is misguided enough without adding inbred royalty to the mix. You wish to ignore the lessons taught to you by the Former Soviet Union...go right ahead. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it and every time history repeats itself...the price goes up.
Simply put?
You can't afford it.
Finally, disregarding North Korea and China as the largest socialist entities on the planet only weakens your stated position.
What you have done is called: "cherry picking".

-Peace-

Eryiedes

signalfire
The problem is the capitalist system, but people are so acquisitive and greedy, nobody wants to hear about it, socialism is demonized even though the socialist countries tend to be the happiest, and few see the solution (look into the Zeitgeist Movement).

It's demonized because it's a resounding failure.
It's demonized because it says it's proper for one man to rightly deserve the fruits of another's labour.
As for happy?
North Korea and China don't look very happy to me.
As for Zeitgeist?
I think I would prefer a future where R2-D2 doesn't get to pick the days of the month that I can eat meat on.
No offence.

-Peace-

North Korea and China are socialist countries? Is that why they're frequently called 'Communist China' and 'Communist North Korea'? One suffers from a complete dearth of modern anything including even electricity and the aftermath of a long war, and the other from extreme excess of population and a raging case of capitalism (factories) combined with a complete lack of concern for pollution control, which is rapidly poisoning the air, water and land. All so the west can buy plastic pumpkins and cheap computers. I truly expect them to at some point decide to close their markets and products and bond-buying to the west and tell them to F off, that will be interesting.

Like the other poster noted, the countries closest to socialism are also always reported as the 'happiest' by whatever measure. YMMV.

Your understanding of Zeitgeist is extremely limited, I suggest you do more research. It's not about 'R2D2 picking what days of the month you can eat meat', but about basing our resource usage on actual resource availability and sustainability, and making sure that everyone has their true needs taken care of (housing, food, education, medical care) before some people get obscene amounts of wealth with which to manipulate the system, creating inequality and the crime that goes along with that. The usual debunking with ridicule is the sign of a closed mind and inadequate information.

See, the problem with capitalism is what we're seeing all over the place now in the west. Extreme inequality, win/lose mentality which is the same as dog eat dog. Hardly a civilization, more like the same mentality as castles, armed camps, and invading hordes. The rich need to start realizing that they're at risk from the not-so-rich, even in their underground bunkers and gated communities. What we're doing obviously isn't working and the love of money has long since overtaken the Constitution. The US is now a fascist state with stunning firepower. The outcome of that combo won't be pretty.

it's the fact that too many prosecutors will not attempt to even try to take these people to trial or allow them to plea bargain to some ridiculous lower crime. let's take the recent congressman radel from florida. he was busted buying an eight ball of coc aine. most of the time, that is usually a felony for 99% of the population. the prosecutor allowed him to plea down to a misdemeanor probation and a fine lower than the cost of the coc aine. that is a travesty and should not have allowed to have happened. if it were almost any other individual, especially, if they are african or hispanic, they would be in prison.

remember when nicole richie was going the wrong way on the free way, stoned? again, a slap on the wrist. i am a middle age white male. i would be in prison for the same crime.

true, the rich have always been able to tweek the laws. but when the gap has grown too wide in the equal treatment under the law, society will not continue to stand.

Eryiedes

Norway is a Monarchy at heart so you're barking up the wrong tree there. Socialism is misguided enough without adding inbred royalty

So why do scandinavia countrys report the highest amount in happyness, education and healthcare?

Eryiedes
to the mix. You wish to ignore the lessons taught to you by the Former Soviet Union...go right ahead. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it and every time history repeats itself...the price goes up.
Simply put?
You can't afford it.

Norway, Sweden and Finland are not the USSR or north Korea!
why does everything have to be measured in extermes with "YOU" people. There no middle way.

Eryiedes
Finally, disregarding North Korea and China as the largest socialist entities on the planet only weakens your stated position.

Yeah and they are crapholes. obviouly there system is rubbish.

Same can be said of capitlist countrys, Hong Kong and Singapore are very free market yet are up the top with scandinavia countrys. But the USA and UK are failing fast does that mean capitlism is a faliure? No as Hong Kong and Singapore make it work.


Both capitlistlism and soliclsim can work. What determines its success is all in the implimentation.

Eryiedes
What you have done is called: "cherry picking".

And your guilty of the same. Picking out the bad apples like China and North Korea and ignoreing the sucessfull ones like Norway and finland ect

Im not saying socilism is any better than capitlism that not the topic here. All Im saying if both can work, depending on how a country impliemenst them.

blackthorne
it's the fact that too many prosecutors will not attempt to even try to take these people to trial or allow them to plea bargain to some ridiculous lower crime. let's take the recent congressman radel from florida. he was busted buying an eight ball of coc aine. most of the time, that is usually a felony for 99% of the population. the prosecutor allowed him to plea down to a misdemeanor probation and a fine lower than the cost of the coc aine. that is a travesty and should not have allowed to have happened. if it were almost any other individual, especially, if they are african or hispanic, they would be in prison.

remember when nicole richie was going the wrong way on the free way, stoned? again, a slap on the wrist. i am a middle age white male. i would be in prison for the same crime.

true, the rich have always been able to tweek the laws. but when the gap has grown too wide in the equal treatment under the law, society will not continue to stand.

Exactly!

IF Lindsey Lohan was a poor black women I bet she would have used up her three strikes by now and be serving life!

reply to post by Eryiedes

Finally, disregarding North Korea and China as the largest socialist entities on the planet only weakens your stated position.

You know, Eryiedes, I starred your first post.

NO! is the answer I have for the OP.

I'm concerned though, that you are confusing Socialism with Communism. China and North Korea are COMMUNIST countries, not socialist ones.

signalfire is right.

@signalfire: You are right. I agree.

reply to post by crazyewok

So why do scandinavia countrys report the highest amount in happyness, education and healthcare?

They are also among the top countries for PEACE.

:thump up: