Steal a $1 soda, get charged with a felony.

[PoorManQ45]

No. I was pointing out that stealing is stealing, regardless of the ability of the victim to absorb the loss (in response to this):

So you do not agree with magnitudes of crimes(within a class) at all?

[Jesda]

Morals, ethics, and laws are three different things, and we seem to be mashing all of them into one discussion.

[hannibal]

^ Word.
Stealing is stealing from a moral or ethical viewpoint. From a legal aspect, of course there a degrees of crimes. Should Bernie Madoff get a more severe sentence than a guy who stole a soda? Of course!

When I was a kid, I stole a few times from Wal-mart or department stores. I justified my actions by saying theyre big companies and wont miss this little bit of money. It took a while, but I eventually did realize how retarded that mentality is.

[alms24sebring]

No, your right. A watercup size soda will not make or break McDonalds. They add water in the coke to make more anyways so f*** them.

[szh]

Morals, ethics, and laws are three different things, and we seem to be mashing all of them into one discussion.

Looks like it.

Z

[AZhitman]

So you do not agree with magnitudes of crimes(within a class) at all?

No, Brien. I don't. My Masters' Program in Criminal Justice Administration, my 7 years with the Supreme Court, and my 20-year career in law enforcement / mental health taught me absolutely nothing.

Why do I even respond to you?

[PoorManQ45]

So you do not agree with magnitudes of crimes(within a class) at all?

No, Brien. I don't. My Masters' Program in Criminal Justice Administration, my 7 years with the Supreme Court, and my 20-year career in law enforcement / mental health taught me absolutely nothing.

Why do I even respond to you?

Are you really suggesting that any thief should be treated the same? Or was that said to simply show that all of them will be labeled "thieves" uniformly, but should still be treated differently based on the facts of the incident?

[AZhitman]

It's of no consequence to you, you'll argue your uninformed position regardless.

I can get that need fulfilled at home - I have 3 teenagers.

[PoorManQ45]

It's of no consequence to you, you'll argue your uninformed position regardless.

I can get that need fulfilled at home - I have 3 teenagers.

Uninformed on what? You tried to inject morality into the legal system.

Back on topic, no matter how many times it's done, stealing a $1 item should not be a felony.

[AZhitman]

Why not?

See, here's where you're ignorant.

What if it goes before the court, the State drafts a plea deal in exchange for no prison time, and in the presentence report, the PO recommends redesignation as a misdemeanor once the offender performs community service of 20 hours to the offended establishment?

Can't do that if it's initially charged as a misdemeanor. Oops.

But please, please, continue to share with us your opinions on how things should be done...

Now, the alternative is, you can just keep letting this dipstick commit petty offense. It won't be long before he graduates to bigger and better crimes, and we can then blame your lackadaisical approach to criminal justice. Read "Broken Windows" if you have time.

I think I've mentioned before: In this economy, if you knew what you were talking about, don'tcha think someone would be paying you for your expertise?

You tried to inject morality into the legal system.

Our legal system is BASED on morality, trollbait.

[Jesda]

I have little faith in Florida's legal system to be fair or just; prosecutors there have earned a reputation for being overzealous and ethically 'questionable.'


[Unrelated tangent incoming.]


I took a [truly excellent] criminology class taught by someone who worked in the system and developed an understanding for how people are funneled through. Unfortunately, the wrong people too often end up at the bottom of the funnel. You can thank legislatures, elected by a paranoid and ignorant public, who interfere with courts by enacting minimum sentences and arbitrary standards like "Three Strikes", no matter how minor the offenses may be.

If the legislature was capable of applying sentences, why have courts at all?


The Crime and Punishment movement that originated in the 1970s has turned imprisonment into a multi billion-dollar industry, with some judges receiving kickbacks from prison operators for applying harsher sentences.

http://www.nacdl.org/champion.aspx?id=21925


We now have a shadow underclass of millions of Americans who can't find work because of their backgrounds, encouraging them (even those with minor offenses) to return to crime to sustain a living.

Yes, I've heard the "Well they shouldnt have done it to begin with" argument. I get it, but reality differs from the ideal, and by age 29, perhaps due to the way the brain's frontal lobe slowly develops, most repeat offenders cease to commit crimes.





You can chalk it up to my inherent, libertarian-minded distrust of government. The system should always be structured in a way that primarily keeps people out, rather than in.

[PoorManQ45]

Greg: can you provide more info on the decreasing of charges and how that differs from going in with the lower charge to begin with?

Doesn't being charged(not convicted) show up on criminal background checks? How will that be seen vs a misdemeanor for future job applications?

[Jesda]

Charges that are dismissed will still show up on your record unless they are expunged.

That of course makes it harder to find work or get a CCW permit, even if you were innocent.

[AZhitman]

Greg: can you provide more info on the decreasing of charges and how that differs from going in with the lower charge to begin with?

No.

I recommend enrolling in your closest local establishment of higher learning. Educating you is a thankless (and painful) endeavor.

Doesn't being charged(not convicted) show up on criminal background checks? How will that be seen vs a misdemeanor for future job applications?

Felonies and misdemeanor charges show up in a CHRI.

A CHRI will contain charges, disposition, and sentence in most cases. However, the dismal level of funding for our nation's law enforcement agencies (and resultant archaic infrastructure) has an unfortunate side effect: A lack of accurate and timely information. Many CHRIs I review contain "disposition not recorded", which can mean anything from "Prosecution declined" to "Guilty and sentenced to life in prison."

If you're concerned about future prospects for employment, don't break the law.

Just because there may not be official state-implemented sanctions for behavior doesn't automatically guarantee the absence of social consequences.

An employer has every right to determine NOT to hire someone who's been charged (not necessarily convicted) of a crime.

[BigTDogg (MA)]

$1 is what McD's charges.

It actually costs about $0.07. That's in 1998 dollars. Might be a dime now. That's actual numbers from when I ran a kitchen in college. Fountain soda is the biggest money maker in any restaurant.

[PoorManQ45]

Greg: can you provide more info on the decreasing of charges and how that differs from going in with the lower charge to begin with?

No.

I recommend enrolling in your closest local establishment of higher learning. Educating you is a thankless (and painful) endeavor.

I asked you the question because you used it as an example to support the potential reasons for starting with the higher charge.

You obviously have the information.

If you really have the "thankless endeavor" view towards educating others on the internet, why do you own a discussion forum?

Doesn't being charged(not convicted) show up on criminal background checks? How will that be seen vs a misdemeanor for future job applications?

Felonies and misdemeanor charges show up in a CHRI.

A CHRI will contain charges, disposition, and sentence in most cases. However, the dismal level of funding for our nation's law enforcement agencies (and resultant archaic infrastructure) has an unfortunate side effect: A lack of accurate and timely information. Many CHRIs I review contain "disposition not recorded", which can mean anything from "Prosecution declined" to "Guilty and sentenced to life in prison."

If you're concerned about future prospects for employment, don't break the law.

Just because there may not be official state-implemented sanctions for behavior doesn't automatically guarantee the absence of social consequences.

An employer has every right to determine NOT to hire someone who's been charged (not necessarily convicted) of a crime.

Very interesting to know.

Thank you

[Jesda]

I recommend enrolling in your closest local establishment of higher learning. Educating you is a thankless (and painful) endeavor.

Buy this $3 book:
http://www.amazon.com/Corrections-Commu ... 1593453132


It's a little tedious and verbose but the information is excellent.

[PoorManQ45]

Buy this $3 book:
http://www.amazon.com/Corrections-Commu ... 1593453132


It's a little tedious and verbose but the information is excellent.

LOL, Amazon is a little out of touch with the pricing on that book!

[Jesda]

Yeah, Amazon is probably sitting on a stale stack of them. I don't even think my campus bookstore priced it that high.

----

As for initially applying a greater charge, it's part of the negotiation process. I don't like it because I distrust the system, but that's part of the push and pull. Ideally, the most appropriate charge is eventually applied. Think of it as a transaction.


Feeding my distrust:

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national ... ays/51800/
http://m.utsandiego.com/news/2012/may/0 ... s-forward/

A student at UC San Diego was rounded up in a drug bust then left in a DEA holding cell for five days without food or water, after officers apparently forgot he was in there.

He was then returned to a holding cell to await his release. The door swung closed sometime Saturday and didn’t open again until Wednesday. Chong said he was in one of the middle cells, with no toilet, no water.

“I had to recycle my own urine,” he said. “I had to do what I had to do to survive.”

The lights went out at one point and stayed off for several days, he said. All the while, Chong said, he could hear occasional footsteps and doors opening and closing, even from the cell next door.

He tried everything he could think of to get someone’s attention. He laid on the floor and squinted through a tiny crack beneath the door. He could see shadows and hear muffled voices, Chong said. But no one came.

“It’s impossible to describe hallucinations like these,” he said. “I was completely insane.”

In utter confusion, Chong said he ate some of the broken glass he’d used to slice his arm. He also ingested a white powdery substance the DEA said had been left in the cell inadvertently.

Suddenly, the door swung open. Badly dehydrated, cramped and likely hours from death, Chong said it took him some time to realize he was being saved.

“When they opened the door, one of them said ‘Here’s the water you’ve been asking for,’” he said. “But I was pretty out of it at the time.”

That's got to cause some kind of permanent psychological damage.

[Bubba1]

Brien: While a percentage of NICOnauts agree with you that it seems a bit excessive that with Florida laws, a person could be jailed for a comparatively petty 3rd strike crime like stealing a soda. Like it or not, that's the law there. But before condemning the law, you need to weigh that against the perp's continued refusal to stop committing crimes. The severity of the of crime is less relevant than the fact that the perp ignored all warnings he received that if he committed another crime he was doing time. To anticipate your next two questions: yes, he is warned about the 3rd strike at minimum when he released from jail, and no, I will not waste the time proving that to you. Get off your lazy arse and check it yourself if you disagree.

[AZhitman]

...and to piggyback off what Bubba said...

Do you think if that guy saw an old lady with her purse next to her at that McDonald's with a wad of cash in it, he wouldn't steal it?

Better to get him out of circulation - He's proven he can't coexist with civilized people. He's sure as hell not contributing to the fabric of society.

[PoorManQ45]

Brien: While a percentage of NICOnauts agree with you that it seems a bit excessive that with Florida laws, a person could be jailed for a comparatively petty 3rd strike crime like stealing a soda. Like it or not, that's the law there. But before condemning the law, you need to weigh that against the perp's continued refusal to stop committing crimes. The severity of the of crime is less relevant than the fact that the perp ignored all warnings he received that if he committed another crime he was doing time. To anticipate your next two questions: yes, he is warned about the 3rd strike at minimum when he released from jail, and no, I will not waste the time proving that to you. Get off your lazy arse and check it yourself if you disagree.

Excellent points.

[Jesda]

Better to get him out of circulation - He's proven he can't coexist with civilized people. He's sure as hell not contributing to the fabric of society.

I agree, but he's not going to be physically removed from society if the system is reasonable (though bear in mind this is Florida, not Arizona, the land of crazies, including the legislature and courts). Even if the felony charge sticks, he's likely/hopefully going to be reformed through various community correction methods. He'll probably do a metric ton of community service, and if he isn't employed he'll likely be required to check in daily at some productivity/training facility run by the corrections department.

Society has to deal with him and reform him no matter what, but the felony charge is a detriment to the weight and severity of the f-word. If everyone is a felon, what's the point? It's like putting someone who pees in an alley on the sex offender registry.