Vacation plans confirmed.

i do think our justice system has been prosecution happy for a long time with a lot of crimes, over looking things like burgleries, assaults and theft... well that just wont end well. the drug charges and traffic charges are much more reasonable.
 
This is so stupid. The one thing the government should most be focusing on, violent crimes, won't be dealt with, while they waste resources on other things.

Letting the drug stuff go I can understand.
 
Kochly said prosecutors will still consider charging suspects with certain misdemeanors, including domestic violence, driving under the influence, firearms offenses, vehicular manslaughter, sex crimes and assault with a deadly weapon.
Click to expand...

Looks like I'll still be going to Cambodia this year.
 
[quote name='Dead of Knight']What the fuck. This is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen.[/quote]

I know. It feels odd that I didn't write it and ain't (proper use) pushing to enact it.
 
[quote name='rickonker']This is so stupid. The one thing the government should most be focusing on, violent crimes, won't be dealt with, while they waste resources on other things.

Letting the drug stuff go I can understand.[/QUOTE]

which violent crimes won't be dealt with, according to the article?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']which violent crimes won't be dealt with, according to the article?[/QUOTE]


First sentence of the article:
Misdemeanors such as assaults, thefts and burglaries will no longer be prosecuted in Contra Costa County because of budget cuts, the county's top prosecutor said Tuesday.
Click to expand...


Should I have said, "won't all be dealt with"? Or do you mean the police will still attempt to stop crimes in progress? I'm including prosecution as a part of dealing with a crime.

[quote name='Friend of Sonic']But "truth" ads and other propaganda about marijuanna will still have the budget for television air time right?[/QUOTE]


Let's hope so. What would we do without those ads? :lol:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Magus8472']Even accepting that this is a wise decision to make, why would you announce it publicly?[/QUOTE]
Maybe to get access to emergency funds?
 
[quote name='rickonker']Maybe to get access to emergency funds?[/QUOTE]

Have to be more risk averse ways of doing that.

I'd be more willing to believe it's an elaborate sting operation.
 
[quote name='Magus8472']Have to be more risk averse ways of doing that.

I'd be more willing to believe it's an elaborate sting operation.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but maybe they're playing hardball.
 
[quote name='rickonker']First sentence of the article:



Should I have said, "won't all be dealt with"? Or do you mean the police will still attempt to stop crimes in progress? I'm including prosecution as a part of dealing with a crime.[/QUOTE]

Not my point. The only "violent" crime in there is assault, and I'm pretty confident the kind of "assault" you'd be outraged were it not charged is actually aggravated assault. Simple assaults (the one omitted here) involve both threats of violence and violent actions that don't involve medical assistance. Basic stuff, not really prosecution worthy, and not particularly violent either.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Not my point. The only "violent" crime in there is assault, and I'm pretty confident the kind of "assault" you'd be outraged were it not charged is actually aggravated assault. Simple assaults (the one omitted here) involve both threats of violence and violent actions that don't involve medical assistance. Basic stuff, not really prosecution worthy, and not particularly violent either.[/QUOTE]


I'm not saying the world will end, but of all the government services to cut, this?
 
It will be interesting to see how crime rates react to this.

I think it would be preferable if a jurisdiction wouldn't publicly announce they're not going to pursue X, Y or Z to see how the community would naturally react. Now they know what they can get away with, not what they think they may or may not.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']It will be interesting to see how crime rates react to this.

I think it would be preferable if a jurisdiction wouldn't publicly announce they're not going to pursue X, Y or Z to see how the community would naturally react. Now they know what they can get away with, not what they think they may or may not.[/quote]

Crimes X, Y, and Z would all go up; word would eventually get out - but there may be some lag. That's why we need religion: to make people believe that there is another type of judgment that they cannot run away from...
 
[quote name='BigT']Crimes X, Y, and Z would all go up; word would eventually get out - but there may be some lag. That's why we need religion: to make people believe that there is another type of judgment that they cannot run away from...[/QUOTE]

Forgive me (a pun!) if I'm not convinced there's a remarkable amount of overlap b/w religious doctrine and criminal law.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Not my point. The only "violent" crime in there is assault, and I'm pretty confident the kind of "assault" you'd be outraged were it not charged is actually aggravated assault. Simple assaults (the one omitted here) involve both threats of violence and violent actions that don't involve medical assistance. Basic stuff, not really prosecution worthy, and not particularly violent either.[/quote]

So in other words we will have to wait until an abusive ex, organized crime, or local thugs actually commit the acts of violence they threaten before the law kicks in? Pardon me if I'm not thrilled by this news.
 
[quote name='camoor']So in other words we will have to wait until an abusive ex, organized crime, or local thugs actually commit the acts of violence they threaten before the law kicks in? Pardon me if I'm not thrilled by this news.[/QUOTE]

Assault implies an actual attempt at battery.

Not that that makes things any better.
 
[quote name='BigT']Crimes X, Y, and Z would all go up; word would eventually get out - but there may be some lag. That's why we need religion: to make people believe that there is another type of judgment that they cannot run away from...[/QUOTE]

Ehhh.. that makes people closed minded and judgmental..and basically pretty stupid. So, no.
 
[quote name='BigT']That's why we need religion: to make people believe that there is another type of judgment that they cannot run away from...[/quote]
Argument from consequences.

And a pretty asshole one, too.
 
[quote name='62t']Hopefully this will work out for me as I work in San Francisco and live next to Contra Costa[/QUOTE]

My sympathies.

This is the attorney general feeling backed into a corner with regards to funding his operations. What a joke of a county.
 
[quote name='BigT']That's why we need religion: to make people believe that there is another type of judgment that they cannot run away from...[/quote]

No, that's why we need Batman.
 
So i can shoplift a new HDTV and speed away at 100 mph without fear of prosecution?

Road trip!:lol:

Seriously though, that is unbelievable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top