CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:44
Arguments:59
Total Votes:49
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 What reforms should be implemented to improve 'Justice'? (38)

Debate Creator

JustIgnoreMe(4316) pic



What reforms should be implemented to improve 'Justice'?

There are lots of people pushing to improve our justice system right now - what reforms should they be advocating?
Add New Argument

Better handling of complaints/abuse.

National reporting of data.

Removing conflicts of interest in prosecuting police.

Limit qualified immunity.

Miocene(432) Clarified
2 points

I agree with all of these.

..................................................................

Fewer laws/reduced sentences around non-violent acts (drug laws, etc.)

Miocene(432) Clarified
1 point

Shop lifting and white collar crime costs the nation $ billions every year and those convicted of such serious offenses must be severely treated within the parameters of the legal system.

Jace(4829) Disputed
1 point

Shop lifting and white collar crime do not cost 'the nation' anything. They cost the immediate, private parties who should be responsible for securing their own enterprise instead of living on the public dole.

Eliminate the monetization of prisoners to the greatest extent possible (no private prisons, civil asset forfeiture reform, bail reform, prison labor reform, etc.)

Miocene(432) Clarified
1 point

All those convicted of violent crime black white or indifferent, should automatically receive mandatory sentences of hard Labour*.

JustIgnoreMe(4316) Clarified
2 points

Prison labor should be restricted to community service and training - not be considered a free/cheap labor force for J.C. Penny and Victoria's Secret. Why pay a non-convict minimum wage when you can pay a convict 20 cents an hour?

If companies want to train prisoners, it should be for a limited time and they should be required to hire at least some percentage of those prisoners once released.

More and better police training

More civilian input/oversight of policing.

Miocene(432) Disputed
1 point

Any monitoring of policing procedures or activities should be carried out by non-partisan professional experts.

Better equipment and tactics.

Body cams, guidance on restraints, de-escalation, improved non-lethal weapons, etc.

Abolish mandatory minimums and truth-in-sentencing laws.

Black Votes Matter.

Fix the Voting Rights Act

Gerrymandering Reform

Restore voting rights - The government should never be able to take away a citizen's right to vote.

Very easy (e.g. Automatic) Voter Registration

Miocene(432) Clarified
1 point

Gerry Mandering is a perfectly good Chinese restaurant just half a mile from where I live and is not in need of any amendments.

Miocene(432) Disputed
1 point

Citizens who break the law must lose all rights including the right to vote.

1 point

Citizens should chose their government - not the other way around.

It sets up incentives for abuse like locking up dissenting voices, and allows scrubbing of legitimate voters either by mistake or on purpose.

Miocene(432) Disputed
1 point

In what way do black votes not matter?

If a law abiding black citizen casts his/her vote it will receive exactly the same priority as a white person's vote.

1 point

"If a law abiding black citizen casts his/her vote"

It is often deliberately made harder for them to vote.

Where registration offices are located, what hours they are open, restricting voter registration drives, moving polling places, early voting limits, which IDs are allowed, what name matches are required, provisional ballot acceptance, voter-challenges, roll purges, which machines to buy/maintain, etc. are often calculated to reduce black turnout.

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/07/circuit-court-north-carolina-law-targeted-african-americans-surgical-precision/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-locations/southern-us-states-have-closed-1200-polling-places-in-recent-years-rights-group-idUSKCN1VV09J

https://www.governing.com/topics/politics/sl-polling-place-close-ahead-of-november-elections-black-voters.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/sep/02/georgia-republians-political-opponents-voter-intimidation

https://www.theroot.com/exclusive-thousands-of-black-votes-in-georgia-disappea-1832472558

https://qz.com/1661870/georgias-new-voting-tech-raises-questions-over-election-security/

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/07/24/texas-redistricting-federal-supervision/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/02/texas-polling-sites-closures-voting

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/16/us/politics/tennessee-voter-registration.html

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/6-million-lost-voters-state-level-estimates-felony-disenfranchisement-2016/

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/step-wrong-direction-cutting-early-voting-hurts-voters

https://www.stltoday.com/opinion/editorial/editorial-foreign-election-meddling-is-real-but-gop-keeps-blocking/article_cfad2051-df3d-560d-b1aa-71da5434a8c2.html

Limiting the use of the past conviction box on job applications.

2 points

You left out a "fair and balanced" SCOTUS, a fair and balanced Federal judiciary, a fair and balanced AG, a fair and balanced Justice department, a fair and balanced White House Advisory.

A league of YES MEN will never improve justice.

It definitely wasn't an exhaustive list, just a start which can improve over time.

If you have specific reforms on those areas, please do post them.

I did see that Stanford was working on a "blind charging" system that seems interesting - ref

Miocene(432) Clarified
1 point

You've clearly never been an employer.

Where I come from it has been illegal for a long time to ask job candidates if they had any convictions for political crimes, i.e., blowing up power stations or killing members of the security forces.

If, for whatever reason it is identified that certain employees had been convicted for violent crimes or terrorism offenses the employer must not under any circumstances sack these employees.

Yet withal, when carrying out work to government installations each potential worker's name, address and date of birth along with similar details abut their parents and immediate next of kin must be submitted.

Any employee failing to pass the security scrutiny process or with the aforementioned convictions are not permitted to engage in the completion of such contracts.

This is injustice.

Jace(4829) Disputed
1 point

Employers can legally decline to hire and and can legally fire employees if their criminal record is relevant to the employment position (e.g. embezzlement for an accounting position, terrorism for a security officer position, etc.).

If the criminal history is not relevant then there is little compelling reason that an employer would need to not hire or to fire the person in question. Although it is technically illegal it is nevertheless easy to identify legally defensible reasons for not hiring or for firing.

Most candidates or employees do not have the resources to fight their employer, and that is particularly true of those with criminal histories. That's presuming they're even aware of their rights in the first place.

Miocene(432) Disputed
1 point

Such information is as vital to the employer as the applicant's formal qualifications for the vacant position.

For instance, if part of a vacant position involved being near to young children it would be imperative that the employer had full information regarding any past pedophilia convictions or pending charges.

JustIgnoreMe(4316) Clarified
0 points

That's why I said "Limiting the use" rather than the more popular phrase of "Ban the Box"

We still need to prevent pedophile-teachers and embezzling-comptrollers, etc. - but it should be limited to crimes related to the position and adhere to statutes of limitations.

1 point

What reforms should be implemented to improve 'Justice'?

Hello Just:

Great list. You probably included ending the drug war, but it's worth mentioning again..

There's a great read entitled: Ain't nobody's business if you do

https://www.amazon.com/Aint-Nobodys-Business-You-Consensual/dp/ 192976717X

excon

PS> Upon further thought, I'm gonna EXPAND my answer above to include ALL consensual crimes..

I mentioned "Fewer laws/reduced sentences around non-violent acts (drug laws, etc.)", but maybe "consensual" or "victimless" would be better.

I have so many books I haven't read yet, but will put that one on the list - Thanks!

1 point

February 12, 1996, issue of National Review

THE WAR ON DRUGS IS LOST

William F. Buckley Jr.

This is a link to a abbreviated version of the 1996 article. If you can find the article in it's entirety it's very worth while reading. The complete article is the text of a symposium comprised of a group of highly accomplished professional TRUE CONSERVATIVES who include large city police chiefs or commissioners, federal judges, ect. Not a radical of any sort in the bunch. Buckley himself of course was a genius. You can't read this article and come away believing that the war on drugs makes any sense at all, because it doesn't.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/07/war-drugs-lost-nro-staff/

1 point

You can't read this article and come away believing that the war on drugs makes any sense at all, because it doesn't

Don't even need to read the article. How can you have a war against something which doesn't fight back?

BRONT(268) Disputed
1 point

Great list. You probably included ending the drug war, but it's worth mentioning again..

There's a great read entitled: Ain't nobody's business if you do

https://www.amazon.com/Aint-Nobodys-Business-You-Consensual/dp/ 192976717X

excon

PS> Upon further thought, I'm gonna EXPAND my answer above to include ALL consensual crimes..

And we know out of Trump vs the Democrats who would be the best chance to actually get any of it passed. But...you seem to relish being lied to with a fake white smile over being helped by orange skin.

Seeing Trump seems able to do something in days, it would make one wonder if the Democrats who couldn't do anything in decades, actually want blacks treated fairly.

I suppose Nancy and Chuck are fairly aware that once blacks get these things, white, Democrat pandering and baiting won't garner very many votes.

The promise of a dangling carrot seems to be a better political tactic than actually giving someone the carrot...

JustIgnoreMe(4316) Clarified
1 point

"we know out of Trump vs the Democrats who would be the best chance to actually get any of it passed."

Yes we do - Democrats. As long as they aren't blocked by Republicans, as they repeatedly have been.

1 point

Broadly speaking, I agree with most of your proposals (I bet we disagree on what each proposal means in practice). But I am little confused about your position on voting. Unless you want all incarceration abolished, you are in favor of taking away people's freedom, but not their vote? Why is voting inviolable but freedom isn't?

JustIgnoreMe(4316) Clarified
1 point

I'm not for banning all incarceration, but, yes, I think people should be able to vote from prison.

The sales-pitchy phrases:

Taking away the right to vote is antithetical to the proposition of "consent of the governed".

Citizens should chose their government - not the other way around.

Some are earning income and paying taxes while incarcerated, so they could claim taxation without representation.

etc.

More prosaically, as I mentioned in my reply to Miocene - it sets up incentives for abuse like locking up dissenting voices, and allows scrubbing of legitimate voters either by mistake or on purpose.

Ignoring a significant number of people who have experience with the justice system increases the likelihood that problems will remain unresolved - (in legislating, policing, prosecuting, sentencing, jailing, rehabilitating, etc.)

As for freedom, I'm open to ideas, but the main difference I see is the downside potential - there is little to no articulable downside for someone voting, but very high potential downside in not jailing violent criminals.

There is some upside to take notice of - prisoners who vote may be more invested in reintegrating with society upon release.

I think Maine and Vermont are the only states that let all prisoners vote, but other jurisdictions allow some voting (ref); I can understand the bias towards not allowing people to vote who are in prison for life without parole, but considering my above concerns and the potential for people to change over decades and the potential for over-sentencing leave me thinking even they should have the right to vote - though I think I would vote for that compromise position if it was the only option on the table.

0 points

yes, I think people should be able to vote from prison.

I think you're an idiot.

The sales pitchy phrases:

You don't know when to shut up.

You're compulsively dishonest.

You are psychologically incapable of conceding any form of criticism or error, no matter how valid or true.

You're a carbon copy of the Conservatives you act like you hate. Equally irrational and equally partisan.

You think we should let child rapists participate in the political system.

Ensuring that police incentives/promotions aren't based on arrests, summonses, confiscations, etc., but low emergency call volumes, fast response times, high clearance rates, etc.