• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

D’Souza Is Spared Prison Time for Campaign Finance Violations

Cardinal said:
And people like Madoff?

The qualification for prison shouldn't be determined by violent vs. nonviolent, but victim vs. non-victim.
Click to expand...

You beat me to that one. He ruined lives in violating the public trust while lining his pockets to support his extravagant lifestyle. He deserved well more than he will end up serving.
 
Cardinal said:
So you believe that as long as violence didn't take place but there was clear evidence of a theft, the perpetrator shouldn't face prison time?
Click to expand...

Thieves don't always go to prison today, do they? I can steal from a 7/11 and as a first time offender, I probably won't see a minute of prison.

They release violent criminals and kiddie rapists because of overcrowding. I'm more afraid of them than I am of D'Souza.
 
tres borrachos said:
Thieves don't always go to prison today, do they? I can steal from a 7/11 and as a first time offender, I probably won't see a minute of prison.

They release violent criminals and kiddie rapists because of overcrowding. I'm more afraid of them than I am of D'Souza.
Click to expand...

Me too, but that doesn't address anything I said. In principle, do you believe that thieves shouldn't face prison time?
 
tres borrachos said:
Malum in se are violent crimes, and malum prohibitum are regulatory crimes of a non-violent nature. White collar crimes really.

I agree with Turtle. Violent people need to be in prison, the others not.
Click to expand...

No. Malum in se crimes do not always involve violence. It merely denotes the fact that it wasn't a victimless crime. If I steal money from your bank account via fraud, even though there is no violence involved, it is not malum in se, because you have directly been made a victim through these actions. If I find a loop hole to donate money to a candidate, that is different because there is no direct victim, therefor (arguably) it's malum prohibitum.

But regardless, I do not agree with turtle. Some non violent crimes definitely deserve jail time. And this is one of them. Any one caught with voter fraud, laundering money to political candidates etc need to be shown that it will not be tolerated and that our election laws are enforced.
 
Cardinal said:
Me too, but that doesn't address anything I said. In principle, do you believe that thieves shouldn't face prison time?
Click to expand...

Thieves should be punished. I can't answer that blanket question. A man who robs a 7/11 of a 6 pack of beer is a thief. Should he serve prison time? Not if it was his first offense.
 
Ockham said:
You say selective, I say politically discriminatory.
Click to expand...

If it continues, and there's no sign of it abating, and expands in severity, one could almost say tyrannical.

Seems almost rather authoritarian in nature. Would just have to add control / manipulation of the press.


This'all has come to nothing, hasn't it?

Oops. My, how positively Soviet!
 
tres borrachos said:
Thieves should be punished. I can't answer that blanket question. A man who robs a 7/11 of a 6 pack of beer is a thief. Should he serve prison time? Not if it was his first offense.
Click to expand...

So you're saying he should serve a prison sentence after his first offense? I have no idea why you're tap dancing around saying that thievery is a crime punishable by imprisonment. This doesn't seem like it should be a particularly volatile topic.
 
Cardinal said:
So you're saying he should served a prison sentence after his first offense? I have no idea why you're tap dancing around such a basic issue here. This doesn't seem like it should be a particularly volatile topic.
Click to expand...

Who is the "he" you're referring to? You asked me:

In principle, do you believe that thieves shouldn't face prison time

And I said I can't answer it. The definition of "thief" is too broad.

Do I think D'Souza should serve jail time? I don't think so, no.
 
tres borrachos said:
Thieves should be punished. I can't answer that blanket question. A man who robs a 7/11 of a 6 pack of beer is a thief. Should he serve prison time? Not if it was his first offense.
Click to expand...

did he display a handgun while in the criminal act
if so, prison, despite its being his first (known) offense
the point being non-violent criminals should also be subjected to prison sentences
those found guilty of committing victimless crimes should not
 
Cardinal said:
A thief.
Click to expand...

Do I think the guy who steals a 6 pack of beer should go to prison? No.
Do I think Madoff should have gone to prison? Yes.
Do I think the guy who embezzles millions of dollars from his employer should go to prison? Yes.
Do I think the guy who steals registration stickers from cars in a parking lot should go to prison? No.

There is no blanket answer. From me anyway.
 
justabubba said:
did he display a handgun while in the criminal act
if so, prison, despite its being his first (known) offense
the point being non-violent criminals should also be subjected to prison sentences
those found guilty of committing victimless crimes should not
Click to expand...

I didn't mention a handgun.
 
tres borrachos said:
Do I think the guy who steals a 6 pack of beer should go to prison? No.
Do I think Madoff should have gone to prison? Yes.
Do I think the guy who embezzles millions of dollars from his employer should go to prison? Yes.
Do I think the guy who steals registration stickers from cars in a parking lot should go to prison? No.

There is no blanket answer. From me anyway.
Click to expand...

Nor would I demand a blanket answer from you since, like you, I believe different situations are different. I was only looking for clarification after you made the statement...

tres borrachos said:
Violent people need to be in prison, the others not.
Click to expand...

I believe that thievery is...in principle...an offense punishable by imprisonment. The reason we have judges, in my opinion, is to determine whether the offense in the specific circumstance is actually deserving of that full punishment.
 
ocean515 said:
Well, your post suggests all found guilty of fraud should be jailed, no distinction.
Click to expand...

which fraud perpetrators should be exempt from incarceration?
 
eohrnberger said:
If it continues, and there's no sign of it abating, and expands in severity, one could almost say tyrannical.

Seems almost rather authoritarian in nature. Would just have to add control / manipulation of the press.


This'all has come to nothing, hasn't it?

Oops. My, how positively Soviet!
Click to expand...

The case you're talking about was one where a State Department official was leaking highly classified information to the reporter, and they used questionable methods to prove so. While I don't like the idea of monitoring members of the press, it doesn't seem "positively Soviet" to me in this case. In addition, they went after Jin-Woo Kim for leaking information and they didn't go after Rosen. Again, I don't like the idea of monitoring a member of the press, but if the purpose of doing so is to stop classified information from being leaked, they're at least doing the wrong thing for the right reason.
 
Cardinal said:
Nor would I demand a blanket answer from you since, like you, I believe different situations are different. I was only looking for clarification after you made the statement...



I believe that thievery is...in principle...an offense punishable by imprisonment. The reason we have judges, in my opinion, is to determine whether the offense in the specific circumstance is actually deserving of that full punishment.
Click to expand...

My statement was too broad then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom