Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 41 of 41
  1. #26
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Herbie View Post
    Wonder just what lawyers are enriched? The prosecutor? No that’s a low to middle paying public service job.

    Must be the defense. No at the trial, that’s another government paid lawyer. O.k. The appeals. Generally these are pro bono jobs, or lawyers associated with anti death penalty groups.

    First part of the dirty secret is true. The second part needs some more thought.
    OK then, could you please elaborate on this?
    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  2. #27
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    4,431
    Quote Originally Posted by crankout View Post
    Bring back labor camps. Dig ditches, break rocks, wrench at LBS's...
    Wrenching! OK now you crossed a line. I suppose you would make them work on only department store bike, too!

  3. #28
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    5,092
    Excellent point about the fallibility of our justice system

    Excellent point about the cost of execution

    Excellent point about labor. In fact, China still practices hard labor, and even some other more hideous things like harvesting organs from their "prisoners" (many of whom could be just political dissenters). I believe prisoners in America have it too easy. I think they should be forced to do some labor, like work 8 hr/day to earn a small wage. I don't like the idea of inmates lying around, getting free food, and pumping weight, as a "punishment". That's not punishment enough!

  4. #29
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by Lombard View Post
    OK then, could you please elaborate on this?
    Sure. Lawyers do not get rich on capital cases. Government paid lawyers do not get rich. Lawyers filing appeals for the defendant are mostly working pro bono, or for a non profit.

    This is not the kind of work you do for money.

  5. #30
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Herbie View Post
    Sure. Lawyers do not get rich on capital cases. Government paid lawyers do not get rich. Lawyers filing appeals for the defendant are mostly working pro bono, or for a non profit.

    This is not the kind of work you do for money.

    OK, so then how was I correct on point #1:

    "The dirty little secret about capital punishment is that it is actually cheaper to throw the guy in prison for life and let him rot there than to put him on death row."

    But not point #2:

    "Keep in mind all those costly appeals that will enrich the lawyers."

    Could you please enlighten me on where the costs are?
    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  6. #31
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    844
    Why don’t you narrow your question down a bit.

    Which attorneys are enriched? Judges and their clerks? Prosecutors and their clerks? The attorneys handing the appeals at state and federal level?

    This leaves the defense. At trial you are probably looking at a salaried public defender. At some point public defenders are replaced by private counsel.

    Here is the only place where there is even the possibility of enrichment comes into play. Perhaps you can enlighten me with an example or 2 where lawyers have become enriched by their participation. Bear in mind that very few defendants can pay.

  7. #32
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Herbie View Post
    Why don’t you narrow your question down a bit.

    Which attorneys are enriched? Judges and their clerks? Prosecutors and their clerks? The attorneys handing the appeals at state and federal level?

    This leaves the defense. At trial you are probably looking at a salaried public defender. At some point public defenders are replaced by private counsel.

    Here is the only place where there is even the possibility of enrichment comes into play. Perhaps you can enlighten me with an example or 2 where lawyers have become enriched by their participation. Bear in mind that very few defendants can pay.
    My point is that you agree with me that it costs more to keep someone on death row than to throw them in prison for life. But you disagree with me as to WHY it costs more to do A rather than B. I acknowledge that I could be wrong on B. So then I am asking you where that expense is since you know it's not B. Do tell.
    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  8. #33
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    844
    Like you I have read several times that it costs society more to execute an inmate, than to keep them in prison for life. I’m not an expert in the economics of running the criminal justice system. I can guess at several reasons for this, but it’s your statement.

    Your disconnect is in the second part of your statement that all the appeals enrich the lawyers. Legal costs both direct and indirect add to the expenses, but no attorney is getting enriched.

    Government attorneys are on salary not pay by the hour. The extra work required by death penalty cases does not generate additional income. They just work longer hours for the same pay

    On the defense side it is possible that an attorney could be enriched by all the appellate work. However you have to have a client who has money. Not a whole lot of that going on. Defense attorneys are generally acting pro bono, or are on the payroll of a non profit. No lawyers are being enriched here.

    Litigation is a very expensive business even if you exclude attorney fees.

    Perhaps you can “do tell” your perception of why it costs more to execute than warehouse an inmate, giving some examples of how the attorneys are enriched financially. Perhaps I am wrong and should reinstate my license. How much do you think I could make per hour in a death penalty case?

    The horse is beginning to stink.

  9. #34
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    371
    The issues with the death penalty as I see it are manifold:

    First, It is about revenge, and we should not base justice on emotion. Disinterested parties should decide penalties ... but we never did finish the debate of whether prison should be a place of punishment, rehabilitation, training and education ...

    Getting even seems like a childish motivation. In my opinion prison is first and foremost to segregate threats, but once segregated (so no longer a threat to the general populace) we do ourselves a disservice if we do not consider rehabilitation.

    The For-Profit prison people love stopping schooling, job training, and rehab---it ensures that prisoners come back frequently.

    For those who simply cannot learn to play by the rules or have acted so badly we have deemed them unfit ever to join society ... sometimes they like prison better---a smaller world with more definite rules and a more predictable routine where they are provided food and shelter. So ... are they even being punished?

    Of course, because we as a society are more bent on arresting everyone we can than dealing with the people we have arrested, we no longer control our own prisons. Sex, drugs, cell phones .... corrupt guards and too few guards on the whole ensure that the inmates run the asylum. it's a mess.

    But .... No one really wants to rationally discuss what prisons are supposed to do .... and that means we cannot rationally discuss what the death penalty is supposed to do. it sure has never proved to be a deterrent.

    Second, execution is irrevocable and judges, juries, cops, and lawyers are not infallible.

    That guy in Texas ... his lawyer was ASLEEP during parts of his trial, but his execution was upheld. Guess what race he was. Guess what race most death row inmates just happen to be, by coincidence.

    We claim that the legal system is fair, but no one believes that. if you can afford a half-dozen lawyers you can get away with murder. if all you can afford is a public defender you will almost certainly be convicted of Something even if you are innocent--ask anyone who has come through the modern plea-bargain system.

    If you are counting on a public defender to keep you alive, you had better hope you are white and appealing on TV. If you are poor, other than Caucasian, maybe have a couple tattoos, maybe got into some trouble as a youth .... nobody will bat an eye no matter what happens.

    Also, look at how many cases after investigation reveal that at some point one cop made the call that one suspect was guilty, and pushed the whole investigation to prove that. Evidence destroyed, overlooked, fabricated, promising leads ignored, innocent people jailed ... and years later released.

    Check out The Innocence Project.

    We jail the wrong people sometimes ... executing them makes it hard to undo those wrongs.

    Between bias, bungling, bad intent, greed, and a general lack of concern about our fellow man unless it directly impinges on our own well-being .... coupled with the fact that it seems not to be so much punishment as revenge, and doesn't seem to deter bad behavior I see a lot of reasons not to kill people as punishment

  10. #35
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Herbie View Post
    Like you I have read several times that it costs society more to execute an inmate, than to keep them in prison for life. I’m not an expert in the economics of running the criminal justice system. I can guess at several reasons for this, but it’s your statement.

    Perhaps you can “do tell” your perception of why it costs more to execute than warehouse an inmate, giving some examples of how the attorneys are enriched financially. Perhaps I am wrong and should reinstate my license.
    Since you are the attorney and I am not, I am asking you to enlighten me since you in your own words "can guess at several reasons for this". In case you haven't yet realized, I have been asking you this question in the last couple of exchanges and you have yet to provide an answer. Rather, you are hung up on my initial statement about "attorneys enriching themselves" which I am open to be stood corrected. Or maybe you are just butt hurt about my statement regarding attorneys in which case I apologize if I offended. But you have yet to provide who or what is responsible for the extra expenditures of executing rather than life without parole which is a statement you agreed with. In the words of H. Ross Perot "I'm all ears".
    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  11. #36
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
    The issues with the death penalty as I see it are manifold:

    First, It is about revenge, and we should not base justice on emotion. Disinterested parties should decide penalties ... but we never did finish the debate of whether prison should be a place of punishment, rehabilitation, training and education ...

    Getting even seems like a childish motivation. In my opinion prison is first and foremost to segregate threats, but once segregated (so no longer a threat to the general populace) we do ourselves a disservice if we do not consider rehabilitation.

    The For-Profit prison people love stopping schooling, job training, and rehab---it ensures that prisoners come back frequently.

    For those who simply cannot learn to play by the rules or have acted so badly we have deemed them unfit ever to join society ... sometimes they like prison better---a smaller world with more definite rules and a more predictable routine where they are provided food and shelter. So ... are they even being punished?

    Of course, because we as a society are more bent on arresting everyone we can than dealing with the people we have arrested, we no longer control our own prisons. Sex, drugs, cell phones .... corrupt guards and too few guards on the whole ensure that the inmates run the asylum. it's a mess.

    But .... No one really wants to rationally discuss what prisons are supposed to do .... and that means we cannot rationally discuss what the death penalty is supposed to do. it sure has never proved to be a deterrent.

    Second, execution is irrevocable and judges, juries, cops, and lawyers are not infallible.

    That guy in Texas ... his lawyer was ASLEEP during parts of his trial, but his execution was upheld. Guess what race he was. Guess what race most death row inmates just happen to be, by coincidence.

    We claim that the legal system is fair, but no one believes that. if you can afford a half-dozen lawyers you can get away with murder. if all you can afford is a public defender you will almost certainly be convicted of Something even if you are innocent--ask anyone who has come through the modern plea-bargain system.

    If you are counting on a public defender to keep you alive, you had better hope you are white and appealing on TV. If you are poor, other than Caucasian, maybe have a couple tattoos, maybe got into some trouble as a youth .... nobody will bat an eye no matter what happens.

    Also, look at how many cases after investigation reveal that at some point one cop made the call that one suspect was guilty, and pushed the whole investigation to prove that. Evidence destroyed, overlooked, fabricated, promising leads ignored, innocent people jailed ... and years later released.

    Check out The Innocence Project.

    We jail the wrong people sometimes ... executing them makes it hard to undo those wrongs.

    Between bias, bungling, bad intent, greed, and a general lack of concern about our fellow man unless it directly impinges on our own well-being .... coupled with the fact that it seems not to be so much punishment as revenge, and doesn't seem to deter bad behavior I see a lot of reasons not to kill people as punishment
    You hit the nail on the head here. I think the main reason we execute people is revenge more than anything else. While I consider taking the life of another as a punishment wrong, I consider doing it out of revenge barbaric.

    I think of all the cases I hear about where a murder conviction is overturned decades later because the person was found innocent. You can't give that inmate his/her years back, but he/she is still alive to have some free years left. No such thing with execution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
    Sex, drugs, cell phones ....
    Cell phones??? I thought it was rock n roll.
    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  12. #37
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    844
    I have provided the answer to my statement about attorneys getting enriched. Perhaps you should elaborate on your position. How are lawyers being enriched? Here is the disagreement

    I Am trying to figure out why you want me to fill in the details for your first statement especially when I don’t disagree. I realize I have not answered the question about what factors go into your general proposition, but I am not sure why you made that statement in the first place if you did not have any idea of what factors go into the equation

    You did not offend me with your statement about lawyers, and the fact that you keep trying to deflect from your 2nd statement where we disagree doesn’t really surprise me. It seems to be a common Internet tactic when someone feels like they are caught up in a statement they cannot defend. When a person starts using derogatory terms to deflect further, it just reinforces my impression. Shoe fit?

    That said

    How much does it cost to file motions, briefs, provide transcripts etc. The prorated cost of a salaried attorney is just a small fraction of this cost. There is no firm that has to generate profits, so no enrichment for a law firm either.

    What does it cost to House an inmate on death row vs. general population

    What is judicial time worth, especially at the appellate level where you have panels

    While you do have to factor in the salary of prosecutors etc, this does not have any thing to do with the proposition that lawyers are being enriched. I did google salaries for Cook County prosecutors. Hate to disappoint you but their top end makes them way underpaid. I did not google US attorney salaries which I am sure are higher, but not exceptional compared to private or corporate practice. Note they are on salary. Hard to justify the term “enriched “ don’t you think

  13. #38
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Herbie View Post
    I Am trying to figure out why you want me to fill in the details for your first statement especially when I don’t disagree. I realize I have not answered the question about what factors go into your general proposition, but I am not sure why you made that statement in the first place if you did not have any idea of what factors go into the equation

    You did not offend me with your statement about lawyers, and the fact that you keep trying to deflect from your 2nd statement where we disagree doesn’t really surprise me. It seems to be a common Internet tactic when someone feels like they are caught up in a statement they cannot defend. When a person starts using derogatory terms to deflect further, it just reinforces my impression. Shoe fit?

    That said

    How much does it cost to file motions, briefs, provide transcripts etc. The prorated cost of a salaried attorney is just a small fraction of this cost. There is no firm that has to generate profits, so no enrichment for a law firm either.

    What does it cost to House an inmate on death row vs. general population

    What is judicial time worth, especially at the appellate level where you have panels

    While you do have to factor in the salary of prosecutors etc, this does not have any thing to do with the proposition that lawyers are being enriched. I did google salaries for Cook County prosecutors. Hate to disappoint you but their top end makes them way underpaid. I did not google US attorney salaries which I am sure are higher, but not exceptional compared to private or corporate practice. Note they are on salary. Hard to justify the term “enriched “ don’t you think
    And in case you hadn't noticed, I backed down off my 2nd statement. You have more knowledge on that than I do, so on that, you win. Do I need to publicly concede defeat any more obviously than that?

    And no, you still didn't answer my question as to what ARE the additional expenses regarding my 1st statement. I am wondering why other than to force the issue on my 2nd statement.
    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  14. #39
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    844
    Start with “That said”

    The rest is the answer to your 2nd question as best as I can give it.

    Turn about is fair play. What did you base your original statement on? (First part) Maybe you can add to my knowledge as well.

    Buzzards have abandoned the carcass. Down to just the flies now. I’ll give you the last word. I bet no one else is interested in what either of us have to say

  15. #40
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Lombard's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Herbie View Post
    Start with “That said”

    The rest is the answer to your 2nd question as best as I can give it.

    Turn about is fair play. What did you base your original statement on? (First part) Maybe you can add to my knowledge as well.

    Buzzards have abandoned the carcass. Down to just the flies now. I’ll give you the last word. I bet no one else is interested in what either of us have to say
    "Enrich" was a harsh word, sorry. "Pay the players" would have been better - the players being administrators, lawyers, judges, etc. More players, more expenses. Yes, I understand public defenders aren't paid that well, especially when you compare their pay to say corporate lawyers. But you know most people love to pick on lawyers.

    Very well.
    “Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.” -- Aaron Levenstein

    "Beware of geeks bearing formulas."
    -- Warren Buffett

    "Education is what you get when you read the fine print. Experience is what you get when you don't. -- Pete Seeger



  16. #41
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    3,144
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/02/n...or-attack.html

    So now the city is installing concrete barriers that will limit the ability of cyclists , pedestrians and others to enjoy the path and to enjoy it safely. The barriers look like they will encourage accidents too.

    Wrong reaction too. The path was a soft target. impossible to protect soft targets since you do one thing and someone immediately devises a work-around or simply goes after a different soft target. it's like playing whack-a-mole and in the meantime quality of life goes down. city seems to prefer concrete blocks over surveillance and outreach to mosques. the goal should be to reach those people who might engage in such acts before they've been programmed or radicalized and to make sure the countries religious leaders are preaching peace and not hate.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. W&OD bike path hit and run by drunk driver
    By Donn12 in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 06-06-2013, 10:25 AM
  2. Multiple Wheetsets, Multiple Cassette Sizes?
    By trail2street in forum Components, Wrenching
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-13-2011, 06:08 PM
  3. Multiple bikes... multiple fittings?
    By heffergm in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-01-2010, 08:44 PM
  4. Driver charged in SC deaths
    By backinthesaddle in forum General Cycling Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 05:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •