Lawlessness in San Fransisco - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15177637
No I'm sorry but being lawful starts in the USA with the Constitution. And that law is adjudicated through the courts. If the courts have a vested interest in finding people guilty, as they do in California, then the courts are not about the law, but about being revenue stream.

Point I'm making here is that cheating people doesn't create society... it destroys it.

So you have people not respecting property rights... stealing... because property rights are held in reference to a community... they simply have no meaning in any other context. So when you see people openly defying the law it is because the law doesn't protect them.

Same principle that started the American Revolution.
#15177639
@PataOneil

You don't have any sense of responsibility. You want government services, you got to pay for it. If you don't pay for it, the courts and the cops become revenue generators to pay for it. There is no such thing as a free lunch. And it starts with you by simply doing what is right. People know the difference between right and wrong.
#15177647
Not necessarily. You have to realize that no murderer is going to be able to pay for the costs of convicting him/her. Such cases can cost millions of dollars. Which means that, in California, the person that rolls through a stop sign is shouldering the burden of "guilt" for the murderer... at least in part.

You figure that is fair?
#15177649
PataOneil wrote:Not necessarily. You have to realize that no murderer is going to be able to pay for the costs of convicting him/her. Such cases can cost millions of dollars. Which means that, in California, the person that rolls through a stop sign is shouldering the burden of "guilt" for the murderer... at least in part.

You figure that is fair?


But doesn't the State pay in that case? That is, if the murderer is declared not guilty, then the costs fall on the state/DA office.

The fines you mention seem to come from usual law enforcement, that can actually be a form of hidden taxation but I'd be surprised if they were earmarked for funding courts.
#15177652
The state pays is the same thing as saying that taxpayers pay. Except in California... and it's the people who get traffic tickets who pay.

No need for you to be surprised. I actual linked you the information in my OP. Here it is again.

https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/crimjust/20 ... 020519.pdf

If you will read that, which comes from the legislative analysts office... a division of the State legislature, you won't be confused about the facts.
#15177655
PataOneil wrote:The state pays is the same thing as saying that taxpayers pay. Except in California... and it's the people who get traffic tickets who pay.

No need for you to be surprised. I actual linked you the information in my OP. Here it is again.

https://lao.ca.gov/handouts/crimjust/20 ... 020519.pdf

If you will read that, which comes from the legislative analysts office... a division of the State legislature, you won't be confused about the facts.


The link only mentions how much the state and local governments get from all those fines, and also how much a person on probation could end up paying. But it doesn't mention those fines are earmarked to the courts, i.e. in the end their budget is largely defined by the legislature itself and not really tied to the outcome of their caseload.
#15177656
Sure it does. You obviously haven't actually read the document.

"Text MarginsLeft align medium figures and tables hereLarge figure marginLarge figure marginLEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE4How Is Fine and Fee Revenue Distributed?Numerous Funds Eligible to Receive Fine and Fee Revenue. Over 50 state funds—in addition to many local funds throughout the state—are eligible to receive fine and fee revenue. However, some of these funds receive very little revenue, such as those that only receive revenue from fines and fees for specific offenses that occur infrequently. Complex Process for Distributing Fine and Fee Revenue. State law (and county resolutions for certain local charges) dictate a very complex process for the distribution of fine and fee revenue. State law currently contains at least 215 distinct code sections specifying how individual fines and fees are to be distributed to state and local funds, including additional requirements for when payments are not made in full. In order to comply with these requirements, collection programs must carefully track, distribute, and record the revenue they collect. "

On the page after that quote is a pie chart that directly shows where the money goes.

"aSplit between courts (state government) and counties (local government) depending on who is actually collecting the delinquent payments"

Maybe you should read it carefully...
#15177657
I did. Just because it goes into the state and local governments, it doesn't necessarily mean it goes to the courts because it's not earmarked for them. It seems to be part of the general revenue for the state or local government at hand.

Or to make it clearer: Even if revenue increased, it doesn't mean the courts will get a greater budget. They may even have their budgets cut, for instance, if enforcement becomes more automated and there is less space for going into the court system to contest them.
#15177661
PataOneil wrote:No you didn't or you would have seen the pie charts...

"State Trial Court Operations"

"State Trial Court Construction"

Not sure how you missed it... It's almost one entire page...


Is that earmarked by CA law?
#15177662
Is it sensible to tackle someone in America given you don't know if they have a gun? Brazen perhaps. Maybe arrogant. But the shop will be insured and the witnesses are alive so I guess you should just leave this for the authorities rather than ask why witnesses acted they way they did PO.

Also, in the UK, there have been high profile cases that "Have-a-go" heroes have been on the wrong side of the law due to intervention. Seems strange I know but how you restrain someone needs to be proportionate and that can be very subjective given things can go wrong and the force someone feels they need to enact at a given time. I would always advise for people to stand and watch and record the event than actually getting involved due to legal technicalities given that - which is exactly what happened here I see.
#15177668
@B0ycey

Yeah, you know, people will just stand around and do nothing while watching women raped and murdered by criminals. They can just sit down and pull their smart phones out, record it. Sort of like making a snuff film or something.

#15177671
Politics_Observer wrote:@B0ycey

Yeah, you know, people will just stand around why women are raped or murdered. They can just sit down and pull their smart phones out and make a snuff film out of it.



I think there is difference in terms of offences here and as such the amount of force allowable. If someone's life is in danger you should perhaps intervene if you are confident to do so, that is different to shoplifting which you shouldn't intervene if you ask me due to the law being against you - regardless if the offender is clearly brazen or not.

Nonetheless after reading this thread about SFs laws, it seems intervention is pointless anyway. I would say they need to elect better governors or they are basically inviting this type of lawlessness. In other words it isn't the bystanders at fault here but the people who make the laws up.
#15177672
@B0ycey

The Bystander effect doesn't just apply to petty crime. It can apply to some of the most serious crimes. I like that hashtag #BeginsWithMe:

USCShoahFoundation wrote:
Students all over the world can now complete an IWitness activity about the dangers of being a bystander that was first piloted in the United States and Rwanda.

In The Bystander Effect – Rwanda, students develop an understanding of what it means to be a bystander and its potential impact in the context of the Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda. 

Students watch a number of testimonies from witnesses to and survivors of the Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda who describe the consequences of the bystander effect in their own lives. Students construct a social media message for the #BeginsWithMe campaign that describes their own plan to counter bystander behavior.

Middle- and high school students at Solomon Schechter Day School in New Jersey and College Saint Andre in Rwanda piloted the activity simultaneously in June 2015, even Skyping and instant-messaging each other at the beginning of the lesson.

In Florida, Inverness Middle School language arts teachers Lauren Fenech and Steffanie Grotz also recently completed the activity with their students and said their students were profoundly moved by what they learned.

#BeginsWithMe is USC Shoah Foundation’s social media campaign that encourages people to share what they will do or have done to share the power of testimony and encourage tolerance in their own communities.


https://sfi.usc.edu/news/2016/01/10615- ... inst-tutsi
#15177673
PataOneil wrote:Dude, you told me you read the document I cited...


I did, but did the distribution result from a legal requirement? Do CA courts get to keep fines for e.g. a guilty verdict or that went to the state and then the usual budgetary process gave the courts the money?
#15177677
Politics_Observer wrote:@B0ycey

The Bystander effect doesn't just apply to petty crime. It can apply to some of the most serious crimes. I like that hashtag #BeginsWithMe:



https://sfi.usc.edu/news/2016/01/10615- ... inst-tutsi


But I wasn't referencing the Bystander Effect but civic duty. You should intervene if someone is being raped or murdered (if you are confident to do so) but you shouldn't if someone is shoplifting (regardless of your confidence). That is morally right and legally right due to you being able to use more force.

As for the ByStander effect, I am not really aware of it but I would have asked what the guy was doing if I passed him that's for sure. Londoners are a special bred when it comes to ignorance. I know that from experience.
#15177679
PataOneil wrote:Well then you did not read it very well, because it answers that question directly in the document.


Sort of. The only thing the document says is "Complex Process for Distributing Fine and Fee Revenue. State law (and county resolutions for certain local charges) dictate a very complex process for the distribution of fine and fee revenue. State law currently contains at least 215 distinct code sections specifying how individual fines and fees are to be distributed to state and local funds, including additional requirements for when payments are not made in full. In order to comply with these requirements, collection programs must carefully track, distribute, and record the revenue they collect.". So how do you know these funds are a direct result of courts handing out guilty verdicts instead of coming from other sources?

Nobody is trying to distract from the humanitarian[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Again: nope. Putin in Feb 2022 only decided ... […]

Helping Ukraine to defeat the Russian invasion an[…]

https://twitter.com/huwaidaarraf/status/1773389663[…]