and if the victim wants charges pressed?
Posted on 04/03/2019 8:00:46 AM PDT by daniel1212
Unfettered prosecutorial discretion is essentially ... an easy way to weaponize the law for political purposes.
There is a long article on this: Justice Scalia and the Idea of Judicial Restraint
This puts the onus on the legislature, I presume with the idea that if the law is bad, a democratic society can fix the law by electing new legislators (tell me how this is working out for any of us, please).
The common law was developed over hundreds of years, yeah, over millennia. It is "judge made law" in the sense that wise and fair judges over the years have, through argument, hammered out legal principles that had come to be universally accepted as creating a fair justice system. There were inequities and in England, Courts of Equity were created to fix some obvious problems in the common law. It is more than just some judge decided something, however. For it to become a principal a judge had to articulate and explain the principle clearly enough and persuasively enough that other judges including appellate panels accepted it.
The IRS and tax law is an example of legislatively created law.
The US Constitution is a common law document, most of which only makes sense in the context of the British Common Law tradition that had been brought to the US at the time. For instance, the right of free speech sounds absolute in the Constitution, but the common law tradition was that you don't have a right to slander individuals and you don't have a right to scream fire in a crowded theater.
The problem with common law is that it is somewhat open to interpretation. The problem with statutory law is that it is much less open to interpretation. If cattle rustling is illegal under common law, then by extension so is the theft of pigs, goats, horses and other agricultural livestock of economic value. Under statutory law, it isn't unless specifically mentioned. So if you don't know that people might import and raise llama or Oryx, and you leave it out of the statute they are not protected.
And when you try to write down everything and every exception you get US tax law before the Trump reform, which no one can understand.
There was a generation of American "conservatives," of which Scalia was one, who did not distrust central government authority the way many of us have been taught to distrust it by our present central government authority.
The problem today is that it’s not a chance to clean up your act, because that arrest follows a person forever so they have trouble attending college or getting a job. Apparently no one is allowed to make a mistake anymore.
A friend had a DUI from 25 years previous. He was interviewing for a job and the HR people said it was company policy not to hire people with DUI convictions. He said, “it was 25,years ago when I was 18.” They had to get special permission for an exemption for him.
Unfortunately, about 1/3 of the population under 28 years old has been arrested.
“Unfettered prosecutorial discretion is essentially no law at all.”
It’s worse. But it is a favorite way of doing business for liberals: selective enforcement of the laws. This becomes a way to use the power of law enforcement to wage war on your political enemies.
Take the president’s administration as an example. Targeted and harassed all of his staff, friends, patrons, and family. Charged and imprisoned former staff for offenses that were no-billed when Democrats did them. And far worse offenses were completely swept under the rug when Dems were under scrutiny.
No, law of the jungle would be superior to this unjust law enforcement system. It’s like having the mafia run government.
That’s been in place for a while but out of the news.
What have the consequences been?
Wonderful. Resisting arrest will just delight law enforcement as every creep will resist since it is no crime. Police will have to wrestle and fight with every perp then the perp can claim injury and sue.
Perhaps, but I broke the law and I paid the price that was owed.
It scared me straight so it was , in the long run, the best thing that could have happened to me.
Back then in Michigan if you are guilty of a misdemeanor your record would be expunged after 5 years. That was a long time ago so have no idea what the laws are currently.
“Drug possession with intent to distribute”
So, how many drug dealers are contributing to her re-election fund?
petty theft, auto breakins,burglary,shoplifting,drugs,.... you name it All of them are through the roof, the LAPD will NOT even respond to ANY crime I listed unless you are a special person.
Thanks for the detailed reply. I’ll have to read the article about Scalia and civil law a little later.
and if the victim wants charges pressed?
Well, under the victim entitlement mentality of Hell,one can see these are their "just deserts."
Who determines who the victim is? For judgment used to be implicitly based on "what saith the Lord" or Constitution, whereas now the verdict is based on what saith political correctness.
true, but if i as a store owner wish a shoplifter to be charged i should have that right
The problem is that "should" does not mean you would under the devil's new/old deal.
then the criminal would be better off if it was handled by the justice system than by me...
Well, the plan is for the likes of a few of you/us to take matters into our own hands, thus justifying the gov. targeting those who uphold traditional values, and increasing the government and suppression of those who actually are the most law-abiding, but who are a threat to the alternative perverted world of the devil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.