Prison is supposed to be for rehabilitation.
One looks at their judging history. It is not a guarantee but an indicator if they will go with the constitution, precedent or are activists.
No - it is to protect law abiding citizens. Rehab is not primary. Rehab is a sought after outcome, but one must consider recitivism rates.
What law was created to target those of a specific skin color. Cite me the law.
Not to butt in but the drug war, for one. At least it disproportionately affected different communities. I believe some of the figures behind it later said it was racially motivated.
What number do you support? Do they need a sponsor? Do they have to be contributors to American society? Can they be felons from another country?
How many have the First Step Act freed? Do you know?
You are aware Biden supported this and made some very interesting comments regarding these laws.
Oh of course. I don’t think anyone familiar with my posts is going to accuse me of covering for Biden.
Beats me. I haven’t read up on the drug wars in years.
Not the point.
The legal immigrants have to have jobs available. I do not support immigrating to America to receive free benefits. When US unemployment goes down, demand goes up. Adjust accordingly.
If I created a law that said “it’s criminal to eat fish on Fridays.” You’d claim I was targeting Catholics except I didn’t mention Catholics once and no one is compelling you (including the church) to eat fish.
You have to show targeting because of color not of a crime hotspot.
Before that is answered with something such as felons are prohibited, a rating on the current home country must be made. Not all criminal justice systems are equal.
I think available is the key. I think it’s stupid to send foreign graduates of US colleges back home immediate after they graduate, especially those with advanced degrees. Why send them home to compete with us from afar? They should be encouraged to stay with easily obtained visas.
I think we can handle a certain number of refugees, but in general agree with this, other than the open border comment. I’ll deny it if you ever say I said this, but, yes, I agree that, in general, people should not come here to be wards of the state.
But why would you be making a law against fish on Friday? Is there a reason for the law, other than targeting a certain group?buffalo:
If I created a law that said “it’s criminal to eat fish on Fridays.” You’d claim I was targeting Catholics except I didn’t mention Catholics once and no one is compelling you (including the church) to eat fish.
So I can’t cite you the law because you question is flawed. You should be asking “what laws effect people of colour more then white.”
There are already decency laws for public appearance. Modifying them to include acts/appearances that no one thought could ever happen when the original laws were written is not racial. Thongs for example were never thought as being an issue. Then they were and in some places are not allowed.