Eric Adams says he will appoint tougher judges to deal with criminals

[Thavoiceofthevoiceless]

If we know the system is racist, and the odds are stacked against us, wouldn’t it make sense to put extra effort into NOT getting caught up in the system? Is it that difficult to not do illegal things?

Only problem with that notion is the fact that a lot of innocent people get caught up in that system because of racism that you're referring to. It could happen to anyone of us at any time and you're full of shyt if you sit here and insist otherwise.

Some of y'all really are exposing yourselves as being Republican like with the rhetoric you're using in this thread.

 

[CreepyMcCreeperson]

I don't know but the authorities appointed in that position should.

Harsh punishment after lives have already been taken is not it. Let's try to prevent not punish after

Prevention starts in the home. No amount of community centers is going to stop you from what you’re influenced by at home. All those babies out of wedlock need to stop! People aren’t reaching their fullest potential because they have to take care of babies, and these kids don’t have strong parental figures to lead them in the right direction.

Only problem with that notion is the fact that a lot of innocent people get caught up in that system because of racism that you're referring to. It could happen to anyone of us at any time and you're full of shyt if you sit here and insist otherwise.

Some of y'all really are exposing yourselves as being Republican like with the rhetoric you're using in this thread.

I don’t support stop and frisk, because it’s an easy way for the police to harass us. But when people are caught doing crime, I’m not opposed to some harsh sentences to send a message, but the sentences were already harsh, and that didn’t stop the criminals from continuing. On the other hand, when you let people go for shoplifting, it encourages MORE shoplifting. All those shoplifters aren’t struggling poor people. A lot of them just want free stuff, or something to sell to make extra money, and some enjoy the thrill.

 

[CrimsonTider]

That's not my argument or position.

I'm simply stating he's punishing a crime after it's done and not preventing it.

If my friend gets murdered it doesn't matter if you gave the guy 50 a hundred years, he still got murdered.

Should the person that killed you friend be able to make bond go back on the streets before there court date?

 

[CrimsonTider]

The theory is that a lot of these crimes are committed by recidivists. People who committed earlier crimes but were let off easy or given bail.

If you ignore the blacks who are liberal elites, live in the burbs, upper middle class, ivory towered, posting on message boards, etc; if you talk to the people actually living in these situations: they all know who the trouble makers are. And they all wish the cops could effectively and safely remove those criminals from their environment. They don't want to report someone, that someone gets a slap on the wrist, and now they have to live next to them.

It’s not just theory it’s the central issue

the ones committing a majority of the crime are repeat offenders

 

[Thavoiceofthevoiceless]

I don’t support stop and frisk, because it’s an easy way for the police to harass us. But when people are caught doing crime, I’m not opposed to some harsh sentences to send a message, but the sentences were already harsh, and that didn’t stop the criminals from continuing. On the other hand, when you let people go for shoplifting, it encourages MORE shoplifting. All those shoplifters aren’t struggling poor people. A lot of them just want free stuff, or something to sell to make extra money, and some enjoy the thrill.

That doesn't address my point though. It's more than just stop and frisk that causes innocent black people to end up in the system and even you know that.

 

[IsThatBrothaMouzone?]

this is what you c00ns wanted. nikkas got be doing 3 to 9 for having expired license plates.

Nothing wrong with being tough on crime....as long as you're tough on EVERYONE and all kinds of crime.

The problem is that no one gives a fukk about "crime" when it's white people doing the dirt (any white collar crime, meth and pills, white supremacy shyt etc).

"Tough" just means over-policing Blacks and harassing them while letting the 17-year old drunk AND high white boy drive off with a warning in his daddy's E63 AMG.

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

this is what you c00ns wanted. nikkas got be doing 3 to 9 for having expired license plates.

Called this months ago about Adams. Elect neoliberals because they have black skin brehs

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

Nothing wrong with being tough on crime....as long as you're tough on EVERYONE and all kinds of crime.

The problem is that no one gives a fukk about "crime" when it's white people doing the dirt (any white collar crime, meth and pills, white supremacy shyt etc).

"Tough" just means over-policing Blacks and harassing them while letting the 17-year old drunk AND high white boy drive off with a warning in his daddy's E63 AMG.

Who you think his donors are? This gonna be about being tough on black folks. That’s all tough on crime is ever about. It’s a dog whistle always has been too

 

[Frangala]

The most valuable opinion in these types of matters should be law abiding individuals who live in those communities (the most important and priority when enacting these policies) afflicted by crime. Outside of that, nobody's opinion(s) should carry AS MUCH (edit) weight. It is really that simple for me at this point. The litmus test should be how does that policy affect hard working law abiding residents of these neighborhoods and communities.

If the ultimate beneficiaries of policy are the individuals who live in these same poor communities afflicted by crime and yet continue to live life in an honorable way and earn a living with dignity (majority of the community imo) then I say green light with this policy.

If the costs of these types of policies adversely affect this demographic in an overwhelming way, then I say scrap the policy. and think of something else.

I do not want to hear from people who (1) do not live in those communities (2) have an agenda to justify their political position (left or right).

 

[Thavoiceofthevoiceless]

The most valuable opinion in these types of matters should be law abiding individuals who live in those communities afflicted by crime. Outside of that, nobody's opinion(s) should carry weight. It is really that simple for me at this point.

I do not want to hear from people who (1) do not live in those communities (2) have an agenda to justify their political position (left or right).

That's a disingenuous argument considering the fact that just because you don't live in communities afflicted by crime doesn't mean that you don't work, commute or travel to those areas as well. You're just as much as prone to crime as the people living there.

 

[Godless Socialist CEO]

Reminder the US tried this, it’s called the crime bill and the war on drugs….. hilarious that some the same folks who hate those two things love this because it’s a black face selling your ass this bullshyt

We’ve tried this it never works

 

[Frangala]

That's a disingenuous argument considering the fact that just because you don't live in communities afflicted by crime doesn't mean that you don't work, commute or travel to those areas as well. You're just as much as prone to crime as the people living there.

Reread my edited post. I meant to convey prioritizing the sentiments in policy making. Those law abiding residents of those communities (which make up the overwhelming majority of he community) should be put FIRST maybe I did not convey prioritizing in my post.

 

[Amestafuu (Emeritus)]

The goal is to prevent crime from happening by attacking the causes.

Putting a$$hole judges in court rooms is reactive, not proactive.

that's the goal of whoever raising these kids not for everyone else.

the goal for everyone else is for them to stay in line..

tough on crime courts and police are not a solution but a reaction. if people want solutions then shyt shouldn't get this far at all. the causes are debatable, we live in a time where clout is a cause for crime. you will find very little empathy for that

 

[Deflatedhoopdreams]

The most valuable opinion in these types of matters should be law abiding individuals who live in those communities afflicted by crime. Outside of that, nobody's opinion(s) should carry weight. It is really that simple for me at this point.

I do not want to hear from people who (1) do not live in those communities (2) have an agenda to justify their political position (left or right).

This is what I have been saying. It’s so easy for these clowns to sit on the outside looking in talking about what they think about the state of the black community. These same people live around all whites while they type the shyt.

if you do not live in the black community. You are not part of the black “community”. You are still black but when you leave the black community you are no long apart of the black community and your opinion means shyt in my eyes

 

[No1]

It’s not just theory it’s the central issue

the ones committing a majority of the crime are repeat offenders

Are you a cop?