get rid off the judge & jury and let the police do on the spot fines or sentencing to prison.
2006-06-29 09:21:02 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Youwould put all the power into the hands of one individual within one group. Your proposal would abolish accountibility and justice.
What kind of people do you think would start to join the force if this ever happened? There are reasons why things are not done this way.
And what do you mean by zero tolerance? The police rarely catch anyone in the act, most arrests are through detective work and they have to build a case. Where they catch someone red handed there is no problem with a conviction, so what is the point of this?
Do you remember what happened on the Undrground recently, a plumber was shot in the head and then publically labelled as a terrorist. This despite the fact that he was surrounded and sitting still.
2006-06-29 09:36:23 · answer #1 · answered by sarah c 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't think we should get rid of the court's system , but i do think the police are getting more and more tied up in red tape stopping them from doing their job!
we need more powers handed down to the judges and the police, zero tolerance being a policy that worked 40 years ago but political correctness and human rights has taken over! why was the system changed? it worked!
2006-06-29 10:47:33 · answer #2 · answered by ROBERT K 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's what the ex mayor or governor whatever they're called in New York did. He created a zero tolerance police force and cleaned up New York's streets. It wouldnt happen here because the likes of Cherie Bleah and her Human Rights Cronies would make sure the criminals are alright and bollox to the victims.
2006-06-29 09:40:57 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the system we have now is decent, but not perfect. Most counties have jails that are packed full. I wish I had an answer, but I do think that final justice should not be an officer's choice. I do believe that people should have a Right to defend themselves in court. This does come back and bite you sometimes, but like I said the system is not perfect. The only thing that would solve the problem is if people would hold themselves accountable for their actions and self-govern their behaviors. This will never ever, ever happen.
2006-06-29 10:36:47 · answer #4 · answered by jawsh3539 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes to zero tolerance policing, but not to become judge and jury.
I do not wish to live in a "police state"
2006-06-29 09:27:15 · answer #5 · answered by super_star 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tony Blair suggeted something like this a couple of years ago... a system whereby police could frog march yobs to the cash machine and make them pay on the spot fines for their yobbish behaviour.
The police force from what i remember pooh-poohed the idea of on the spot fines due to the logistics of enforcing this law.
2006-06-29 09:27:58 · answer #6 · answered by MonkeyKing669 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well in a way.There was this child molester who got 30 days in jail by THE WORST JUDGE EVER.Ok here is something.If a police officer is fired at by a criminal,chances are he cannot fire back because he will face a court marshell thanks to this new rule that the aclu and a bunch of other jerks put in.In my mind a police should be able to use as much force as needed.I mean dont break his arm but hold him down and cuff him.
2006-06-29 09:29:05 · answer #7 · answered by machiner94 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
sentencing no. But there are some states not far from it. A few years ago I was pulled over in IL for seat belt (I had it on but 'not the right way' - 'nuther story there! lol) and the rule there is you pay the fine on the spot and go your way with the ticket...or surrender your license on the spot until you go to court and/or it's paid.
2006-06-29 12:23:00 · answer #8 · answered by Jan H 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we need a complete shake up of our criminal justice system and an evaluation of crime and its punishment. We are heading for big trouble if we dont get this right in future. We need to be less tolerant, more severe in our punishments, we need not to take into consideration others 'human rights' when evil is perpetrated upon us. We need to fight back and fight fire with fire. We certainly need severe deterents and we somehow need to instill discipline in a generation who think they rule the earth and that everyone owes them something.
There is a good arguement, now we have DNA testing and forensic science has moved into the realms of sci-fi, for bringing back hanging or similar deterents. Why aren't we doing it NOW?.........
2006-06-29 09:37:13 · answer #9 · answered by stingmyflesh 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Umm hello this is America. Why in the world would anyone want this. I think that zero tolerance would do more bad than good.
2006-06-29 09:28:55 · answer #10 · answered by Lucid_dreams 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋