There is a United States Constitution, unfortunately, the government and The System doesn't follow it. They make up rules as they go along. There are people "doing favors" for others within the system. There are loop holes that officials use to get away with so many things.
I was watching 20/20 last night and there was a great question asked of an attorney who's fees would have been about a million dollars. (He was doing this case pro bono to help a woman he believed was wrongly convicted for killing her son) The prosecuters and police went only after her, they didn't even collect other evidence, not even fingerprints in her house. They later found out a serial killer confessed to the murder.
"So, does it take about a million dollars to get a fair trial in this system?" The attorney was asked. And he answered to the effect- when the prosecuters look past getting all the evidence, the judges allow evidence into court that should not have been allowed, and prosecuters basically play dirty, then yes it does.
2007-03-10 08:38:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by julie j 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Think you mean United Statesian, not American system.
You see, there is no such a thing as ‘American’ nationality, America is not a nation America is a continent with many nations in it. The US never named itself the name of the United States is a designation it comes from the end of the Declaration of Independence, "WE, therefore, the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in GENERAL CONGRESS, Assembled...". The preamble to the U.S. Constitution reiterated the phrase: "We the People of the United States..." (The authors of these two documents probably used the phrase "united states" in place of a list of colonies/states because they remained uncertain at the time of drafting which colonies/states would sign off on the sentiments therein.) The geographic term "America" specifies the states' home on the American continent.
It is therefor incorrect to refer to US citizens as Americans with the intent of denoting citizenship, or the United States as America with the intent of denoting a nation. Americans have a term for US citizens, we are called United Statesians by the rest of Americans, to say American with the intent of denoting citizenship or America when we mean the United States reflects poorly on our attitude towards the 70% of Americans that are not United Statesians.
Also, although some people would like to believe that America is not one but two continents, North America and South America. If you think about it though, the term U.S. of A. is a glaring example that this line of thought is incorrect, if America was two continents instead of one, shouldn’t it be U.S. of N.A. (North America)? We say Columbus discovered..... ? AMERICA, not South America or North America.
Lastly, while everybody in America from Nome to Patagonia, from Easter Island to Greenland is an American, not every United Statesian is an American. For instance, Hawaiians are as United Statesians as they come, but they ARE NOT Americans, they are Pacific Islanders.
That said, the court system determines what 'justice' is.
Hope that helps.
2007-03-10 08:22:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by r1b1c* 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
We The People. But there's one problem with my answer -At present we're not living in a democratic republic; since the general election of 1988, we've been ruled by elitist's who've formed a crude Aristocracy: George H. W. Bush, William Jefferson Clinton, George W. Bush, and it's very likely our next president shall be none other that Hillary Rodham Clinton. Now since we're no longer living in a democratic republic, We The People cannot/are not permitted to determine what is "just" and "fair" in the American system?
2007-03-10 08:32:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It seems it should be the American people should decide that, except: there was a time when the majority thought slavery was fair and just. It wasn't even a hundred years ago when not allowing women to vote was considered fair and just by most Americans. Even now, many believe skewing things toward a Judeo-Christian belief system is fair and just. The majority isn't always right--we need to enact laws, and see that they are enforced, that try to keep things as fair and just as we can make them. Is this possible? I'm not sure.
2007-03-10 08:28:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Uh... did you omit the area the position they wade through severe prices of melancholy and alcoholism? did you recognize they have a suicide price rather a lot two times that of the U. S.? Does that help your concept they are "happier" human beings? also, the reality is that Finns are compelled to stay with a lot less fabric products; they do no longer have a call about residing existence how they prefer to, yet in reality how they are allowed to. In united statesa., we are able to elect to stay with a lot less or with more suitable. particular, we do not all have equivalent get entry to to each little thing the homogenous and tiny inhabitants of Finns do, yet i imagine it truly is more suitable than made up for the a lot wider variety of options and possibilities to pursue ones aims that we've the following. Or that we used to have, until eventually authorities interfered too a lot contained in the commercial equipment. only because you want to exhibit this large u . s . right into a dimished and dreary socialist uniformity like Finland would not advise united statesa. is of the same opinion with you that it truly is a objective worth pursuing. i will take the animating contest of freedom we are birthright to lower than the structure to the boring and dreary shackles of authorities targeted existence any day.
2016-12-01 19:24:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by quartermon 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe that the more involvement 'the people' have in the laws of their country, the more apt they are to follow those laws. Also, who better to decide 'just' and 'fair' than the people who live in the country? Lawmakers, determined by a vote, are still not the best to determine those things...as they cannot always be counted upon to follow the path 'the people' would like them to.
That said, I believe that in the issues of justice and fairness, there should be votes from 'the people'. Sure, this would require more voting, but it would give more say to the people affected by the laws...
2007-03-10 08:29:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Super Ruper 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Equality in liberty, just like the Founders said.
As in, I'm free to do what I want to do and you're free to do what you want to do, limited only in that we can't limit each other's liberty.
What I want to do is watch Cramer and read the IBD and save and invest and what some people seem to want to do is not save and invest, not take night courses in an area where jobs are being in-sourced instead of out-sourced, and watch Lou Dobbs tell them what they want to hear, that they're victims. It's not "unjust" or "unfair" that I end up making more than they do.
2007-03-10 08:25:49
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Legislators, Judges, parents .etc.those of us that because of office ,experience ,or election to do so decide what is "just"
and fair."" This of course, should be after discussion about of pro's and cons of the subject.
After all of this we sometimes find that there are no accurate predictors of what is "just" and "fair"then have to return to our previous decisions and start again.
2007-03-10 09:14:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by cesare214 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
US - a Constitution of the People, for the People and BY the People. US should not let Adm get too used to signing all these secrect docs subtracting our rights and giving them more.
2007-03-10 08:23:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
In the American legal system, it's whoever writes (or rights) the laws. That's either the legislators (for statutes), or appellate judges (for common law precedent).
2007-03-10 09:00:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
0⤊
0⤋