2007-10-22 03:51:40 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
From the perspective of the law, they propbably like to believe that such a measure would compel an individual to think twice before making a similar mistake. While it stands completely unfair for the victim of such rules in law. A trial is a must before any penalty.
2007-10-22 04:01:17 · answer #1 · answered by tower 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
DEPENDING ON CRIME?
MINOR VIOLATIONS OK? IN ALABAMA A JUDGE SENTENCED A SHOPLIFTER TO CARRY A SIGN IN FROM OF WAL MART STORE THAT SAID THEY WERE CAUGHT SHOP LIFTING.
WAL MART MADE THE JUDGE RECANT HIS ORDER THAT IT WAS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE STORE OR THE LAW TO DO THIS???
LET THE TIME /FINE, FIT THE CRIME.
HERE IN THE US WE HAVE A BAIL TO GET OUT AND THEN A FINE FOR THE OFFENSE IF NO JAIL TIME OR BOTH TIME AND FINE??
WE ALSO LET YOU PAY FOR THE TRAFFIC TICKET AND NOT GO TO TRIAL?
SOUNDS LIKE MANY THINGS WE ALREADY HAVE IN OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM?
2007-10-22 11:30:32 · answer #2 · answered by ahsoasho2u2 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
nope
lets rich kids do what they want
and only ends up with poor kids unable to pay the fine going to jail anyway
not a good idea
all the best
Ian
2007-10-22 10:59:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋