The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

Bugs

Varies from state to state. But I don't think a basic accident would be a felony. An accident where someone is killed would be.

Most states the first two or three DUI's are misdemeanors, while the third or fourth becomes a felony.

DUI laws are generally gettting tougher and tougher in the US. Would not surprise me if eventualy even a basic DUI becomes a felony.

__________________
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion" - Steven Weinberg

bkkandrew

^Well, according to this:

Is a DUI a Felony? - DUI / DWI

A DUI that results in a injury is a felony in some states. An injury could be a cut, a bruise, etc., etc., so is it really appropriate to exclude such an offender from the democratic process for their entire life?

Jet Gorgon

Jeezus wept, BA, what are you on about? The minutiae of which crimes should block the perp's voting rights? Diff between a felony and a misdemeanour? Check it out in a law library. Or apply some common sense.

bkkandrew

^Yes, when it comes to perminently removing the democratic rights of citizens, the minutiae of the detail is very important. I am wondering who (and on what criteria) is deciding whether people should be prevented from voting.

So, to go back to my example, the DUI with minor injury 'felon' to be perminently excluded from elections - reasonable or not?

Jet Gorgon

^ That's for the Supreme Court of whatever land to decide. The people can dispute the decisions. Of course I do not agree with all laws, but we don't live on our own private islands do we?

Bugs

Actually there are a number of people in the US who would think it is reasonable. I don't think the offense in and of itself should cost someone their right to vote. But the reason this type of thing gets felony status in some states is because they feel that it is a really big deal and should be treated as such. The goal of moving it into felony status is not to take away the right to vote, but to increase the level of punishment that can be given for violators.

I do think those that commit felony crimes should have their right to vote taken away. At least for a while - I would be open to debate how long that might be.

And I also support the right for each state to determine which crimes are felony crimes and which are not. Sure some states are going to have more crimes fall into the felony area than others - it's up to them. And it is up to the citizens of each state not to commit a felony if they want to keep their right to vote. Not too much to ask really.

Jet Gorgon

^ I disagree with each state having the right to pick the penalty, especially for death sentences. That's just my innate thinking.
I don't need a lawyer for an opinion. I held my judgement because all there is on this board lately is criticism. Bugs did not give you an opinion either.
As I said felonies. Misdemeanours -- hey, that's jaywalking or running a red light among other things like graffitti or vandalism in Canada -- mind, rather serious offences here, especially B&E (home invasion is the new label), muggings, swarming and beatings, etc. are taken lightly by the liberal judges. Be a criminal so you can have rights; the victims get little.
The loss of voting rights is piffle to criminals anyway -- tell me, how many would register to vote? Why give rights to criminals anyway, BA?

bkkandrew

^You are not 'giving' anybody rights, the debate is what rights are being taken away.

In the UK right now, you can have a criminal record for putting your rubbish out too early, or leaving an inch gap between lid and body of the rubbish bin. It is for this reason that I am now somewhat cynical of the labelling of groups as criminal or not. It is then a dangerous path to go down (IMO) to start selecting groups within the burgening 'criminal' population to select for disenfranchisement.

If you are willing to buy into the vote-removal plan, then you have to define and opine on the perameters where the sanction should be used.

Again, for example, there is a larger fine available for the rubbish-bin fines, as described above, in the UK, than for some assaults where an injury may be sustained, which would, no doubt gain 'felony' status in the US. So to translate this into UK law priorities, this would suggest that, if similar vote-removal laws were adopted in the UK, reducing support for a particular party would be simple - go round to each of their supporters' houses and leave their bin lids ajar!

Bugs

Can the blue team measure up in the debates - this bloke seems to think otherwise:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...aB7z fbsSOGcE

Eliminator

Jet, and he has no common sense and doubt if he even has 2 brain cells to rub together.

bkkandrew

^Seemingly enough common sense to ask a few questions that many here that are so free with their opinions are suddendly shy to answer...

Accidental Ajarn

"In the UK right now, you can have a criminal record for putting your rubbish out too early"

What the fuck does this have to do with politics in the USA?

Eliminator

Most would not post stupid questions, goes back to having at least a little bit of COMMON SENSE. The list you posted was not using common sense. Grow up or at least get 2 brain cells to rub together BEFORE you make a list.

6. Fly Tipping;
7. Graffiti;
8. Vandalism;

What the flock is "fly tipping", I'm not going to bother to google it.

Graffiti, now this really shows how little brain power you have at your disposal.

Vandalism, Is the person breaking windows or setting off bombs?

Time for a GAG order for you, "Get A Grip" on reality, Lord knows your brain is toast.

__________________
Eliminator
1986 Kawasaki 900

Boon Mee

^These Libtards are scratching the bottom of the barrel.
If they were to have a closer look at their Messiah, they might be surprised, eh?

"What deserves ridicule is the notion that Obama's brief stint as a South Side rabble-rouser for tax-subsidized, partisan nonprofits qualifies as executive experience you can believe in." -- IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Why Obama's Organizer Days Are A Big Joke

__________________
ผมเป็นคนบ้านนอก

Jet Gorgon

^ Mebbe he had control of the food stamps war chest.

attaboy

I think Obama was the front guy. Bill Ayers, the terrorist, couldn't swing the gig so he arranged for Obama, clean cut young law professor, to get the job. Black Harvard graduate, Obama was a shoe in. From his position as chair head of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Obama could funnel the cash to Ayers. Obama could have wound up being a stooge but he was intelligent enough to end up being a front man who by mere chance and good fortune has graduated to US Senator. This is America, the America Obam's wife complains about. Who do they wish to give credit to for Obama's achievements. Is she willing to share the credit? I know when she looks up at him when he's speaking on stage, I know she says, "I got him there. I did it."

__________________
As a kid I always thought my nickname was "attaboy" until I realized they were rooting for the dog: "Attaboy, get 'em! Get 'em!".

sabang

Whatever you may think of the job, and the government money thrown at it, a stint as a community organiser is pretty good training for being a politician- you're effectively doing many of the same things, but on a smaller scale.

Jet Gorgon

^ Same same PTA then?

bkkandrew

Surely not knowing what things are and then refusing to find out makes you the dim one, no?

Texpat

Sabang. Come on, now. Let's be honest.

Community organizer? Isn't that like a petty officer?

You think BO wants to be thought of as a donation collector?

I'm shocked and appalled that a community organizer might be president just a few years later.



Tell the truth. Is it because he swishes, or because he's black?