I think that the outside companies that are hiring these prisoners’ labor are paying a lot more than that for it, but the bulk of their payments go to the prison, with only a pittance being passed on to the prisoner.
The man can still make sense, when he chooses to!
It means that he could get the money to pay his child support in some legal way.
Your posts seem to imply that the state should care where he (legally) got the money. I don’t think that is important.
I believe a system in which they lock this shit head up until his mommy or his girlfriend coughs up his child support is better than a system in which he does not pay his child support even though he could get the money from his mommy or his girlfriend. How hard it is on him, or on his mother or his latest conquest, is not nearly as important as his children’s need for support.
Sometimes there are no excuses good enough.
A man supports his children. If he has to beg, he supports his children. He doesn’t make excuses why he can’t do it. He does it, or he isn’t a man. Now I have little doubt that this creep never had his father around when he was growing up to teach him by example and precept that this is what a man does. This is upsettingly common among US blacks, and this explains most of the problems of the black community. No matter. Someone has to be the grown-up, someone has to be responsible. If they are your kids, you are that someone.
If someone complains about how unfair it is to send them to jail for a few months because they abandoned their children and they had to get the money from their mother, that someone better be prepared for a big fat “who gives a flying fuck at a rolling donut, you loser - you made the kids, you damn well better support them, and if being a fucking criminal makes it hard to find a job then work at McDonald’s and live on beans - but your children come way first”.
[QUOTE=Senegoid]
You want to learn a little more about extortion in Missouri, Shodan?
The OP, and Shodan and anyone else who thinks things are OK like they are now, needs to read this lengthy article from start to finish. Then come back and talk in this thread.
How municipalities in St. Louis County, Mo., profit from poverty. Radley Balko, Washington Post, Sept. 3, 2014
[/QUOTE]
I posted that exact article in another thread. I have read it already. You did notice, did you not, that the woman had four warrants out for her arrest in three different jurisdictions? And it is unfortunate that she was unable to avoid being cruelly exploited for her poverty by not speeding, using her seatbelt, driving with insurance, registering her vehicle, or taking the bus.
Yup, they can snowball all right, especially if you are so effing stupid that you just ignore your traffic tickets until they do snowball.
So what exactly do you recommend? Someone can’t pay her traffic ticket, so she ignores it. You don’t want to put her in jail. So how do you make her pay her traffic ticket? Impound her car? Garnish her wages?
Regards,
Shodan
Sure.
And if she is unemployed? Are you prepared to deal with the howling about how the state took the car away from the poor persecuted single mother so she can’t get to job interviews so she can feed her four children? How is that better than making her post bail or spend some time in the pokey?
Regards,
Shodan
I expect that the proper officials would use something called “judgment” and realize that if she has a weekly paycheck of $250, then garnishing it for $100 is malicious and stupid. Perhaps it can be garnished for $5 a week until her situation improves.
This same concept of “judgment” would generally dictate that it is incredibly stupid to put someone in jail for days, weeks or months in order for the state to be compensated for a $100 unpaid parking ticket, due to the considerable expenses the government would have to subject to in providing shelter, food, medical care, 24 hour supervision, and other necessities that jail must provide.
For more information on this idea of “judgment,” Wikipedia has a helpful article entitled “wisdom.” It explains that the opposite concept is “folly,” which is the tendency to make poor choices even when good knowledge is in hand.
What if she doesn’t have a job - do we impound her car? Or do we just ignore the fact that she ignores her traffic tickets?
Regards,
Shodan
No, in such a case we obviously go straight to execution and feeding the remains to orphans. It is a win-win-win in that we stand up to scofflaws, reduce the poverty rate, and make sure kids don’t go to bed hungry.
If you don’t have a serious answer…
:shrugs:
Regards,
Shodan
I don’t take prison sentences for debtors to be a serious proposal.
Calm down, Shodan! Relax! We have a new Congress in-coming in just another month or so, with a new majority taking over. Surely they will pass or amend all the laws needed to create the Perfect Society you envision. It’s all going to be all right!
Until then, we have this concept called bankruptcy in which, although a person may have debts, is simply flat-out unable to pay them. We recognize that this can happen, and have a system for writing off those debts. The creditors lose, but how can that be helped if the debtor simply can’t pay? We, as a society, chose to do away with debtors’ prisons a long time ago.
The same with people who can’t pay their fines. If they just can’t pay, we need a way to be able to write them off. It does take some judgement to decide if the alleged scofflaw can be a usefully contributing member of society. If so, we just make things worse by confiscating their car, tossing them in jail, maybe making them lose their job. How does that help anything? Never mind piling on the fines and fees and penalties for missed court dates, new arrest warrants for petty late payments, etc.
You say you read that whole article, but you only mention that one person with a few traffic tickets. The article, IIRC, gives many more examples than that. And it says that many of those law encounters are bogus or trumped up, with speed traps and other petty harassments. People arrested and held in jail over petty infractions until they can be taken before a judge, in communities where the court is only in session one day every two weeks. Corrupt cops, prosecutors, and judges who are in the business of shaking down the poor people for all they can get, just to finance their municipal governments. The article was quite explicit about that.
Ravenman must be right. We should just shoot them and feed the remains to orphans. There is just no other equitable way.
Is it your understanding that criminal fines and child support are discharged in bankruptcy?
Regards,
Shodan
Let’s leave the personal jibes for The BBQ Pit and out of Great Debates.
[ /Moderating ]
[ol]
[/ol]
Actually, in the very next paragraph he notes that such fines are not discharged in bankruptcy and suggested that there should be a remedy for that.
Is it your understanding that delinquent child support is or should be discharged in bankruptcy?
Regards,
Shodan
In the very next sentence of said paragraph, I suggested that it requires some judgement. You should really try it yourself someday. It might open your eyes.
That is an interesting question. Why not? If you find yourself with no money to support them, then why not have any remaining assets liquidated to pay off your creditors, and as your children are your biggest creditors, they get the lions share of the liquidation. And just like if they sell your car, you don’t get ‘visiting’ rights to see your car anymore.
But I’m a firm believer that if you don’t want your kids anymore, there should be a place you can drop them off that will take care of them and find good homes for them. Better for all concerned. Of course, you should be required to be sterilized permanently if you do so.
What is the natural rate of fine for going 45 mph in a 35 mph zone?
What should be the interest charged for failing to appear on that citation?
Is it acceptable to pile on fines for failure to pay fines?
I stand corrected, Shodan. Clearly it is working to some degree. Kudos.
Bump!
News item, seen in New York Times and numerous other on-line sources yesterday or today (Dec. 18-19, 2014).
Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster, who apparently isn’t your everyday law enforcement boot-licking cop apologist, files lawsuit against 13 municipalities in St. Loo County over their predatory law enforcement practices. It appears that the good legislators of Missouri actually saw fit to pass a law a while back regulating such practices, which the municipalities are now accused of mostly just ignoring. Good thing there’s an adult in the room down there.
NYT: Contesting Traffic Fines, Missouri Sues 13 Suburbs of St. Louis, Dec. 18.
Similar article in HuffPo: Missouri Attorney General Sues Municipalities Over ‘Predatory’ Traffic Fines, Dec. 18. Includes links at end of article to several other similar articles.