Now what exactly are the parameters of this debate??

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=four&linkid=rule4_410

“Rehabilitation” is not listed. At Item # 3 “encouraging” defendant to knock it off is mentioned in the same phrase as “…deterring him or her from future offenses”.

We in the courts are not in the business of retraining or re-educating cons despite dabbling in court ordered shoplifter school, DUI school, bad check school, woman beater school, mental health court, drug court, and all the other rehab functions which are offered as herbs and spices for diversion or as add-ons to a criminal sentence. The purpose of sentencing if you actually get there, is punishment.

Now lets get down to using it.

A debate is not a group wishing expedition. You argue policy within realistic restraints. To the extent we are talking about what is to be done in the USA by the federal and state legislatures we have to at least pretend to stay within the limits of the Constitution of the USA and of CA.

So an open ended “King for a day” debate is Kiddy Talk. Is this what is being contemplated here in this exercise or is there some structure in place?

My beef is that I see the black kids from these schools experienced in nothing but Kiddy Talk. “Restorative Justice” is one of the nonsensical terms used to describe people taking whatever they want from other people who are expected to quietly hand it over. Guess what – It’s not working for all the Trevons…

Life is not like that in CA or in the USA.

Yes, Socialism is currently being taught in CA State secondary schools and universities. I think Capitalism and Entrepreneurship is far preferable and some people come out ready to deal – the black kids don’t. It’s wrong to aggressively promote certain people as roadkill.

Debate is good. But real debate in real world terms not chimp out exercises. Any attempt to have these children debate or discuss crime and punishment must begin with reminders that the people have spoken about 3 strikes, mandatory sentencing, the death penalty, Megan’s List and the other CA ballot measures and Constitutional measures. The courts and law enforcement are required to obey. You can advocate (yet) another ballot measure but other than that, the law is written.

School is not FantasyLand.

That’s rich.

Not so humorous is his usual mocking of the voice of young people, and pre-judging of their intentions and intellect.

Right now the CA law is clear that the purpose for the criminal justice system is punishment not rehabilitation. I believe that may have come from the people in an Constitutional initiative, not the legislature (which is owned and operated by the Democratic Party which is not into punishment of criminals). The Punishment thing is settled now and I don’t believe the legislature has any further say. even the 3 strike system is enshrined in the CA Constitution by a voter initiative so the Democrats can’t stop it (it’s called “mandatory”). As far as the Charters, I believe they have the right to exist. So do the private schools.

In a Socialist State such as the old Soviet Union the government can simply command the people to do whatever the government wishes. No Freedom.

So what do we want the kids to debate? What’s to happen in the existing Constitutional Law – or what glorious Socialist Dream World we can create if we can ban non-government schools, and re-educate people to live their lives according to the state wishes.

People are criminals because it gives them pleasure and treasure. There is no such thing as “educating” an Anti-Social to stop raping, robbing, or whatever they want. Singapore and Malaysia and other such countries are in the forefront in managing a racially diverse population so they don’t steal, rape and spray paint parked cars. We need to emulate them.

But if children want to debate public policy and write themselves a new State & Federal Constitution, it will be fun to hear them do it.

In which the “debate” degenerates to name-calling and everybody leaves. Having a debate presupposes the two sides consider each other worth talking to in the first place. Modern Libs have a very hard time in conversation with Conservatives because they have been taught to consider them evil. The right wingers come to regard the Libs as stupid children, which can get in the way of polite conversation also.

The makings of a fun night I think!

Another real problem is evident in the debate at the Supreme Court on Obama’s Socialized medicine. Some of the most emotional people blabber about how important it is that “the children” or some other worthies be given free health care. To me the case before the court is not about whether that’s true. The only issue before the court is whether the Federal Government (as opposed to the State Governments which have far more power) have constitutional authority to impose this Socialist Scheme from Washington on the States.

Obama is making the laughable argument that this is part of the Commerce Clause. That should fail. The legislation must be struck down. The mob just doesn’t seem to get it how Federal and State powers work, and more importantly why (to preserve the nation). That’s 8th grade civics.

Likewise debating Law often turns on procedural flows, and power flows. Ignore them at your peril. You don’t win a legal argument because you are blonde or because people like you, or because you are black and people like you no matter how screwed up you are. The minute the chillun are taught to expect victory because of good intentions or political popularity they are being set up for failure. In law school my instructors often intentionally made the victors of any legal contest loathsome – to reinforce that point. There are not supposed to be consolation prizes for parties who screw up their cases. The law is often winner take all. Some people never seemed to learn that one.

Back to the thread. I already see the issues in the language being used here – the “dedication” of these young people. That sounds like code words for Liberals who pervert the law to reach pre-determined ends. Rather than speaking of skill and learning of precedent and rules, we are really praising “dedication’ to pervert justice to rig cases for the politically powerful and favored.

I never see the word “dedication” being used to praise anyone for following rules and precedents.

When the law is meaningless and the politically favored take what they want there will be violence, cheating and business taken offshore. You will see “dedication” applied to threatening witnesses, paying off the legislature, the executive branch (Clinton’s pardons..), and corrupting the locals. And it takes a lot of money to pay off the locals, they are very greedy. And don’t think vote counting in SF is any more sacred than Math and Verbal Scores in DC.

So that’s my 2 cents to this debate. I wish I could attend.

Brave New World.