Would you rather go to prison or church? (Page 2)

duncan124
duncan124:
That is true in the UK, or was, some sentences were changed if that person was joining the military, but the law was changed and the military now has to refuse that person. A case was brought recently when an RAF recruit was sentenced and he the claimed the sentence meant he was not going to be earning the same wage and so the sentence was excessive but his appeal failed as it was the military who have to refuse criminals.

In a magistrates court the hearing of the sentence is usually a separate hearing and the guilty defendants solicitor has to describe the circumstances so that the Justices can chose the right sentence. The impact of the sentence has to be shown to have been considered by the Court.
11 years ago Report
1
duncan124
duncan124:
I was going to say that this thread is about 'Prison or Church' not 'prison or military'. Christmas is a time for festivities and partys and hardly a good time to send people to church for correction.
11 years ago Report
1
Azathoth
Azathoth: In general sessions, the judges can decide on whether a case goes to a grand jury of the defendant's peers. In more minor cases, the judge usually gives community service and the like as punishment. In this particular case that my wife and I viewed, the fellow was a dug offender. A seller. The judge waived the initial community service, only if the defendant were to show proof of enlistment.

The US Army is more into giving waivers. They do this for some applicant's medical issues, age and criminal history. The Marines, Air Force and Navy are less likely to give waivers on these things.
(Edited by Azathoth)
11 years ago Report
0
Azathoth
Azathoth: Yes, it is about jail or church. I contributed to thread crapping...AGAIN. Sorry. Ok, back on topic: I think jail would be much worse, of course. Though, I've sat through sermons that could be considered punishment, even torture. lol
11 years ago Report
0
Whimsical Fairy
Whimsical Fairy: A judge can't order someone to join the military, but they can decline to impose a sentence if conditions are met. Again, the military has the finally say...not the judge.
11 years ago Report
0
duncan124
duncan124:
In the UK the problem was that enlisted men were being violent in the streets as normal and it was very difficult to bring them to court without the military intervening and stopping it. Clearly that situation lead in to the Army mutinies.
11 years ago Report
0
Azathoth
Azathoth: That's what I said and explained, Tink.

I've read that, Duncan. I suppose (I don't know for sure) that the Army imposes their own court marshal process in the UK?
11 years ago Report
0
duncan124
duncan124:
In the US people did say that seeing the solders marching around was cheering the people up and 'altering their minds' and I think the US treatment of drug dealers comes form their opinion that it has something to do with the society they live in.
11 years ago Report
0
Whimsical Fairy
Whimsical Fairy: No, that really isn't what you said or explained Aza.

At any rate...more on waivers. (Again, talking only about the USA)

Some offenses can be waived, and others cannot. Different offenses require waiver approval at different levels in the recruiting chain-of-command.

It's important to note that applicants who require a waiver ARE NOT qualified for enlistment, unless/until a waiver is approved. The burden is on the applicant to prove to waiver authorities that they have overcome their disqualifications for enlistment, and that their acceptance would be in the best interests of the Military. Waiver authorities will consider the "whole person" concept when considering waiver applications.

In general, waivers are required for:

Five to Nine minor traffic offenses

Two to five more serious traffic offenses

Two or more Class 1 minor non-traffic offenses

Two to Nine Class 2 minor non-traffic offenses

Two to five serious offenses

One felony

Individuals with ten or more minor traffic offenses, six or more serious traffic offenses, ten or more Class 2 minor non-traffic offenses, six or more serious non-traffic offenses, or more than one felony are not eligible for a waiver.
11 years ago Report
0
duncan124
duncan124:
The solders were 'excused' attending the courts and there were so many delays that finally the High Court changed the law so that solders had to be given up to the Police I think. But the Military wont help stop criminal behaviour amongst themselves and you still have to identify the solder.

Solders were often given civilian disguises and told to attack prominent women in society it was shown during John Majors Govt only after a large number of solders were killed in reply.
11 years ago Report
0
Azathoth
Azathoth: Well, just as there is an option, for a judge, to need to see proof of enlistment to drop penalties...a similar thing could be said when giving a choice of penalties or rehabilitation, as far as drug arrest processes are concerned. This is common, at least, in Tennessee.

After the 'War on Drugs' started raging, the people's eyes were somewhat opened...right or wrong...to the drug problem.

Honestly, seeing soldiers in the street, for myself anyway, was more of a worry than a cheering up. It meant, to me, that our security was terribly compromised.

11 years ago Report
0
Azathoth
Azathoth: Yes, I explained the situation that I and my wife saw. It wasn't something I simply made up. These 'choices' for judge are very commonplace. Again: at least in Tennessee, they are.
11 years ago Report
0
duncan124
duncan124:
Yes thats how I remember the US laws were.
11 years ago Report
0
Whimsical Fairy
Whimsical Fairy: You may have explained the situation you witnessed...but just out of sheer curiosity, did you follow through? Did the young man get his waiver?

I stated that a judge can't order someone to join the military...and they can't. Can they decline to impose a sentence if conditions are met...absolutely. I further stated that the military has the final say, not the judge.

The military doesn't have to give a waiver at all.
11 years ago Report
0
ShawnXx
ShawnXx: Judges do what they believe it occurs all the time...that's reality.
11 years ago Report
0
MercuryDragon
MercuryDragon: I'd rather go to PJ's strip joint, and that place smells like fish. It doesn't serve food either.
11 years ago Report
0
ShawnXx
ShawnXx: lol
11 years ago Report
0
duncan124
duncan124:
Abuse is abuse @MercuryDragon
11 years ago Report
1
Azathoth
Azathoth: Since I was there for something very minor and didn't know the defendant, I've no clue if he was given a waiver. I simply heard the judge's ruling that day: that he needed to give proof of enlistment to have said punishment dropped. My cousin is a District Attourney. Before being a DA, he did some work as a defense lawyer, later as a judge. He's worked for this kind of thing, and he has judged on this kind of thing.
I never stated that a judge could make someone join the military. I only said that a judge can dismiss on certain grounds being met. I don't know if the drug dealer followed through, but I DO know that my cousin has seen offenders get enlisted and have punishment dropped.

Edit: 'punishment' dropped...not 'charges'
(Edited by Azathoth)
11 years ago Report
0
ShawnXx
ShawnXx: I think everyone is missing the point that the judge in this thread topic felt that making the teenager go to church, even though it was his personal belief, was better than sending him to jail. Correct me if I'm wrong but can a judge legally sentence someone to go to church? Isn't that a decision someone should make on their own in a so-called free country?
11 years ago Report
1
duncan124
duncan124:
I think the law was altered in the US so that the military did not appear to be involved but the same thing went on just out of sight.

11 years ago Report
0
duncan124
duncan124:
@Sosweetly Yes, it is not a proper decision. The idea of a sentence is to stop people not help them.
11 years ago Report
0
Azathoth
Azathoth: Shawn, do you remember that same judge that allowed the drug dealer to not be punished actually offering community service (to another offender) at the judge's own church? I think it's messed up, but yeah...judges seem to give their own personal brand of justice. It reminds of people that have said that bailiffs, before court proceedings, come out and tell people to tuck their shirts in and for guys to take earrings out...then all bow in prayer.
11 years ago Report
1
Whimsical Fairy
Whimsical Fairy: One would certainly think ordering someone to attend church instead of jail/prison would be a direct violation of the separation of Church and State...
11 years ago Report
1
MercuryDragon
MercuryDragon: I don't agree that a judge should be able to sentence someone to attend church rather than jail. This is not separation of church and state.

Pretty much the same reason I disagree with court-ordered AA instead of jail. Half the steps are all about God and only the first and last steps mention the word alcohol. The first, says to admit you are powerless over alcohol-- and the last, says to use your spiritual awakening to spread the word to other alcoholics.

Seems like court-ordering someone to go to church rather than jail would be a breach of the first amendment. Sure, it might work for you if you're Christian, but you can't really practice your beliefs freely if you're being ordered to go to a church you don't believe in.
11 years ago Report
3