I heard a local news story about a young man doing young man stuff in an altercation and he got charged with 3 felonies. Nobody was even injured, just "threatened". Everything is a felony these days it's ridiculous. It's almost as if the state will use any excuse to take your rights from you at the first sign of not being a docile tax slave.
Discussion
the state in rights young young these at injured, story felony it's slave. ridiculous. not days Everything any local use a doing almost will sign excuse a about as docile "threatened". with to from got an Nobody of and was take stuff 3 man being if your even I man the first tax heard he felonies. just charged is you news a It's a altercation
Sad. Need to undo all the stupid laws.
The prison industry has to take care of their bottom line.
Do you suggest having no rules for making threats? Just wait until someone is injured to act?
I don't know the story, but there are self-defense rules that apply to threats and there probably should be limits on them. Maybe his were justified. I don't know. But they also may not have been.
In the US anyway
There can certainly be laws against threats but it shouldn't be such an extreme measure as a felony.
I think it depends and that's my point. I'd need more details to have any real position on this example. I'm just speaking in general terms.
Threatening to shoot or blow up a school, for example, should be a felony for an adult. That's why details matter. Even for 1:1 cases. It just depends on what happened and why for me.
I'm guessing I would agree with you though based on what you've said. Especially if they were both instigators.
I also don't think all felonies should automatically remove rights forever. I think that's nonsense. Especially if they're released and served all time and paid fines or whatever.
Yeah. Unfortunately it pretty much ruins your life forever regardless of time served. It's often unfair.
My father experienced that for breaking into a car at 17. Couldn't vote for his entire adult life. But, I think there are avenues to restore those rights. It just should be automatic a lot more often.
To me the story seemed like two young men resolving a dispute in a way that nobody would have blinked an eye about BACK IN MY DAY but no, now this young man can no longer vote, own guns, get most jobs, rent most apartments, get government assistance, travel internationally, etc. etc. And he didn't even hurt anybody beyond their feelings.
I think the fundamental disagreement is that laws related to threats only protect feelings. It may be that some cases need special consideration, but the laws usually have a good reason for existing. Threats have consequences beyond feelings, even if this one case is unique in some way I'm unaware of. That's what courts are for.
