On America

The place for general political discussion.

Re: On America

Postby Saz » Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:49 pm

exploited wrote:It is objectively more effective. Having 50 different criminal codes creates massive inefficiencies and confusion. Consider gun laws.
It's not objectively anything. 50 different criminal codes also enables some states to innovate re policy, which leads to greater inefficiencies in the long run. And it's really not confusing or inefficient at all, we have a long common law tradition that has sorted this all out. YOU can't understand it, but the courts do and the lawyers do and we have a clear process for resolving any ambiguities that remain. A simpler system is not inherently more efficient, just or easier to apply. No idea what you are talking about RE gun laws, we have significant federal legislation in that area, and we have a constitutional provision that directly addresses the issue. No one is confused, some people just disagree, which you would ALWAYS have.

There is no reason to believe it can't work just as well with criminal code as it has with commercial code.

We don't have a single federal system for the commercial code either. You really don't understand what you are talking about. The commercial code is many respect no different that the criminal one. there are state laws and there are federal laws, and in many areas of regulation, both apply.

As for where it fits into federalism, federalism is merely the act of delegating explicit powers between provinces/states and the federal government. It doesn't "go against" federalism to have a uniform criminal code.
If you delegate all powers to the same federal entity, on every issue, it's not a federal system anymore. You aren't talking about apportioning powers, you are talking about giving all powers to one entity. Britain is not a federal state for example, even though powers are apportioned between various levels of government. You really don't understand the concept not sure why I'm even discussing this with you.

It may go against the framers intentions, but that doesn't really matter. What doesn't these days?

It's a critical question in any case to apportion powers between the federal government and the states. You don't read case law, we know this because last time you were caught with your pants down, so I can see why you don't understand. But this is a crucial question for a majority of the SC so it obviously does matter. You often just don't agree with their interposition but to say it doesn't mater is again, beyond clueless.

As for the Constitution, it would require a constitutional amendment, or widespread adoption of a criminal code developed by the NCCUSL. Either would be a better system. But then again, America is renowned for it's criminal justice system, so maybe you should just leave it.
again it wouldn't. All it would take is a creative interpretation by the courts and legislation by congress. But again, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about, and have done a google hatchet job to even reference the NCCUSL. We have a model penal code which does much of what you actually describe. From a legal and constitutional perspective though, there is no issue with states harmonising laws, because as a matter of law the power still sits with the states.

I don't think anyone in america really cares how renowned our criminal codes are. American objectives and values re justice are fundamentally different than most developed nations. We would consider ourselves failing if sweden or wherever thought we were doing a good job. please read up on these subjects before you continue though, its pretty bad when you miss the MPC and start talking about the NCCUSL or some shit, you clearly don't even have the basics here.
Pun intended for the plebes on here who don't get a joke
User avatar
Saz
Governor
 
Posts: 8448
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:37 am
Location: Airstrip One
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 1068 times
Been thanked: 899 times
Political Leaning: Classic Liberal

Re: On America

Postby exploited » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:07 pm

Nobody is confused? Please explain to me what the requirements are to carry a handgun on your person, in New York, Pennsylvania, Montana, Texas, Kansas and California. Let's say that you are from New Jersey. Do this without looking up the various criminal codes, and properly interpreting them. You can't? That is what we call confusion. A f**k lawyer can't even figure this out without extensive research, let alone an average person. Whereas in Canada, I know I cannot carry a handgun in any province without having a restricted firearms license, while belonging to a gun club, carrying it in a lockbox, with a trigger guard and the ammunition removed. That is uniform everywhere. Much easier.

As for federalism, I find it ironic that you would accuse somebody of not understanding it, and then proceed to say something as profoundly f**k stupid as "If you delegate all powers to the same federal entity, on every issue, it's not a federal system anymore." Was that suggested... anywhere? No, it wasn't. Policing, healthcare, education, roads, contracts, etc. can all be dedicated to a state or provincial level, while criminal code is federal. This would still constitute a federalist system. Do I need to give you a primer on what constitutes federalism? Because Canada is a federalist system with a uniform criminal code.

As for the NCCUSL, I referenced that specifically because it has developed hundreds of harmonization codes. Why has it done this Saz? Why go through all this hassle? Why is it so important that the commercial code is uniform, and what about the criminal code separates it from the commercial code, enough that one can be innovative and remain relevant while being uniform, but the other can't?

Christ Almighty you are annoying. Are you ever going to actually engage with this debate? Or did you just need a place to scream "MURICA" over and over again?
User avatar
exploited
Vice President
 
Posts: 20958
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:32 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 2197 times
Been thanked: 1702 times

Re: On America

Postby Saz » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:41 pm

Can't teach those who are unwilling to learn :))
Pun intended for the plebes on here who don't get a joke
User avatar
Saz
Governor
 
Posts: 8448
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:37 am
Location: Airstrip One
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 1068 times
Been thanked: 899 times
Political Leaning: Classic Liberal

Re: On America

Postby spacemonkey » Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:35 pm

NAB wrote:
spacemonkey wrote:OK, I apologize for bulling you guy's, but y'all make it so easy. I may not agree with much you may say, but would stand with anyone of you defending your right to say it. To bad they couldn't figure that out in Charlottesville.


Did you mean bullying? Do you actually think you're bullying us with these posts? :))


like I said, you do make it easy, lol.
The hardest part of doing nothing is knowing when your done.
spacemonkey
Governor
 
Posts: 4832
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:54 am
Location: cyberspace
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 64 times
Been thanked: 268 times

Re: On America

Postby fstarcstar » Thu Sep 21, 2017 4:01 pm

exploited wrote:Nobody is confused? Please explain to me what the requirements are to carry a handgun on your person, in New York, Pennsylvania, Montana, Texas, Kansas and California. Let's say that you are from New Jersey. Do this without looking up the various criminal codes, and properly interpreting them. You can't? That is what we call confusion. A f**k lawyer can't even figure this out without extensive research, let alone an average person. Whereas in Canada, I know I cannot carry a handgun in any province without having a restricted firearms license, while belonging to a gun club, carrying it in a lockbox, with a trigger guard and the ammunition removed. That is uniform everywhere. Much easier.

As for federalism, I find it ironic that you would accuse somebody of not understanding it, and then proceed to say something as profoundly f**k stupid as "If you delegate all powers to the same federal entity, on every issue, it's not a federal system anymore." Was that suggested... anywhere? No, it wasn't. Policing, healthcare, education, roads, contracts, etc. can all be dedicated to a state or provincial level, while criminal code is federal. This would still constitute a federalist system. Do I need to give you a primer on what constitutes federalism? Because Canada is a federalist system with a uniform criminal code.

As for the NCCUSL, I referenced that specifically because it has developed hundreds of harmonization codes. Why has it done this Saz? Why go through all this hassle? Why is it so important that the commercial code is uniform, and what about the criminal code separates it from the commercial code, enough that one can be innovative and remain relevant while being uniform, but the other can't?

Christ Almighty you are annoying. Are you ever going to actually engage with this debate? Or did you just need a place to scream "MURICA" over and over again?


Demographics of Canada: 35,000,000 people with about 4 major cities and the rest of your country is uninhabitable because of perma frost.
USA: 330,000,000 people amd countless number of cities and habitable land from coast to coast.

Your entire country is the near equivalent of the population of Texas. The reason you don't understand why federalism works or why it's a problem is because you clearly lack the understanding of just how big and diverse the US is. It is physically impossible to get everyone in this country on the same page.
Image
User avatar
fstarcstar
Governor
 
Posts: 2400
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:47 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 126 times
Been thanked: 144 times

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest