• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Improper or proper?

ChrisL said:
I disagree. Everyone doesn't get this special treatment, so it is unequal treatment, therefore unethical.
Click to expand...

Not everyone is similarly situated in life and sometimes it is more immoral not to act when you can otherwise prevent harm.
 
What's the use of being influential if you can't use your influence? It's like being a billionaire but you have to go to the dollar store.
 
DiAnna said:
To be honest, rather than fair, they do not "expedite" releases of prisoners who have not had a top state official basically demanding that they do so. The Lt. Gov. used his position to push a personal agenda, so that his relative was not treated equally, but instead got preferential treatment.

Not acceptable. :)
Click to expand...

According to the local news, that is a common practice.
 
Fisher said:
Not everyone is similarly situated in life and sometimes it is more immoral not to act when you can otherwise prevent harm.
Click to expand...

Still unethical.
 
ksu_aviator said:
According to the local news, that is a common practice.
Click to expand...

So? That doesn't make it right or proper. It is improper and unethical. Any politician or person in a position of authority who uses their connections to do "favors" for relatives is a scum IMO.
 
specklebang said:
What's the use of being influential if you can't use your influence? It's like being a billionaire but you have to go to the dollar store.
Click to expand...

Using your "influence" as a get out of jail card for your friends/family is unethical. I can't even believe this has to be explained.
 
They are setting themselves up to get sued. If another person gets arrested for a similarly minor offense (since when is stealing a minor offense?) doesn't get similar treatment, they have grounds for a discrimination suit.
 
ksu_aviator said:
So, it seems to me that the Lt. Gov tried very hard to not do anything improper while putting plenty of pressure to get his relative out of jail. Of course, she didn't do anything jaw dropping. It was illegal, but it wasn't drug running or money laundering. So the question is, was it to much pressure to repeat he's the LG even though he said on numerous occasions that he wanted everything to be within the law and procedures?


So, I think it was clumsy but ok. He could have done without as much name dropping and more "what's the proper way to handle this" but he never made a threat, veiled or otherwise, and he never put any pressure. He just asked very nicely and persistently for a favor and I don't think that's as much of a problem as some seem to.
Click to expand...

Seems a little over the top to me but then why was a young lady, supposedly from a good family, picked up for "shoplifting" and put in jail in the first place? Is this normal practice in the US? Here, if you're picked up for shoplifting, it's pretty much a misdemeanor and usually you don't even leave the store, and you're sent home once the paperwork is done and given a court date to attend your first hearing on the matter. Seems like a waste of taxpayer dollars transporting, booking, jailing, etc. etc. of this "criminal".
 
Another reason why this is wrong is because if you have a relative that has a problem with the authorities continually, then you aren't doing that person any favors by getting them off lighter. Then, that person sees a free "get out of jail" card. It's really dumb.
 
ChrisL said:
Still unethical.
Click to expand...

So you would think it is more ethical to let someone sit in jail an extra 6-8 weeks because they cannot make bail for a crime they are going to enter a guilty plea to for which they will not receive a jail sentence for than try to get them moved up on the docket? Do you think it is more ethical to let a soldier passing through town who gets picked up on a Vanilla circumstance DUI either have to sit in jail or be forced to stay in state for 6-8 weeks to avoid violating the condition of their bond, thereby screwing them with the military? I do not. There are some circumstances in which skipping the line is the right thing to do---it is why Emergency Departments triage and prioritize patients.
 
ChrisL said:
Using your "influence" as a get out of jail card for your friends/family is unethical. I can't even believe this has to be explained.
Click to expand...

Oh, I guess I didn't get the memo. I'll have to be more observant in the future. Mental note to self "politicians may not use influence due to ethical issues?

Thank god we don't have this problem very often. How dare this one politician spoil the ethics of the many!:roll:

How did you feel about my concept of not allowing billionaires to buy solid gold cars?
 
specklebang said:
Oh, I guess I didn't get the memo. I'll have to be more observant in the future. Mental note to self "politicians may not use influence due to ethical issues?

Thank god we don't have this problem very often. How dare this one politician spoil the ethics of the many!:roll:

How did you feel about my concept of not allowing billionaires to buy solid gold cars?
Click to expand...

Lol! Apparently you're feelings are hurt, but that's okay because it's the truth. If a politician's "baby" gets arrested for something, they should be treated as anyone else, regardless of their power or influence. It sets a really bad precedence.
 
ChrisL said:
Lol! Apparently you're feelings are hurt, but that's okay because it's the truth. If a politician's "baby" gets arrested for something, they should be treated as anyone else, regardless of their power or influence. It sets a really bad precedence.
Click to expand...

My feelings? Hurt? Why would you even think that?

As for the powerful and rich receiving "a different justice", I wouldn't be concerned about establishing precedent. It's already established so it's a bit late to worry about it.

Now, about the billionaire...
 
specklebang said:
My feelings? Hurt? Why would you even think that?

As for the powerful and rich receiving "a different justice", I wouldn't be concerned about establishing precedent. It's already established so it's a bit late to worry about it.

Now, about the billionaire...
Click to expand...

It's a terrible precedence and example to set, and any person with ethics would realize that. Not ALL privileged people do this either, because they realize.

The billionaire example is just retarded, irrelevant and completely meaningless. :mrgreen:
 
specklebang said:
Sheesh. Retarded, irrelevant and completely meaningless. Nice response. I suppose that's not meant as a compliment, is it?
Click to expand...

Sorry. :shrug:
 
ChrisL said:
Sorry. :shrug:
Click to expand...

S'OK. Really. But I was actually trying to make a point. If people have power and money - they will use it.

You may resent the power of power. But that doesn't cause it to be unreal. Our politicians get certain benefits that we civilians don't get. Is it fair? Is it "right"? Maybe not - but it is real.
 
specklebang said:
S'OK. Really. But I was actually trying to make a point. If people have power and money - they will use it.

You may resent the power of power. But that doesn't cause it to be unreal. Our politicians get certain benefits that we civilians don't get. Is it fair? Is it "right"? Maybe not - but it is real.
Click to expand...

I never said it wasn't real. I said it was unethical because it is.
 
ChrisL said:
So? That doesn't make it right or proper. It is improper and unethical. Any politician or person in a position of authority who uses their connections to do "favors" for relatives is a scum IMO.
Click to expand...

Unethical? Did they not follow the rules? all she got was expedited processing. She didn't get out of the charges and she still went to jail. I fail to see the unethical part.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Seems a little over the top to me but then why was a young lady, supposedly from a good family, picked up for "shoplifting" and put in jail in the first place? Is this normal practice in the US? Here, if you're picked up for shoplifting, it's pretty much a misdemeanor and usually you don't even leave the store, and you're sent home once the paperwork is done and given a court date to attend your first hearing on the matter. Seems like a waste of taxpayer dollars transporting, booking, jailing, etc. etc. of this "criminal".
Click to expand...

When I worked in retail, the people we caught had to wait in the manager's office. When the police got there, the person I caught was read their rights, gave a statement, I gave a statement and the officer would give the individual something no different from a traffic ticket. Everyone would walk away and I never once had to go to court. So I'm assuming they all paid a fine and went on their way. It does seem odd that she went to jail. Maybe Allen needs a more streamlined system.
 
ChrisL said:
I never said it wasn't real. I said it was unethical because it is.
Click to expand...

These days, ethics are in the eye of the beholder. To you it seems (and I agree) "unethical".

Can you give me an example of ethical behavior by one of our rulers? Even if you pick a good one, at least half the people will disagree with you.

You do realize that every time a new contract is awarded, whether is $100K to study the mating habits of Zimbabwean grasshoppers or building a new billion dollar aircraft, that rewards flow from hand to hand. These are far greater examples of "unethical" behavior but it is the norm.

Just because I discuss, examine or question something doesn't mean I advocate it.

Here's a book I liked because it would result in a world I could be at ease in: THE TRUTH MACHINE
 
specklebang said:
These days, ethics are in the eye of the beholder. To you it seems (and I agree) "unethical".

Can you give me an example of ethical behavior by one of our rulers? Even if you pick a good one, at least half the people will disagree with you.

You do realize that every time a new contract is awarded, whether is $100K to study the mating habits of Zimbabwean grasshoppers or building a new billion dollar aircraft, that rewards flow from hand to hand. These are far greater examples of "unethical" behavior but it is the norm.

Just because I discuss, examine or question something doesn't mean I advocate it.

Here's a book I liked because it would result in a world I could be at ease in: THE TRUTH MACHINE
Click to expand...

Nice thanks for the link.

However, the question is proper or improper; not do people do it anyway. My answer is improper.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Seems a little over the top to me but then why was a young lady, supposedly from a good family, picked up for "shoplifting" and put in jail in the first place? Is this normal practice in the US? Here, if you're picked up for shoplifting, it's pretty much a misdemeanor and usually you don't even leave the store, and you're sent home once the paperwork is done and given a court date to attend your first hearing on the matter. Seems like a waste of taxpayer dollars transporting, booking, jailing, etc. etc. of this "criminal".
Click to expand...

ksu_aviator said:
When I worked in retail, the people we caught had to wait in the manager's office. When the police got there, the person I caught was read their rights, gave a statement, I gave a statement and the officer would give the individual something no different from a traffic ticket. Everyone would walk away and I never once had to go to court. So I'm assuming they all paid a fine and went on their way. It does seem odd that she went to jail. Maybe Allen needs a more streamlined system.
Click to expand...

In my area, they get taken to the police station and booked into jail and then released on a Recognizance Bond unless they have a record, in which case they have to post a secured bond.
 
Sheriff should have said, sir we take a dim view of prank calls. Then hung up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom