Another poll about basic beliefs. Public corruption.

We have laws against theft, slander, embezzlement, and a host of other crimes but when it comes to our public officials, elected or chosen, we always seem to let them off the hook.

So, the question is...if a public official is convicted of a serious crime should sentencing be increased for doing damage to the public good? Say, a 25% increase in time and/or fine?

they certainly should not be let off easy like most are. I'd say give them the 75%-100% max penalty and eliminate the top 2 sentencing easy offs.

I'd go with 20 years in prison.

However, ive noticed that sentencing is arbitrary.

Example, Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years in prison, others were sentenced less than 6 years.

My "ignore list" needs to be updated. Some people no longer seem to be with us and some of you (you know who you are) are just not worth engaging. I put these three little polls together to help me evaluate your fitness for being ignored. Simple positions that no one can deny but some of you deny them anyway. You're intractable and stupid to boot. Congratulations! You made the list. Other considerations are how you handle intellectual defeat; do you run away, do you sulk, (or worse) you throw a barbed invective and try to declare victory with your pants around your ankles. That last one puts you on the list.

69in2it69
aloysius.x
Chung Tran
mask69venom
txdot-guy
Yssup Rider
pdidy69
WTF

The ignore has already been put down on you so don't try to contact me. My decision is irrevocable until next year. You shit in your own bed, now you have to sleep in it.

Preemptive strike: This is not about your opinion, this is about how you go about expressing them and your general demeanor. Why have a discussion someone who cannot see reality, nor will accept it when it is 100% proven to them?

We have laws against theft, slander, embezzlement, and a host of other crimes but when it comes to our public officials, elected or chosen, we always seem to let them off the hook.

So, the question is...if a public official is convicted of a serious crime should sentencing be increased for doing damage to the public good? Say, a 25% increase in time and/or fine? Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

I'm going to go with a fine. They should pay back all the money they made as a public official. But then - what comes to mind is - what about getting into office just to make money? Then pay back the money "earned" as a public official when your scheme comes to fruition. A la Dumpster president.

Then again, there's this fuck-face pedo.

I'm going to go with a fine. They should pay back all the money they made as a public official. But then - what comes to mind is - what about getting into office just to make money? Then pay back the money "earned" as a public official when your scheme comes to fruition. A la Dumpster president.

Then again, there's this fuck-face pedo. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

that's called "honest service" all the politicians engage in that form of legal corruption.

PWD. Not a good look. You were so busy ragging on others you forgot to finish your poll.

Maybe the mods can help you back up on that poll there pal.

PWD. Not a good look. You were so busy ragging on others you forgot to finish your poll.

Maybe the mods can help you back up on that poll there pal. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

if you say so

How about a lifetime ban for politics? No running, no serving, no behind the scenes (penalize anyone who hires the criminal). The only thing that may be open to them would be writing and advising but not be a paid part of the campaign (it was the money that got them into trouble the first time).

That’s what they’re trying to do with Trumpler.

if you say so Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Since you’re here as JDBs white knight, please read the poll question and explain it to us.

It reads like something written by Gabby Johnson of Rock Ridge.

How about a lifetime ban for politics? No running, no serving, no behind the scenes (penalize anyone who hires the criminal). The only thing that may be open to them would be writing and advising but not be a paid part of the campaign (it was the money that got them into trouble the first time). Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Id go for that. They can write/advise but cannot be part of any campaign activity.

Ban on all offices; local, state, federal.

You know what the problem would be? The democrats would find some way in every friendly city and town to nuke any worthwhile GOP candidate before they can even run.

You know what the problem would be? The democrats would find some way in every friendly city and town to nuke any worthwhile GOP candidate before they can even run. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

yea.. they like to play dirty, so smearing someone isn't beneath them.


but they can't see ahead that their tactic can be used against them.

How about a lifetime ban for [from?] politics? No running, no serving, no behind the scenes (penalize anyone who hires the criminal). The only thing that may be open to them would be writing and advising but not be a paid part of the campaign (it was the money that got them into trouble the first time). Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn

Penalize anyone who hires the criminal? According to some, an illegal is a criminal having broken immigration laws. Still, businesses "hire the criminal".

What sort of sanctions should business owners face for the same act?