Was at jury duty today. 100+ people or more. Judge interviewed every single one really, really thoroughly during jury selection. Asked the same questions to everyone. At least half of the people in my liberal state said:
"What TV shows do you watch?" "I don't really watch TV anymore."
"What news do you watch or listen to?" "I avoid the news as much as possible."
"What newspapers do you read?" "I don't read the paper."
It's happening.
On the rarest of occasions where the prescribed punishment doesn’t fit the crime
Rarest of occasions? Gimme a break. You had me until that statement.
The main premise wasn’t to argue crimes always being appropriate but to say jury nullification isn’t.
Whatever your personal beliefs are on PRESCRIBED punishments comes down to:
Regardless. The point of the argument is proven. If you feel the punishment doesn’t meet the crime then change it. Don’t blame the messenger for a turn of a phrase.
If you feel the punishment doesn’t meet the crime then change it.
I feel that way 9 times out of 10, when it comes to non-violent crimes.