June 4, 2015
"Shining a Light on Overcriminalization"
The title of this post is the title of this notable new "Backgrounder" from The Heritage Foundation authored by Jordan Richardson. Here is the abstrat:
Overcriminalization — the overuse or misuse of the criminal law to address societal problems — manifests itself in a variety of ways, including overly broad definitions of criminal acts, excessively harsh sentencing, and criminal sanctions for simple mistakes or accidents under a theory of strict liability. However, overcriminalization has a more tangible aspect beyond legislation and legal theory: American citizens all too often find themselves trapped by the very system that they assumed existed for their protection and prosecuted for crimes that most people would not even recognize as criminal offenses.
Criminal justice reform is about more than policy debates in Congress or legal procedure; it is about how the lives and fortunes of ordinary Americans are threatened by abuse of the law. Only by identifying the problem and highlighting why it matters will any meaningful change take place.
June 4, 2015 at 08:59 AM | Permalink
The authors underestimate this phenomenon. Over-criminalization is itself a criminal enterprise of the legal profession. It generates lawyer jobs and fees. It is intentional. It is unrestrained by checks and balances. It is carried out by the lawyer s of both parties. It is lawyer quackery that likely generates half their income. So try taking it away. See what happens to you.
Potential remedies, not involving violence. Violence has full justification. The immunity of the lawyer justifies all out violence against its criminal cult enterprise hierarchy. Their criminality makes violence a form of self defense. Nothing short of violence and eradication of the hierarchy is likely to work. Violence itself is an unproven remedy. In the past, violent revolutions have all failed. That includes the catastrophic and idiotic American Revolution. As a British colony, we would have ended slavery in 1833, not 1863. The subject would have been settled without killing 850,000 people, and messing up the nation for another 100 years. The beef was about taxation amounting to 2% of GDP. They should have just peacefully evaded it, instead of going to war.
Back to short of violence remedies:
Desuetude as an amendment.
Daubert standards and pilot testing results of all new regulation.
Legal liability of government entities for malpractice.
Federal government responsible for interference with contract. Now immune.
New laws and regulations are ghoulish human experimentation and lack of informed consent is a crime against humanity. Arrest the lawyers engaging in that practice.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Jun 4, 2015 9:18:22 AM