Discussion Thread: An INTENTIONAL Two-tiered Justice System

[Pommer]

I kinda, sorta miss the general political discussions that we used to be able to have before “politics” started to look like some zero-sum game and the bickering back and forth, back and forth…
BTAIM

We already have two sets of laws in the Several States, one set is the State (and State approved) Laws & and Statutes and yes, even regulation, and the other is the Federal law that is supposed to be enforced the same exact way in NYC as well as in Waldo AR.

If the States can accommodate the Federal Government (and at least “help” enforce Federal Law, even though, in that State, it might not be a “crime”, [recreational THC], e.g.), then Maybe the Federal laws could also accommodate the States and better, yet the counties that make up those States, and have Urban Federal Law and Rural Federal Law?

Just like there are still “dry-counties“, there could be counties where it is legal to advertise your preferred “clientele” without fear of testing your rights to “free-association“ for the “affront” of running a lunch-counter, in your own store.

Don’t try to force the Frederal Law to act differently, in different counties.
Have the Federal Government allow the counties to choose between RFL and UFL. (Some things could be a la carte even, maybe?)

This will never happen though, not unless we think, long and hard, about doing something even stupider.
And I know that we’re not going to, again.

So, let us reason together, tell me why this sucky “two-state solution” has been staring us in our face for so long.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I kinda, sorta miss the general political discussions that we used to be able to have before “politics” started to look like some zero-sum game and the bickering back and forth, back and forth…
BTAIM

We already have two sets of laws in the Several States, one set is the State (and State approved) Laws & and Statutes and yes, even regulation, and the other is the Federal law that is supposed to be enforced the same exact way in NYC as well as in Waldo AR.

If the States can accommodate the Federal Government (and at least “help” enforce Federal Law, even though, in that State, it might not be a “crime”, [recreational THC], e.g.), then Maybe the Federal laws could also accommodate the States and better, yet the counties that make up those States, and have Urban Federal Law and Rural Federal Law?

Just like there are still “dry-counties“, there could be counties where it is legal to advertise your preferred “clientele” without fear of testing your rights to “free-association“ for the “affront” of running a lunch-counter, in your own store.

Don’t try to force the Frederal Law to act differently, in different counties.
Have the Federal Government allow the counties to choose between RFL and UFL. (Some things could be a la carte even, maybe?)

This will never happen though, not unless we think, long and hard, about doing something even stupider.
And I know that we’re not going to, again.

So, let us reason together, tell me why this sucky “two-state solution” has been staring us in our face for so long.

Maybe because the other two-tiered justice system --that of turning a blind eye to some, and prosecuting to absurd proportions the others-- is too busy pursuing its own devices.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Ooh! A free thinking thread. Love it!

 

[Pommer]

I had mid level hopes for this thread but it seems as if you’re going to be stuck in the Valley of Partisan Divide for a while.

 

[Landon Caeli]

I had mid level hopes for this thread but it seems as if you’re going to be stuck in the Valley of Partisan Divide for a while.

It should be a great thread. Unfortunately, we lack good posters on CF. If you're not preaching facts, nobody knows what to do.

...It's actually pathetic.

 

[Pommer]

It should be a great thread. Unfortunately, we lack good posters on CF. If you're not preaching facts, nobody knows what to do.

...It's actually pathetic.

Goodness knows that I enjoy “fighting-the-good-fight”, but not all of the time.

I have to take (mental) steps to not become a polemicist, (which is necessary and useful in debate forums, but just not the gig that I desire for myself).

Of course this thread would devolve and we’d end up fighting over “which side would get what?”

We have to continue talking about stuff though