Would this be effective in undermining organized crime?

1. 53

   peter565posted 7 years ago

   Would this be effective in undermining organized crime?
   
   Organized crime is the most dangerous criminal, because it is a team. It is a serious problem, I got this idea that might help to resolve the issue, it can be argue to violate human right by some, but considering how bad things are with organized crime, I think it is acceptable. The idea is, whenever a person who is a member of an organized crime, committed a crime and found guilty, 10 more can be found guilty of the same crime, simply by been member of same gang, the idea is from ancient China, where for serious death penalty offense (eg mass murder), they can even execute ur children for it.
   
   

   replyreport
2. 70

   mike102771posted 7 years ago

   I am not sure where to start with this idea. You want to jail people for who they are connected to. Execute their children? We put people in jail for crimes they commit not crimes committed by others.
   
   Do you know that at one time such groups as the unions and NAACP where considered criminal organizations by law enforcement? The FBI investigated the civil rights movement in the 1960’s for organized crime.
   Forget human rights it’s a violation of civil rights which are the basis of laws in most modern societies. I would imagine many ancient Chinese here murdered by their feudal masters because they knew someone or could be connected to people who the masters don’t care for.
   
   If we are just going to toss the constitution out the window why not just round up everyone who kind of looks guilty and blast away?

   replyreport
   1. 53

      peter565posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The idea is in alliance with during martial law, certain human right & civil right consideration are put on hold, due to necessity, in my opinion, organized crime issue is so bad, it is justify to put certain HR  & CR on hold till things get

      replyreport
   2. 70

      mike102771posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Do you really think we need martial Law? Are you really ready to give your rights away for some measure of  security? Do you think that rights surrendered will rights restored? I think any rights we give away will stay away.

      replyreport
   3. 53

      peter565posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      There are so call, semi martial law, thus for example, we can only declare martial law against organized crime. France declare a semi martial law, after the Paris bombing, which to my knowledge has ended now.

      replyreport
   4. 70

      mike102771posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Are you talking about organized crime or terrorists? Semi Martial Law. Is that like a woman being Semi pregnant? Give the Gov an inch and they will take your freedom. Do you trust the Gov?

      replyreport
   5. 53

      peter565posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Not sure about US constitution, in Taiwan for example, martial law, require President declare, senate approval, must end when senate request, this system referenced the US, so I would assume US.is the same and organized crime is as bad as terrorist.

      replyreport
   6. 70

      mike102771posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Like most Constitutional law in the US it is unclear. The majority of times it was used the use of it was later found to be illegal.  I have to disagree terrorists are worse than organized criminals (unless you are talking about Bankers).

      replyreport
   7. 53

      peter565posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The US is the first constitution democratic country in the world, form in 18th century, thus US constitution is more abstract, other nations turn constitutional democratic in the 20th century, thus, has a more clear constitution.

      replyreport
3. 84

   tsmogposted 7 years ago

   We have some measures in place today in the U.S. like conspiracy, complicity, accessory, obstruction, and mandatory reporting with child abuse too.

   replyreport
   1. 70

      mike102771posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      With any of these charges the POI has to be directly connected to the crime rather than just affiliated with the person charged or convicted.

      replyreport
4. 86

   tamarawilhiteposted 7 years ago

   What you are calling for is collective guilt, and that is a violation of Western law.
   You don't hold the children responsible for the parents' crimes. You don't hold families or friends responsible for the crimes of another.
   The closest thing we have done is charge everyone involved in the crime with the same, most serious offense. This is how many women end up in jail for life, having driven the get away car for an armed robber who killed someone. She didn't kill someone, but she was helping them. But even this involves someone who was voluntarily involved in the crime. However, in these cases, no one in the gang who wasn't involved in that crime goes to jail.

   replyreport