The Frankish Reich Posted January 21 Posted January 21 Just now, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I don’t know. I would think that allowing the families of victims to author/write/vote on laws, but at some point you have to trust the rule of law. Written, debated, voted on….boom it’s done. It is done. But unfortunately (dare I say like most victim-named legislation?) parts of the law are ill-considered. Because, well, they weren't really "considered" because everyone's afraid of "being against Laken's law" 11 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: Other than name aside, how is this a bad bill? I'd read the Reason article. The one thing that is utterly unworkable is the provision that would allow a state to sue the federal government. There's also the fact that as written the statute would seem to apply to someone charged and found not guilty of a minor shoplifting offense, or even someone who was charged with the charges subsequently dropped because the cops found out they had the wrong guy. Just not well thought-out at all.
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 21 Posted January 21 Just now, The Frankish Reich said: It is done. But unfortunately (dare I say like most victim-named legislation?) parts of the law are ill-considered. Because, well, they weren't really "considered" because everyone's afraid of "being against Laken's law" Such as? And assuming you’re correct, is “Ill-considered” unique to victim-named laws?
The Frankish Reich Posted January 21 Posted January 21 2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Such as? And assuming you’re correct, is “Ill-considered” unique to victim-named laws? The part about states suing the government. Ill-considered? Well, because the creep who killed Laken Riley had previously committed a petty theft, the law became "theft = mandatory detention." If Laken Riley's killer had previously committed a tax fraud, would it be "tax fraud = mandatory detention?" What does theft have to do with him being a rapist killer? And there's categories of offenders who are left out who may pose more of a risk to future Laken Rileys. In other words: poorly thought-out/knee-jerk reaction laws. 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted January 21 Posted January 21 15 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: The part about states suing the government. Ill-considered? Well, because the creep who killed Laken Riley had previously committed a petty theft, the law became "theft = mandatory detention." If Laken Riley's killer had previously committed a tax fraud, would it be "tax fraud = mandatory detention?" What does theft have to do with him being a rapist killer? And there's categories of offenders who are left out who may pose more of a risk to future Laken Rileys. In other words: poorly thought-out/knee-jerk reaction laws. Interesting analysis, thanks. I thought the law addressed a person here illegally, charged with a violent crime (or crimes that have markers/predictors of future violent behavior), and trying to remove dangerous individuals from the population. The second part of my question dealt with whether or not “poorly thought out/knee jerk reaction laws” were unique to victim-inspired legislation? Or, is it pretty common that language is at times ill conceived, not-thought-out, subject to attack by states etc? I am not an expert of course, but it sure seems like the problem extends beyond the Laken Riley Act.
B-Man Posted January 23 Posted January 23 Congress passes Laken Riley Act in early win for Trump on immigration Max Matza The US Congress has passed a bill requiring undocumented immigrants who are arrested for theft or violent crimes to be held in jail pending trial. The bill, named after Laken Riley - a Georgia nursing student murdered last year by a Venezuelan man - passed the House of Representatives a day after it was approved by the Senate. The measure cruised through the House by a vote of 263 to 156. Forty-six Democrats defied their party leadership and crossed the political aisle to support the Republican-led measure. In the Senate, 12 Democrats gave their support to the bill. It now heads to the White House for President Donald Trump to sign into law - an early legislative win for his fledgling administration on a bill named after a woman whom he often invoked during his campaign. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj482l0kw7qo 1
JDHillFan Posted January 23 Posted January 23 (edited) 1 hour ago, B-Man said: Congress passes Laken Riley Act in early win for Trump on immigration Max Matza The US Congress has passed a bill requiring undocumented immigrants who are arrested for theft or violent crimes to be held in jail pending trial. The bill, named after Laken Riley - a Georgia nursing student murdered last year by a Venezuelan man - passed the House of Representatives a day after it was approved by the Senate. The measure cruised through the House by a vote of 263 to 156. Forty-six Democrats defied their party leadership and crossed the political aisle to support the Republican-led measure. In the Senate, 12 Democrats gave their support to the bill. It now heads to the White House for President Donald Trump to sign into law - an early legislative win for his fledgling administration on a bill named after a woman whom he often invoked during his campaign. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj482l0kw7qo By Roundy standards, and his standards alone, that’s 58 democrats going to hell for hating brown people. Pray for them. These democrats may actually be in danger of going to hell. Pray for them. Edited January 23 by JDHillFan 2
BillsFanNC Posted Monday at 06:04 PM Author Posted Monday at 06:04 PM Just now, Doc said: That was Selena Gomez? Yup. 1
The Frankish Reich Posted Monday at 06:15 PM Posted Monday at 06:15 PM On 1/26/2025 at 9:20 AM, BillsFanNC said: I would suggest you read the bill. Would it have required the custody of this Florida illegal after his 1st or 2nd DUI? No. It will require his custody now that he's "caused injury." After someone's already dead. And guess what? The liquor/bar/restaurant industry actually lobbies against these laws, the ones that add new punishments to DUI offenders. That's probably why there's no mandatory custody for first-time illegal aliens offenders.
JDHillFan Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago On 1/21/2025 at 12:51 PM, The Frankish Reich said: I follow the general rule that all legislation named after a person is almost always bad. On 1/21/2025 at 2:21 PM, The Frankish Reich said: https://reason.com/2025/01/18/the-laken-riley-act-reminds-us-if-a-law-is-named-after-someone-its-probably-bad/#:~:text=Usually pegged to a victim,don't get on board. I think Reason (a hard libertarian site) first noticed this. First post - all legislation named after a person is almost always bad. That’s an impressive use of the language. You made it sound so profound! Second post - you think Reason first noticed this a couple days before you posted your nugget of wisdom. Too funny. Anyway: 2
Tommy Callahan Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago (edited) About time. Here comes the "defend violent/rapey criminals crowd ". Edited 19 hours ago by Tommy Callahan 1
Doc Posted 18 hours ago Posted 18 hours ago 41 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: About time. Here comes the "defend violent/rapey criminals crowd ". "You just want to jail all immigrants!" 1 1
Recommended Posts