It doesn’t really matter what you take seriously, if you’re unwilling to regard the facts. The “harsh sentencing” period of the late 80s-now has completely devastated an entire generation of poor people, particularly PoC. So, the slippery slope doesn't even need to happen. We are living it. My point is that we are…

I would love that. However, I don’t see it IRL. For example, in 2007 when the issue of over sentencing came to the Supreme Court from the same geographical region as Brock Turner (So Cal versus Nor Cal). A black man got LIFE without parole for stealing a $1200 golf club from a white golf course under the newly enacted…

Except that you are literally advocating for tougher sentencing that will disproportionately affect POC, and that's a fact, while I am saying lets all take a fucking step back and look at the broader implications of these calls (read: how they will affect POC). My literal stance on this whole thing is that the concern…

No. You can't call for stricter sentences and think they will only be applied to one crime. History and statistics defy that logic.

There is no law on sentencing. There are guidelines, and a lot of discretion. If that discretion comes with a fear of public retaliation, the trend will be toward using that discretion to increase sentences across the board. Modern history has proven this.

Address what? Mass incarceration? My, it must be nice to be privileged enough to not be affected by it. But for the sake of the millions of people who are, please think more broadly.

Yeah, girl, your pregnant lazy is my non-pregnant normal.

Fair enough. I guess my concern is that this will set a precedent that with enough political influence, we can remove judges from the bench when they do things we don’t like. This concerns me because the majority (or at least the vocal minority) of Americans still think that we should lock the door and throw away the…

In the case of judges, I`m afraid its actually that if you ARE beholden to the people, you will abuse the system. Historically speaking, judges are elected based on their “tough on crime” stance and their conviction/sentencing rate (the more harsh, the better). Removing Persky would just add to this. What’s to stop…

Actually, drug-related convictions make up a smaller portion of the prison population than you’d think. Minimizing sentences for drug crimes is indeed important, but drawing the hard line at victim/victimless won’t end the mass incarceration problem (i.e. simple assault is no a victimless crime).

The Marshall Project is an organization of progressively-minded criminal justice reform advocates who have been working in the field for years and years. If they warning against reactionary moves, it is probably worth it to hear them out...

Counterpoint: removing Persky sends the message to judges that HARSHER SENTENCES WILL KEEP YOU ON THE BENCH.

THANK YOU for this. As somebody who cares deeply about criminal justice reform and ending mass incarceration, but who also recognizes and is abhorred by rape culture, I have felt like I couldn’t properly convey my feeling about this Persky backlash.

Yeah, this weeks episode of Made in America had extensive footage of OJ and Nicole’s wedding, including a clip of Robert and Kris Kardashian giving the couple well wishes. It must be surreal to watch for those who attended (I imagine maybe Kim did?)

Ugh the Facebook comments about this were straight up depressing.

Considering how private Taylor seems to be with her relationships (she needs to leave the juicy stuff for her songs) I actually don’t think they were staged? She’s just not that thirsty for paparazzi, considering her star status. She doesn’t have to ask.

Nothing like a good blubbery cry sesh before bed.

It’s long-awaited and perhaps too late and may not do much, etc. But despite all of that...

You can’t just kill somebody without allowing for an appeals process. That would be some arcane shit, especially considering the number of times we have sent somebody to death row only to exonerate them upon learning they were falsely convicted (6 since 1999 in Louisiana alone). It is absolutely unacceptable to risk…

You don’t have to care, the Constitution does that for you. They have an 8th Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment. You SHOULD care that legislators are willing to spend $1M to deprive citizens of their Constitutional rights (the real ones, too, not the imagined one to carry assault rifles).