Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Link

I'm okay with this.

As noted, if whatever statue offends you for whatever reason, start a petition, get thousands to sign it; have it go to a vote and have the city take it down properly.

I think you're missing context Robtard, or you're being super post-modern, perhaps?

Let us take three statues as examples.

Ghandi in Ghana, Churchill in London and Bismark in Germany.

Okay, so in reverse order. Bismark united the German people despite being a brutal dictator to non-Germans. Good for Germany, appropiately placed in Germany.

Churchill won WW2 for Britain despite his horrible racist comments about non-British people, appropriately in London to celebrate someone who stood up for Britain.

Ghandi, a party man who abused African people having a statue in Africa to celebrate... well, I'm not sure. Maybe we shouldn't celebrate shenanigans.

This applies to a lot of the Confederate statues that celebrated racism and brutality towards black people in the confederate states. I'd say, if they were horrible racist twats then get rid of those statues. If they did good things with a bit of baggage, then let them stay to remember the good things and not the bad.

Appreciate good, shun the bad. That's all I'm saying.

I think people need to stop saying "post-modern" in here...

My point is, you're probably not going to get a shit load of people being offended and signing up to remove a Gandhi statue in India, so it'd likely stay.

People can even do a counter petition, getting people to sign to keep statues.

Originally posted by Blakemore
I think you're missing context Robtard, or you're being super post-modern, perhaps?

Let us take three statues as examples.

Ghandi in Ghana, Churchill in London and Bismark in Germany.

Okay, so in reverse order. Bismark united the German people despite being a brutal dictator to non-Germans. Good for Germany, appropiately placed in Germany.

Churchill won WW2 for Britain despite his horrible racist comments about non-British people, appropriately in London to celebrate someone who stood up for Britain.

Ghandi, a party man who abused African people having a statue in Africa to celebrate... well, I'm not sure. Maybe we shouldn't celebrate shenanigans.

This applies to a lot of the Confederate statues that celebrated racism and brutality towards black people in the confederate states. I'd say, if they were horrible racist twats then get rid of those statues. If they did good things with a bit of baggage, then let them stay to remember the good things and not the bad.

Appreciate good, shun the bad. That's all I'm saying.

Alternative take:


Felony vandalism is felony vandalism no matter the context.


Allow democracy to take its proper course: vote the statues off of public property.

^That's the right idea. I have no problem with statues being removed as long as the majority of people in the city or town where said statue is vote to have it removed; but thugs breaking the law by defacing them and/or trying to forcefully remove them because they childishly think what they want should override the will of the general populace or the law is despicable.

I don't give a shit if they're Confederate statues or statues of Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson, or even a statue of the disgusting Karl Marx.


Glad that some of the lawbreakers are finally getting punished for their lawless behavior.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
^That's the right idea. I have no problem with statues being removed as long as the majority of people in the city or town where said statue is vote to have it removed; but thugs breaking the law by defacing them and/or trying to forcefully remove them because they childishly think what they want should override the will of the general populace or the law is despicable.

I don't give a shit if they're Confederate statues or statues of Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson, or even a statue of the disgusting Karl Marx.


Glad that some of the lawbreakers are finally getting punished for their lawless behavior.

Nice. Very nice. This is such a good post that it is something I could see myself typing up.


Sometimes, you knock it out of the park, TheLoneRanger.

Also lol:

Oklahoma prosecutor charges allegedly violent protesters with terrorism: 'This is not Seattle'

Funny, we have a statue of Margaret Sanger, a pen pal of Hitler, and a woman that made it her life work to wipe Blacks from this Country.

All I hear is silence on that front.

Statue lives matter.

Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. History has stopped.

Originally posted by Surtur
Also lol:

Oklahoma prosecutor charges allegedly violent protesters with terrorism: 'This is not Seattle'

https://i.imgur.com/5jjGHIX.jpg

Aaaahahahaha, that's Oklahoma, for you.

I like the cut of their jib

Originally posted by BackFire
Statue lives matter. top notch!

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/20/881017611/west-virginia-born-out-of-the-civil-war-grapples-with-confederate-monuments

Stupid West Virginia...

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Link

It is interesting that the Department of Justice can bring charges against a person for defacing a statue in four hours, but the officers who murdered Breonna Taylor are still walking free.

Because going after the cops who murdered Breonna Taylor won't win Trump support with his base, while going after some "thugs" who defaced a statue will. Trump should realize that he already has his base, ginning them up is kinda pointless aside from an ego boost a this point in time.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
It is interesting that the Department of Justice can bring charges against a person for defacing a statue in four hours, but the officers who murdered Breonna Taylor are still walking free.

You call it interesting, I call it: awful

Originally posted by Surtur
You call it interesting, I call it: awful

I call it racist.

Yeah, but you're not very bright and prone to calling things that aren't actually racist...racist.

Not your fault, you're democrat. How could you be any other way?

It's like none of you have ever even seen Ghostbusters. You won't be laughing when the statues come alive and murder you. Best get rid of them all now before that happens, I say.

The police have failed, as an organization, sure, they aren't all bad, but when it comes to trusting the justice system, they have failed too many times to deserve the benefit of the doubt. So i don't know about "we don't need police" but we need independent review of every procedure, and all new leadership, and personnel review. That is way more important than anything to do with statues. So the DOJ obviously failing to prioritize.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yeah, but you're not very bright and prone to calling things that aren't actually racist...racist.

Not your fault, you're democrat. How could you be any other way?

https://i.imgur.com/k4j43Ww.jpg

Originally posted by truejedi
The police have failed, as an organization, sure, they aren't all bad, but when it comes to trusting the justice system, they have failed too many times to deserve the benefit of the doubt. So i don't know about "we don't need police" but we need independent review of every procedure, and all new leadership, and personnel review. That is way more important than anything to do with statues. So the DOJ obviously failing to prioritize.


So, in other words, breaking the law is perfectly fine because some cops have done bad things.


No, the priority is enforcing the goddamn law, that's the priority, libtard. Law isn't supposed to stop being enforced because some people retardedly think that there is a nationwide agenda by the cops to exterminate black people.


Some of you looney leftists are so damn dumb...smh. The law doesn't take a vacation because some people were wrongly killed by a few cops, ffs.


The DoJ's highest priority is enforcing the law and punishing those who break it... and rightly so.

Im not even liberal. 2016 was the first election i wasnt straight ticket Republican.

If you have eight hours in the day, the DOJ needs to be spending all eight getting their police departments straightened out. Wasting 2 because OMG statues is showing how much they don't understand they have a full blown crisis in their midst. They have a small window here to get their own house in order, or else they will find that when American people lose all confidence in the justice system, all hell will break loose.

Why do the people with Jedi avatar end up having the biggest sore thumbs

Felony charges seem too much for my sensibilities. But I guess it is in character for the United States where there's been an unseemly inflation in length of sentences.

Maybe they should have checked the law before vandalizing property. there is a very clear line separating misdemeanor and felony vandalism.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Maybe they should have checked the law before vandalizing property. there is a very clear line separating misdemeanor and felony vandalism.

That's a legal argument, and I am not disputing that, I am making a normative argument about the way I think it should be.

Why should the charges be lowered for rioters?

Not just rioters, just for everyone. I think our legal systems overvalue property and undervalue people.

So, how much damage should people be allowed to do to your personal property before being charged with a felony?

Originally posted by Silent Master
So, how much damage should people be allowed to do to your personal property before being charged with a felony?

I'm not sure it should ever be a felony. If we were to go by some limit I'd probably more base it on the impact on the owner and the circumstances surrounding the situation. But ultimately I think misdemeanor charges and of course liability in a civil case more than cover most things I can think of. So I think the question is more how damaging is the property damage to a person or society as a whole.

Originally posted by Artol
I'm not sure it should ever be a felony. If we were to go by some limit I'd probably more base it on the impact on the owner and the circumstances surrounding the situation. But ultimately I think misdemeanor charges and of course liability in a civil case more than cover most things I can think of. So I think the question is more how damaging is the property damage to a person or society as a whole.

So, if rioters do $56,000 worth of damage to your house. you'd be ok with them only being charged with a misdemeanor?

Originally posted by Silent Master
So, if rioters do $56,000 worth of damage to your house. you'd be ok with them only being charged with a misdemeanor?

Yes

Would the same hold true for other crimes?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Would the same hold true for other crimes?

That's a pretty broad question. Could you specify what you mean? I do think that there are crimes where considerably longer sentences than what misdemeanors come with are appropriate. I would reform the loss of civil liberties and the duties surrounding a felony conviction though.

If someone doing $56,000 in damage to your house is a misdemeanor, what about someone stealing $56,000 dollars from you?

Originally posted by Silent Master
If someone doing $56,000 in damage to your house is a misdemeanor, what about someone stealing $56,000 dollars from you?

Again, I think what is relevant is the impact that it has on the person. If you steal 56,000$ from a grandma that has $57,000 that has a huge negative impact on her, and may be very detrimental to her health and life, in that light it may be prudent to increase the sentencing (again under the caveat of not losing your civil liberties outside of the right to free movement). If you steal $56,000 from the government or Bill Gates I think that is a completely different situation. And the same with the property damage. But ultimately yes, even stealing $56,000 from me or from an old grandma should probably be covered under a misdemeanor and in civil court.

Originally posted by Artol
Again, I think what is relevant is the impact that it has on the person. If you steal 56,000$ from a grandma that has $57,000 that has a huge negative impact on her, and may be very detrimental to her health and life, in that light it may be prudent to increase the sentencing (again under the caveat of not losing your civil liberties outside of the right to free movement). If you steal $56,000 from the government or Bill Gates I think that is a completely different situation. And the same with the property damage. But ultimately yes, even stealing $56,000 from me or from an old grandma should probably be covered under a misdemeanor and in civil court.

Do you realize the effect on crime that such a change would cause?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
https://i.imgur.com/k4j43Ww.jpg

Originally posted by Silent Master
Do you realize the effect on crime that such a change would cause?

Yeah, I suspect it would go down.

Originally posted by Artol
Yeah, I suspect it would go down.

You think vastly lowering the punishment for crime would make it do down?

Yeah, I mean generally an overhaul from punitive to rehabilitative justice would be what does it. As for punishment, you having to pay back the money you stole (plus possibly damages) as well as being potentially incarcerated for a while or forced to do community service should meet the threshold where increase in sentencing has marginal impact on disincentivization.

Originally posted by Artol
Yeah, I mean generally an overhaul from punitive to rehabilitative justice would be what does it. As for punishment, you having to pay back the money you stole (plus possibly damages) as well as being potentially incarcerated for a while or forced to do community service should meet the threshold where increase in sentencing has marginal impact on disincentivization.

How is vastly lowering the punishment for crimes rehabilitative justice?

Originally posted by Silent Master
How is vastly lowering the punishment for crimes rehabilitative justice?

I like all of Artol's suggestions and they actual work - by the science.

But what they should do with the incarceration is keep them in prison until spring 2021. Minimum. Why? Because this is all political. Depriving them of their freedom and ability to participate in the destructive rioting, voting, AND post election rioting and violence, will completely undercut the purpose of their destructive political movement. It's the worst possible outcome for them.

While rehabilitating them. They will need to go to psychotherapy where they are told over and over "You can't always get what you want. Other people think differently from you and you should not force your will on others - it is evil."

Originally posted by Artol
Yeah, I mean generally an overhaul from punitive to rehabilitative justice would be what does it. As for punishment, you having to pay back the money you stole (plus possibly damages) as well as being potentially incarcerated for a while or forced to do community service should meet the threshold where increase in sentencing has marginal impact on disincentivization. Agreed

Originally posted by Artol
Felony charges seem too much for my sensibilities. But I guess it is in character for the United States where there's been an unseemly inflation in length of sentences.


Nah, it's not too much. It should be a felony. Thugs who deface and/or tear down statues should spend at least a decade in prison, imo.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/29/trump-biden-polls-battleground-states-coronavirus-impact

Originally posted by Silent Master
You think vastly lowering the punishment for crime would make it do down?


Anyone who thinks that is obviously retarded.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Anyone who thinks that is obviously retarded. ]csm]durwank

Originally posted by dadudemon
I like all of Artol's suggestions and they actual work - by the science.

But what they should do with the incarceration is keep them in prison until spring 2021. Minimum. Why? Because this is all political. Depriving them of their freedom and ability to participate in the destructive rioting, voting, AND post election rioting and violence, will completely undercut the purpose of their destructive political movement. It's the worst possible outcome for them.

While rehabilitating them. They will need to go to psychotherapy where they are told over and over "You can't always get what you want. Other people think differently from you and you should not force your will on others - it is evil."

I think you proposing to disenfranchise those who disagree with the ruling class is a bad idea. Why? The government can only rule with the consent of the governed. As you said, it's all political-- stripping voting rights away from the opposition sounds great until they outnumber you and break out the guillotines.

I don't think we are there YET in America, but we definitely aren't getting further away from it, and excluding the opposition from partaking in the process will only alienate them further, fixing nothing. They would come out of prison in the spring of 2021 with nothing to lose, and a host of newly sympathetic allies.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Nah, it's not too much. It should be a felony. Thugs who deface and/or tear down statues should spend at least a decade in prison, imo.

At a cost of 36,000 a year for federal prisoners to the taxpayer. No thanks. You can pay for it.

Originally posted by truejedi
I think you proposing to disenfranchise those who disagree with the ruling class is a bad idea. Why?

This is a strawman of my position and you know it.

We are talking about people who have committed felony vandalism. Actual crimes. And you're getting upset that I want to reduce their prison sentences?

Are you not aware of the penalties for felony vandalism?

https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Vandalism.htm




Originally posted by truejedi
The government can only rule with the consent of the governed.

And if the people vote to keep those statues but the minority destroys the statues anyway, they are operating against the will of the people and violate the consent of the governed.

You either support mob rule - the mob that is the most violent makes the rules - or you believe in civil society that uses laws, regulations, and democracy to decide actions.


FYI, tyranny of the minority is called minoritarianism. We are actually in that age already where the tyranny of the minority is making the decisions and rules because the majority has no spine to fight against the injustices.

Originally posted by truejedi
As you said, it's all political-- stripping voting rights away from the opposition sounds great until they outnumber you and break out the guillotines.

You're under the mistaken position that I am suggesting we add new laws that strip away the right to vote for 9 months.

You're wrong. I am suggesting that they can return to society after they serve their prison terms and after they complete a rehabilitation program. In addition to restitution. Their voting rights are restored.

The sting from my suggestion is they will JUST miss all the important things coming up that is very dear and precious to them. Instead of sending them to prison for years (I am against that), jail them for just a wee bit of time and make them go through rehabilitation to enter society as functioning members. If you throw the book at them and send them away a long time, it costs the taxpayers money and doesn't sting as much if you let them out right after the good stuff happens.

Originally posted by dadudemon
This is a strawman of my position and you know it.

We are talking about people who have committed felony vandalism. Actual crimes. And you're getting upset that I want to reduce their prison sentences?

Are you not aware of the penalties for felony vandalism?

https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Vandalism.htm






And if the people vote to keep those statues but the minority destroys the statues anyway, they are operating against the will of the people and violate the consent of the governed.

You either support mob rule - the mob that is the most violent makes the rules - or you believe in civil society that uses laws, regulations, and democracy to decide actions.


FYI, tyranny of the minority is called minoritarianism. We are actually in that age already where the tyranny of the minority is making the decisions and rules because the majority has no spine to fight against the injustices.



You're under the mistaken position that I am suggesting we add new laws that strip away the right to vote for 9 months.

You're wrong. I am suggesting that they can return to society after they serve their prison terms and after they complete a rehabilitation program. In addition to restitution. Their voting rights are restored.

The sting from my suggestion is they will JUST miss all the important things coming up that is very dear and precious to them. Instead of sending them to prison for years (I am against that), jail them for just a wee bit of time and make them go through rehabilitation to enter society as functioning members. If you throw the book at them and send them away a long time, it costs the taxpayers money and doesn't sting as much if you let them out right after the good stuff happens.

I like this post. I dont agree with everything about it, but it has a lot of good points. I'll try to give a better response later.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
https://i.imgur.com/k4j43Ww.jpg

Heheheeheee

Originally posted by Silent Master
You think vastly lowering the punishment for crime would make it do down?

Has more strict sentencing done anything to lower crimes?

Then there's also the cost of having someone for a non-violent crime sitting in prison for 10+ years.

Originally posted by truejedi
I like this post. I dont agree with everything about it, but it has a lot of good points. I'll try to give a better response later.

I look forward to your response.

Definitely tell me where you think I go wrong in my thought process and where I can improve my ideas.

Originally posted by Robtard
Has more strict sentencing done anything to lower crimes?

Then there's also the cost of having someone for a non-violent crime sitting in prison for 10+ years.

Never said I support 10+ years. I say for the first offense, 3 years probation and a fine of 3x the repair cost +$5,000.

The fine sounds extreme. Why not the cost of replacement or repair?

If you broke someone's window, would you want to pay 3x the cost of a window replacement plus an extra $5k. You wouldn't, as that would be extreme.

Ok, how about the fine for first offense is just repair cost. 2nd offense something like 2x repair +$1,000?

Originally posted by dadudemon
I like all of Artol's suggestions and they actual work - by the science.

But what they should do with the incarceration is keep them in prison until spring 2021. Minimum. Why? Because this is all political. Depriving them of their freedom and ability to participate in the destructive rioting, voting, AND post election rioting and violence, will completely undercut the purpose of their destructive political movement. It's the worst possible outcome for them.

While rehabilitating them. They will need to go to psychotherapy where they are told over and over "You can't always get what you want. Other people think differently from you and you should not force your will on others - it is evil."

I can see how that is a punishment that might seem fitting for the crime, while having a certain amusing irony to it. But I am generally opposed to the disenfranchisement of any group, I think even murderers should have the rights to vote in elections, and there should be polling stations in prisons to ensure that.

Originally posted by Artol
I can see how that is a punishment that might seem fitting for the crime, while having a certain amusing irony to it. But I am generally opposed to the disenfranchisement of any group, I think even murderers should have the rights to vote in elections, and there should be polling stations in prisons to ensure that. My thoughts exactly.

Originally posted by Artol
I can see how that is a punishment that might seem fitting for the crime, while having a certain amusing irony to it. But I am generally opposed to the disenfranchisement of any group, I think even murderers should have the rights to vote in elections, and there should be polling stations in prisons to ensure that.

Check out my following on my same post:

Originally posted by dadudemon
This is a strawman of my position and you know it.

We are talking about people who have committed felony vandalism. Actual crimes. And you're getting upset that I want to reduce their prison sentences?

Are you not aware of the penalties for felony vandalism?

https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/Vandalism.htm






And if the people vote to keep those statues but the minority destroys the statues anyway, they are operating against the will of the people and violate the consent of the governed.

You either support mob rule - the mob that is the most violent makes the rules - or you believe in civil society that uses laws, regulations, and democracy to decide actions.


FYI, tyranny of the minority is called minoritarianism. We are actually in that age already where the tyranny of the minority is making the decisions and rules because the majority has no spine to fight against the injustices.



You're under the mistaken position that I am suggesting we add new laws that strip away the right to vote for 9 months.

You're wrong. I am suggesting that they can return to society after they serve their prison terms and after they complete a rehabilitation program. In addition to restitution. Their voting rights are restored.

The sting from my suggestion is they will JUST miss all the important things coming up that is very dear and precious to them. Instead of sending them to prison for years (I am against that), jail them for just a wee bit of time and make them go through rehabilitation to enter society as functioning members. If you throw the book at them and send them away a long time, it costs the taxpayers money and doesn't sting as much if you let them out right after the good stuff happens.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Check out my following on my same post:

Yeah, I read it. My suggestion in regards to disenfranchisement goes beyond the status quo, I think voting rights should a) never be taken away for any crime and b) restored to all those currently serving sentences. When it comes to your suggestion of shortening prison sentences and focusing more on rehabilitation and reintegration into society I am completely in agreement.

Originally posted by Artol
Yeah, I read it. My suggestion in regards to disenfranchisement goes beyond the status quo, I think voting rights should a) never be taken away for any crime and b) restored to all those currently serving sentences. When it comes to your suggestion of shortening prison sentences and focusing more on rehabilitation and reintegration into society I am completely in agreement.

Oh, then that would explain why you didn't agree completely. It was because you never want voting rights to be removed even if you are incarcerated for crimes, is that correct?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Oh, then that would explain why you didn't agree completely. It was because you never want voting rights to be removed even if you are incarcerated for crimes, is that correct? I think that is crime and sentence dependent, losing your rights as a citizen for spray painting BLM on a statue seems extreme, losing them for shooting someone stealing your Swatika doesn't.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Oh, then that would explain why you didn't agree completely. It was because you never want voting rights to be removed even if you are incarcerated for crimes, is that correct? Yes, that is correct.

I just hope there are no police to make it worse

Originally posted by Artol
Yes, that is correct.

https://i.imgur.com/Qg2ghtA.gif

Where I live they are adding 1,200 more cops to the streets for this weekend.

I don't want a policed nanny state.

Feels like we are becoming that.

DDM and Artol: An alternative perspective.



I've had my car stolem. It was part of an epidemic of kids hitting different towns for cars with the doors unlocked or keys left in them, and taking them out for joyrides. My car was one of those taken. It was found a week later in the neighboring city. Drugs all over the place, smell of weed took months to clear out.

The officer who returned it explains that even if they found the kids, they'd simply have to let them go, because they're minors. And the kids KNOW this. Which is WHY they do it.

Give a slap on the wrist, and there is no incentive NOT to commit a crime over and over again.

Originally posted by cdtm
DDM and Artol: An alternative perspective.



I've had my car stolem. It was part of an epidemic of kids hitting different towns for cars with the doors unlocked or keys left in them, and taking them out for joyrides. My car was one of those taken. It was found a week later in the neighboring city. Drugs all over the place, smell of weed took months to clear out.

The officer who returned it explains that even if they found the kids, they'd simply have to let them go, because they're minors. And the kids KNOW this. Which is WHY they do it.

Give a slap on the wrist, and there is no incentive NOT to commit a crime over and over again.
Of course the eas answer is give them a gun and cut police funding by at least 50%

Originally posted by cdtm
DDM and Artol: An alternative perspective.



I've had my car stolem. It was part of an epidemic of kids hitting different towns for cars with the doors unlocked or keys left in them, and taking them out for joyrides. My car was one of those taken. It was found a week later in the neighboring city. Drugs all over the place, smell of weed took months to clear out.

The officer who returned it explains that even if they found the kids, they'd simply have to let them go, because they're minors. And the kids KNOW this. Which is WHY they do it.

Give a slap on the wrist, and there is no incentive NOT to commit a crime over and over again.

I'm advocating for restitution and rehabilitation as well as incarceration (but not "years" like most states are with felony vandalism).



Also, in the example you gave, that's still grand theft auto and a felony. If they didn't have licenses, operating a motor vehicle without a license. Reckless endangerment/reckless driving (and "wreckless driving" if they didn't crash awesome weeeeeee!), grand theft auto, among other charges.


Destroying statues that cost multiples of thousands of dollars is definitely felony vandalism. They shouldn't be released from jail and they should definitely serve time until they are rehabilitated.

Originally posted by cdtm
DDM and Artol: An alternative perspective.



I've had my car stolem. It was part of an epidemic of kids hitting different towns for cars with the doors unlocked or keys left in them, and taking them out for joyrides. My car was one of those taken. It was found a week later in the neighboring city. Drugs all over the place, smell of weed took months to clear out.

The officer who returned it explains that even if they found the kids, they'd simply have to let them go, because they're minors. And the kids KNOW this. Which is WHY they do it.

Give a slap on the wrist, and there is no incentive NOT to commit a crime over and over again.

Pretty much the same thing happened to me back in 2004. They got let go. And they had f*cked up the steering wheel on the car.

Originally posted by Surtur
Pretty much the same thing happened to me back in 2004. They got let go. And they had f*cked up the steering wheel on the car.

That's super shitty.



I was crashed into by truck of 2 illegal Latino's who were drunk on tequila (they admitted it to me). The dude driving and was left by his friend who jumped in the truck and sped off when the police were about to arrive.




The one driving that was left behind pretended to not know English. It was pissing off the police officer. He actually knew Spanish the entire time. Let him play the ignorance game. And then told him in Spanish that if he didn't start telling the truth, he's going straight to jail. That sobered him up quickly. Now he knew English, instantly. It was a miracle!

The police told me to be on my way. They scoured the neighborhood to find the truck because one of the police thinks he recognized the white truck before it sped off. I never heard anything about it.

I was stuck with thousands in car repairs and I was only 20 at the time. Thinking back, that's a lot of money I could have used for more important things. I had car insurance that covered damage to other vehicles but not the full coverage (because it cost 3x the amount and was $190 a month vs. $64 a month for just liability).


Anyway, the police really haven't done much for me.