Apparently Obama isnt issuing enough pardons

[oragator1]

Conservative groups want MORE pardons issued for reasons that don't make sense to me. They call it checks and balances, but isn't that what appeals are for? A pardon is one person circumventing the system which has its own inherent risks, not the least of which are cases like Mark Rich and Scooter Libby( commutation) or Ford with Nixon etc (I think that was best for the country but before he died Ford said he did it because he didn't want to see his friend go through that).

Does anyone support this position, and if so, why?

http://www.foxnews.mobi/quickPage.html?page=22995&external=2027005.proteus.fma#quickPage_html_page_2 2995_content_90842757_pageNum_1

[jdrgator]

I agree that he hasn't issued enough pardons. Seems like specious reasoning in calling it checks and balances; though indirectly, I suppose it is.

I personally think there such be much more pardoning or at least commutation of misdemeanors of certain types (think non violent drug crimes), though Governors could do this too, and for some felonies when its warranted.

[neisgator]

I don't get this issue...from either side of the aisle

[MichiGator2002]

What is the right amount of pardons, just for argument's sake? I usually think we should scrutinize who is pardoned, but never occurred to me to care how many.

[jdrgator]

What is the right amount of pardons, just for argument's sake? I usually think we should scrutinize who is pardoned, but never occurred to me to care how many.

Good question that has no real right answer, as I "know" you know. My take is that given the many failures in our system, with respect to misdemeanors I'd like to see something along the line of a mass pardoning of minor crimes after a certain amount of time, which ones though would obviously need to be looked at.

For serious violent crimes and other felonies, it will be more case specific, but pardoning more would make it easier for folks to reintegrate fully into society, especially those who have already served their time and are already working hard to reintegrate as productive members of society. In other words, it would remove unnecessary barriers (what what Jeremy Travis has called invisible punishment (http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/1000557_invisible_punishment.pdf)) and restore more liberties for more people.

[gatorman_07732]

I just don't get was is even an issue here. This is something I just don't think about

[jdrgator]

I just don't get was is even an issue here. This is something I just don't think about

But you worry about someone tasting the president's food! haha, I couldn't resist, gman. :laugh::laugh:

More seriously, I think it has much to do with government power and abuse thereof, and indeed, liberty. Something both libs and pubs can agree upon in principle, at least.

[MichiGator2002]

I just never have perceived a Governor or President as obligated to pardon anyone as a matter of course, so I would never think of it that way. If no pardons were issued that year or term, it honestly wouldn't faze me at all; I would just assume that there were no gross injustices that had been brought well enough to the executive's attention. Also, insert snotty Eric Holder/Marc Rich joke here. Yes, I am lazy enough for placeholder comedy. The only pardon issue I followed recently was the two border agents. Oh, and when people were suggesting that Obama could pardon a Texas death row inmate.

[gatorman_07732]

But you worry about someone tasting the president's food! haha, I couldn't resist, gman. :laugh::laugh:

More seriously, I think it has much to do with government power and abuse thereof, and indeed, liberty. Something both libs and pubs can agree upon in principle, at least.

Well I reserve judgment for any shady characters that my get pardoned, but just saying in general this is something that doesn't really bother me. Now, as for that damn (fill in the blank for anstro) taster/tester/whatever...........:laugh:

[jdrgator]

I just never have perceived a Governor or President as obligated to pardon anyone as a matter of course, so I would never think of it that way. If no pardons were issued that year or term, it honestly wouldn't faze me at all; I would just assume that there were no gross injustices that had been brought well enough to the executive's attention. Also, insert snotty Eric Holder/Marc Rich joke here. Yes, I am lazy enough for placeholder comedy. The only pardon issue I followed recently was the two border agents. Oh, and when people were suggesting that Obama could pardon a Texas death row inmate.

I would want it to be viewed more as an obligation than just a stated power. I certainly wouldn't assume that there are no gross injustices just because some governor or president didn't pardon anyone in a given year.

Our cj/court system is replete with major errors in criminal processing whether by police or in the courts. And given appeals courts only take up issues of law, not issues of fact at appeal, I think there needs to be a more robust mechanism to handle such problems, one of which could be the issuance of more pardons.

[MichiGator2002]

That mistakes are made in the abstract isn't enough to make me just assume there should be X-ish pardons a year to correct them. I think an executive should feel great restraint and hesitation about pardoning someone convicted of a crime and sentenced in accordance with the law, should give great deference to the integrity of that process. I need some real showing that there was a screw up, and what's more, that it couldn't be remedied judicially. I don't want people pardoned because it is a diplomatic favor, for instance, or some other sort of patronage (Rich, again).

[jdrgator]

Well I reserve judgment for any shady characters that my get pardoned, but just saying in general this is something that doesn't really bother me. Now, as for that damn (fill in the blank for anstro) taster/tester/whatever...........:laugh:

Understandable. It bothers me, but then again, given my profession, it's on my mind quite a bit.

[G8trGr8t]

do the thousands of illegal immigrants that committed crimes he just released count???

[jdrgator]

That mistakes are made in the abstract isn't enough to make me just assume there should be X-ish pardons a year to correct them. I think an executive should feel great restraint and hesitation about pardoning someone convicted of a crime and sentenced in accordance with the law, should give great deference to the integrity of that process. I need some real showing that there was a screw up, and what's more, that it couldn't be remedied judicially. I don't want people pardoned because it is a diplomatic favor, for instance, or some other sort of patronage (Rich, again).

Fair enough points. I don't completely disagree. There has to be fidelity to the law and to the system for it to operate effectively, and for it to have legitimacy in the public's eye. At the same time, I don't believe that errors in case processing, whether by police or at trial are necessarily abstract.

But to shorten my comments, can't it be that mechanisms can be created to handle the many problems currently plaguing the system? I have serious doubt about how just our system is in its current state.

[cocodrilo]

I'm surprised that Obama didn't pardon Bin Laden. The guy was just trying to enjoy retirement with his wives and porn collection in that nice pad in Pakistan. (How come they never include a vacation in Pakistan as a prize on the Wheel of Fortune? What's wrong with it? I mean, show me a more religious country.)