talkin bout #8, protection from cruel and/or unusual punishment...
Most people who are at all active in politics or have any interest in our government usually have their favorite ammendments to the Constitution.
Some love the 1st Ammendment. Journalists, activists and anyone with an unpopular or at least a perceived minority voice will often cite their 1st ammendment rights to speech, religion and assembly.
Some Love the 2nd Ammendment. Some to the point they fantasize about someone actually trying to pry the gun from their "cold, dead hands."
When we don't want to rat ourselves out, or on the advice of our cuncil, the 5th ammendment to our Constitution is not only cited but used as a battle cry quite often. One recent justice employee was so big on it she invoked her priveledge before any questions were even asked.
Some toast the repeal of Prohibition, and if it hadn't been repealed, the 18th ammendment to our Constitution might be the least popular.
But since it has been repealed, the least popular has to be the 8th ammendment. The text reads...
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Despite this, most people, especially when freely expressing themselves, will pay no heed to this protection. In their mind, the harsher the better for the guilty. Especially when we just don't like the person. This comes out in impassioned cries for opponents to "burn and rot in hell" over a simple disagreement. Or to wish some other great harm on someone who has offended us in some minor way, in the big picture. But at those moments, it is not the "punishment fitting the crime" that is important to us. It is that the offender feel some wrath that proves that the offended dare not even be challenged in the future.
And it has really become evident in the Paris Hilton spectacle recently.
Miss Hilton has been convicted of violating her probation after a DUI had her license suspended. The judge sentenced her t o 45 days in jail. The nation applauded.
Never mind that the usual for such an offense is 5-15 days, and most people try to b.s. their way out of it.
Miss Hilton was a disgrace in court, trying to blame everyone around her for her own selfish deeds. No doubt. But again, that is typical in these courts. Many who find themselves in this predicament are usually not hardened criminals and are scared to death to see their 1st glimpse of the inside of a jail cell after visiting hours. So they blame everone else to try to save their neck.
And the few who are violated that are more advanced in the criminal arts are usually being pulled in because they want the guy or gal there for another, more serious investigation. And those cases are handled and sentenced a little differently.
Now before anyone gets the idea that I am a Paris fan, think again...I can't stand the lil wench.
But her Constitutional rights could be violated here, and that is never good for the rest of us. Keep in mind that most everyone never cite or knew about her actual courtroom alibis, but cited the fact that she is a "rich lil ho that thinks she's above the law" as justification for her sentence. They cited their hate of her going in. People were calling for her getting "the max" since before she went to court last week.
I don't want to see her pardoned, but at the same time, she doesn't deserve a more cruel or an unusual punishment than the rest of us either. And one could argue that the fact that she is being given a report date rather than just being hauled away like most others was unfairly lenient to her. But unfair leniency doesn't justify unusual cruelness on the flip side.
Also, the prison she is going to often lets people out early, as they are overcrowded. But before she has even arrived, it is being reported that she won't be considered for that in fear of public outcry that they were too soft on her. Even tho non-celebrities who are non violent offenders of this minor (overall) type are usually the 1st to be released. So her status is potentially causing an unfair bias there too.
I'm not telling anyone that they shouldn't feel a little glee in the fact that this girl, who was trying to skirt around the law, at the least, and does live in a way that offends many (including me, sometimes) finally got told "no" in an almost unappealable way. And Paris Hilton spending an extra week or 2 behind bars might not trigger armageddon. But the 8th Ammendment to our Constitution is an important principle that defines us and seperates us from some other societies who don't respect the rule of law as we do. And breaking that principle for a moment of selfish satisfaction while another American (who I don't llike either) has their Constitutional rights flagrantly violated for the purposes of satsfying a "mob rule" kind of mentality is simply wrong and un-American, in my view.
And once we start compromising this principle for nothing more than a shallow, selfish satisfaction, what else will we let go by the wayside for less than vital reasons? Will it be those rights that you cherish and tout? Will it be your rights that are being tossed aside for the satisfaction of "mob rule?"
I certainly hope not.