The term zero tolerance has been used as a pejorative term to criticize broken windows, and appropriately so. Broken windows wasnt zero tolerance. Zero tolerance, first of all, implies a zealotry about you will have no discretion. And the second thing is, it says you dont have any discretion which is exactly what we want to avoid which sets up a high arrest thing. But let me just talk about, zero tolerance can be a useful tool at times, at particular locations around particular problems. But you have to be very specific about that. Think, for example, of just a very simple example, school buses. We simply understand that the risks of people passing school buses is so great and the consequence is so great that we dont want any discretion about that. We want to send out a message you pass a school bus thats discharging or getting children, youre in deep, deep trouble. So and i could give you other examples of that. So zero tolerance is antithetical to the whole approach of broken windows
These consequences. They include but are not limited to loss or restriction of professional licenses, ineligibility for public funds including Public Welfare benefits, Public Housing, and student loans, loss of voting rights, ineligibility for jury duty, and a big one in colorado is loss of hunting privileges. And deportation of immigrants. While collateral consequences have always accompanied criminal convictions in the United States, their number in impact expanded dramatically during the 1980s and 1990s. Collateral consequences have recently garnered increased attention in if large part because of the Record Number of individuals now exiting u. S. Correctional facilities and returning to communities across the country. The numerous collateral consequences that attached to convictions are perceived as frustrating reintegration for both individuals and for communities. Many maintain that collateral consequences are a barrier to successful reentry for many offenders. While many nations
Cspan2 providing love coverage of the u. S. Senate floor proceedings and keep Public Policy events and every weekend booktv offering 15 years the only Television Network devoted to nonfiction books and authors. Cspan2 created by the cabletv industry and broad as a Public Service by your Cable Assembly provide a. Watch us in hd, follow us on twitter. Now live to london for british Prime Ministers question time. Each week the house of commons is in session. We believe Prime Minister David Cameron taking questions from the house of commons live wednesday morning sun cspan2. We invite your participation on twitter. Prior to question time members are finishing up other business and live to the floor of the british house of commons. Colleagues in the department of transport how we finance the major package of infrastructure. Questions for the Prime Minister . Thank you, mr. Speaker. I have meetings with ministerial colleagues and others and in addition to my duties in this house i have other
Out the entrance of an interaction between a citizen and a police officer. This is part of the new train is coming up. You dont have to start out with a preemptive use of aggressiveness. It the situation warrants it you do have to take control of the situation, once you have everything under control, bring it down, until the people why you stopped them and let them know, give them the respect. We have to take control of it. Immediately diaz do it once you have it under control. A quick question. The remarkable progress in terms of policing, research and crime analysis. He talked a little bit about some of those issues as well, community policing, all coming at the same time. But it seems to me one of the challenges is how you actually apply that to the officer on the street when the kind of daytoday activity tends to be the response, the cost of service, the random patrol car patrol and also for the officers , theyre meant to extend to be very much output granted an outcome focused. St
Greece shows that at least four nonchristian prayergivers delivered prayers thereafter in 2009, 10, 11 and 13. On the sectarian points, clearly the line. Counsel. Im sorry . One a year. Im sorry, your honor . Four additional people after the suit was filed. Yes, your honor. One a year. Approximately. How often does the legislature meet . Once a month. And on the sectarian line, i just like to point the court to the senate brief, the amicus brief filed by senators, pages 8 to 17 which shows the extensive history from the beginning of the republic until today of prayer in congress. That would be sectarian and unconstitutional under respondents position. With respect to coercion, its unquestionably true that there is less basis for claiming coercion here than there was in marsh. In marsh, senator chambers was required to be on the senate floor by rule, he had to be there to do his job and the practice was to stand every single time, which he did because he felt coerced to do it, whereas,