10 Crimes you get less prison time for than AaronSwartz got

[bannination]

http://www.alternet.org/10-awful-crimes ... r-articles

Everything about it is sad and horrible.

[Leo Lyons]

A crime is a crime. The amount of money you have determines the punishment.

[O Really]

A crime is a crime. The amount of money you have determines the punishment.

Oh. That explains why Bernie Madoff is running around loose.

But no, that's not how it works. More money certainly gets you a better defense, and a better defense can frequently get you a better outcome. But a crime is not a crime - there are extenuating circumstances and aggravating circumstances. There are prior records. There are results and consequences that differ and affect a sentence.

Overall, though, you're right. Wealthy people often get more justice than poor people, particularly if the poor people aren't white and charged with a crime with death row potential.

[Leo Lyons]

A crime is a crime. The amount of money you have determines the punishment.

Oh. That explains why Bernie Madoff is running around loose.

Madoff's projected release date is November 14, 2139. The release date, described as "academic" in Madoff's case because he would have to live to the age of 201, reflects a reduction for good behavior.

In his letter to his daughter-in-law, Madoff claimed that he was being treated in prison like a "Mafia don". "They call me either Uncle Bernie or Mr. Madoff. I can't walk anywhere without someone shouting their greetings and encouragement, to keep my spirit up. It's really quite sweet, how concerned everyone is about my well being, including the staff...It's much safer here than walking the streets of New York."

Well, if he behaves himself, he'll get time off for good behaviour; say at age 127, or something.

[Stinger]

Madoff ripped off the 1%ers. He goes to jail.

The Wall Streeter's version of pyramid schemes crashed the world economy. The 99%ers had to bail out Wall Street. We even got the honor of paying the criminals their bonuses. Not one of them's even been charged. They'll never spend a day in jail. They get to keep all the money AND go right back to manipulating government and the economy to their further advantage.

1%ers don't go to jail for ripping off the 99%ers ... only if they're dumb enough to rip off other 1%ers.

[mike]

Done. And tweeted.

[rstrong]

Petition signed. Anything I can do to participate in the country's political process.

[rstrong]

Aaron was facing 35 years in prison

No. No he wasn't.

35 years was the maximum possible sentence - for people who already have a long criminal record - not any sentence Aaron Swartz was even remotely likely to get.

PopeHat explains here regarding Aaron Swartz: Three Things You May Not Get About the Aaron Swartz Case

And that's while still strongly criticizing the prosecutors.

He provides a better explanation in general here: Cloudy, With A Chance of Shitty Journalism

[O Really]

The difference between 35 and 7 does not change my view, does it yours?

It doesn't change my view of the issue, but affects my opinion on the accuracy and reliability of the petition writer. If "35" is an exaggeration of reality, why do we believe the rest?

[O Really]

It's not as big a deal to me. Given that we all understand what a "maximum sentence" is, it seems reasonable to cite it rather than some purely speculative lower number. Did you see that "the petition writer" is your (our) ACLU?

I'm a loyal member, but the ACLU has been known to exaggerate, believe me. Sometimes it's the only or best way to get attention. Sometimes it costs credibility.

[Boatrocker]

The FBI will never wash off the stain of 50 years of Hoover. We should scrap it, salt the earth and start over.

[Vrede too]

Remember Aaron Swartz

5 years gone, we seem to have gone backwards on the things he cared about.

[O Really]

Linked from the original article..

"Still, Aaron's methods were reckless and counterproductive. For starters, walking into someone's networking closet and hooking your equipment up to a switch without permission is almost never OK, and it's definitely not OK if the objective is to evade the network owner's previous attempts to block you from the network. The conflict between Aaron and JSTOR led to the entire MIT campus being cut off from JSTOR access for several days, doubtless affecting the productivity of hundreds of MIT scholars.

But the more lasting cost of Aaron's actions will likely be to the reputation of the open access movement. Open access advocates have the natural high ground and are gradually winning the debate over the future of academic publishing. Change comes slowly, but things have been changing. Aaron's actions are likely to slow that progress by allowing the bad guys to lump open access advocates in with malicious clowns like LulzSec. The incident makes JSTOR look like an injured, even magnanimous, party and gives them an excuse to make their policies more restrictive.

And ultimately, it's not clear what the point was. Even if Swartz had obtained the entire JSTOR archive and released a copy of it onto the darknet, it's not clear how that would meaningfully advance the goals of the open access movement. Normal people are not going to hop on BitTorrent and download a multi-terrabyte document dump."

And legal sabre-rattling notwithstanding, he was offered a 6-month plea deal, probably not something that would be indicative of a likely 35-50 year sentence if he were convicted. Maybe a better comparison of crime would be felony theft?

[Vrede too]

http://www.alternet.org/10-awful-crimes ... r-articles

Everything about it is sad and horrible.

Aaron Hillel Swartz (November 8, 1986 – January 11, 2013)

Internet pays tribute to Aaron Swartz: commentary from around the web
After Aaron Swartz's death, we're collecting commentary on internet freedom. Add to this using #smarttakes on Twitter

The inspiring heroism of Aaron Swartz
Glenn Greenwald
The internet freedom activist committed suicide on Friday at age 26, but his life was driven by courage and passion

Aaron Swartz, presente!