Reference no: EM131872694
When the US Senate passed a new immigration law a few years back, many criticized it as "amnesty". I was confused by that, since the plan called for any undocumented alien to:
- register with the government;
- submit to a background check;
- to pay a fine and back taxes;
- go to the back of the line of prospective immigrants;
- learn English and civics;
- demonstrate a history of work in the United States;
- show current employment;
- have lived in the US for 10 years.
Upon the fulfillment of these requirements, these immigrants can get a green card. The whole process was expected to take 13 years.
That doesn't sound like amnesty to me, which I understand to mean complete exoneration of prior bad acts. Merriam-Webster agrees: "the act of an authority (as a government) by which pardon is granted to a large group of individuals" Merriam-Webster.com, n.d. Web. 8 Sept. 2014.
Having spent many years in courtrooms watching criminal sentencing proceedings, I know we make similar deals with criminals, both American and foreign-borne, everyday and no one calls that "amnesty". Well, hardly anyone. Those deals are done through plea-bargaining and many people are opposed to giving self-admitted criminals any kind of a break.
What do you think about plea bargaining? Are you for it, or against it? Why?
Regardless of your position, after you've answered that, answer this: Should we abolish plea bargaining?