Topic: The use of public defenders should be mandatory
this is a constitutional right under the 6th amendment so yes, it absolutely should be mandatory to protect this important right to defence
this takes away freedom of choice in terms of hiring a lawyer that suits your own needs.
this we keep rich people from getting away with crimes because they will not be able to get high priced lawyers.
this will level the playing field between those who can afford top-notch attorneys and those who can't.
this would cause a decrease in pay for the public defender and lower the quality of representation as too many people will rush to the new employment opportunities regardless of their record..
this would create equality and true justice. if everyone had a public defender, justice would be more fair instead of the more well off skirting justice because they can pay more money to expensive lawyers.
this would create many general attorneys representing cases they are not skilled nor knowledge about and would flood the attorney pool overwhelmingly and cause a wait list for representation..
this would eliminate peoples right to choose.
this would ensure everyone, regardless of financial means, has the same level of representation, making it a fairer system.
this would insure that people have a legal representation regardless of the ability to hire a lawyer.
this would level the playing field for all, meaning the poor would have access to the same lawyers the rich use.
this would not be a good use of public money; money should instead be spent on education and welfare.
this would stop rich people being able to avoid criminal charges by buying the best lawyers.
to protect those who do not understand the law the use of public defenders should be mandatory.
true freedom means allowing anyone facing the justice system to defend themselves and choose how they plead instead of being forced to do what another person thinks is best for them.
use of public defenders should be mandatory because everyone deserves the right to be appointed an attorney. it is given when we are arrested we will be defended publicly
use of public defenders should be mandatory because rich people can afford high priced lawyers to buy their way out of whatever crime they have commited.
use of public defenders shouldn't be mandatory because the money could be better spent on things like healthcare or education systems. if someone has commited a crime they should be made responsible for costs
using only public defenders would put many criminal lawyers out of business
using public defenders ensures that even the poorest and most marginalised in society have access to some form of legal representation.
using public defenders exclusively will be an expensive burden on taxpayers.
using public defenders for all would create a level playing field so that having more money cannot buy you a better defence.
using public defenders for everyone lets means that all the people would be treated more equal.
using public defenders for everyone would insure that everyone receives the same defense not matter how much money they have.