04 Jan 2013, 11:02 am
04 Jan 2013, 11:29 am
04 Jan 2013, 11:42 am
04 Jan 2013, 1:59 pm
Raptor wrote:
I'll agree with you on one thing: That the corrections system (and all executive functions of law and justice) should strictly be a government function because that does fall within the role of government IMHO.
That aside, NOT being tough on crime obviously isn't the answer to lower crime. Either they get caught and locked up for a long time or we armed citizens deal with them more terminally when they come our way. Either way something has to be done and letting them run wild or appeasing them somehow isn't the answer.
That aside, NOT being tough on crime obviously isn't the answer to lower crime. Either they get caught and locked up for a long time or we armed citizens deal with them more terminally when they come our way. Either way something has to be done and letting them run wild or appeasing them somehow isn't the answer.
I suggest to you that those are not the only two options.
Your thinking seems limited to reacting to crime. You treat crime as an inevitability that must be answered when it occurs, either through tough enforcement or arming victims.
But what about preventing crime from occurring? I suggest to you that the leading cause of crime--greater than almost all others put together--is poverty. If you address poverty, you will go a long way towards removing the motivation for a great deal of the crime that takes place, obviating the need for prisons, (whether private or otherwise), and diminishing the likelihood that an armed victim is likely to escalate, rather than mitigate the body count.
But when we must react to crime (and we always will have to react to some level of crime), I am not persuaded that not being tough on crime isn't the answer. A very brief review of crime in the United States will demonstrate that the "tough on crime" agenda has been an unmitigated failure. Three strikes laws have made no one safer, but have made many richer. But approaches to criminal justice that focus on rehabilitation and reintigration may, in fact, provide greater public safety than harsh sentencing.
Quote:
One thing I am very weary of is the war on drugs. I'm generally against hard substance abuse but for all the people that get killed, (innocent or guilty) and incarcerated every year it's just not worth it. It never was worth it. 
With that I wholeheartedly concur.
04 Jan 2013, 3:15 pm
ArrantPariah wrote:
So long as we as a society have made the collective decision to deprive a huge portion of our population of their liberty and keep them locked in cages, they might as well be doing something to contribute to the economy, rather than being a complete economic drain.
They seem to be making some decent products. They make good license plates. The eyeglass frames look nice, and come in more styles than those that come from China and elsewhere. Why should Medicaid patients be the only ones to benefit from their labour, and get the most stylish eyeglasses in town?
China takes it one step further, and harvests the organs of condemned criminals. We should do that, too. Lethal injection is so wasteful--it poisons the organs and renders them unuseable. A quick bullet to the head, and the doctors are waiting to remove the still-beating heart, and the other organs which are still very fresh.
They seem to be making some decent products. They make good license plates. The eyeglass frames look nice, and come in more styles than those that come from China and elsewhere. Why should Medicaid patients be the only ones to benefit from their labour, and get the most stylish eyeglasses in town?
China takes it one step further, and harvests the organs of condemned criminals. We should do that, too. Lethal injection is so wasteful--it poisons the organs and renders them unuseable. A quick bullet to the head, and the doctors are waiting to remove the still-beating heart, and the other organs which are still very fresh.
/\ /\
If I said that it would be another TOS or two.
And I suppose you want a sign that reads "Arbeit Macht Frei" over the gate to the glasses factory to give the hapless prisoners false hope when they shuffle through every morning.
I think you've been getting too many carbon monoxide fumes under that bridge....
04 Jan 2013, 3:26 pm
04 Jan 2013, 3:43 pm
visagrunt wrote:
But what about preventing crime from occurring? I suggest to you that the leading cause of crime--greater than almost all others put together--is poverty. If you address poverty, you will go a long way towards removing the motivation for a great deal of the crime that takes place, obviating the need for prisons, (whether private or otherwise), and diminishing the likelihood that an armed victim is likely to escalate, rather than mitigate the body count.
But when we must react to crime (and we always will have to react to some level of crime), I am not persuaded that not being tough on crime isn't the answer. A very brief review of crime in the United States will demonstrate that the "tough on crime" agenda has been an unmitigated failure. Three strikes laws have made no one safer, but have made many richer. But approaches to criminal justice that focus on rehabilitation and reintigration may, in fact, provide greater public safety than harsh sentencing.
With that I wholeheartedly concur.
But when we must react to crime (and we always will have to react to some level of crime), I am not persuaded that not being tough on crime isn't the answer. A very brief review of crime in the United States will demonstrate that the "tough on crime" agenda has been an unmitigated failure. Three strikes laws have made no one safer, but have made many richer. But approaches to criminal justice that focus on rehabilitation and reintigration may, in fact, provide greater public safety than harsh sentencing.
Quote:
One thing I am very weary of is the war on drugs. I'm generally against hard substance abuse but for all the people that get killed, (innocent or guilty) and incarcerated every year it's just not worth it. It never was worth it.
With that I wholeheartedly concur.
This. I'm neither for or against prison labor, and whether it takes jobs from others is beside the point. First we have too many people imprisoned for victimless crimes. Second, we have an increasingly privatized prison system, and even verified cases of judges getting kickbacks from prison companies for sending people to prison for crimes they'd otherwise get a less severe punishment for.
There is nothing wrong with allowing prisoners to do meaningful work and get paid for it. The tasks that it takes just to house people are not enough to keep people from getting bored, and boredom is wrong to inflict on anyone. Boredom isn't an answer to crime.
But if prisoners are doing work they should earn AT LEAST minimum wage, even if they're not allowed to spend it on themselves, so they have something to live on once released or to send to their families while incarcerated. That way they're also paying taxes and paying into medicare and social security so they'll have paid into those systems that they will likely benefit from at some point. Work in prison should be a job just like a job anywhere else. Not slavery, as it is in many cases now.
Drug use and prostitution should not be considered crimes. (This change alone would empty our prisons by half.)
No one, but no one should profit from housing prisoners.
Last edited by BlueAbyss on 04 Jan 2013, 5:59 pm, edited 3 times in total.
04 Jan 2013, 3:43 pm
04 Jan 2013, 3:51 pm
04 Jan 2013, 3:53 pm
04 Jan 2013, 3:57 pm
04 Jan 2013, 4:03 pm
04 Jan 2013, 4:06 pm
04 Jan 2013, 4:24 pm
04 Jan 2013, 4:40 pm
Trolls don't fare well in sunlight according to J.R.Tolkien.
Wonder if AP wears sunblock?? 
04 Jan 2013, 5:34 pm
