To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 16882
16881  |  16883
Subject: 
Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Thu, 4 Jul 2002 12:30:44 GMT
Viewed: 
3851 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:


No, I don't.  What is it?

I'd have to remember where I saw it, but something like 70% of all violent
crimes are committed by repeat offenders.

And what counts as a crime when compiling those
numbers?  And why is it that you think crimes that take place in prison are
less important?

I don't think I ever asserted that.

I think the overall effect on the economy of fixing those who can be fixed
would be a wild net gain.  If we stopped the prohibition on heroine, the price
would drop to a point where virtually any addict could afford their fix without
resorting to crime.  And even if it took _all_ of the money we spend
incarcerating them and had to dump it into methodone clinics and halfway houses
and such -- so that we were at an economic standstill (at first) the social
gain would be tremendous.

But I don't think that we would spend all that on them.  I think we'd spend
lots and lots less and everyone would be happier.  I mean everyone.  We all
stand to win by legalizing heroine.

Way up there, you ask "why should I be forced to pay for this?"  I agree!
Taxation is still thievery.  But why should you be forced to pay for prisons?

*They* are a necessary evil to protect society.

And if it has to be paid, one way or another, then why not pay less and get
more?

It seems almost like you[1] just want those people to hurt.

Not me or society, it's they themselves who are to blame.

1 - "You," in this case, means the folks who cling to punishment as an
effective means of handling social woes against all evidence, for no reason
that I can yet fathom -- not you, John, specifically.  (I don't know if you fit
that bill.)

Incarceration is simply the most effective way to protect society from
criminals.  Perhaps if we were hard enough on crime, criminals would think
twice about their illegal activities.

-John



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
 
(...) in (...) No, I don't. What is it? And what counts as a crime when compiling those numbers? And why is it that you think crimes that take place in prison are less important? I think the overall effect on the economy of fixing those who can be (...) (22 years ago, 4-Jul-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

395 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR