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: 
8015 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 (...) (24 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
    

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