Subject:
|
Re: New Web Page
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 May 1999 21:02:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
713 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <373b2d40.4308071@lugnet.com>...
> On Thu, 13 May 1999 15:11:15 GMT, "Christopher L. Weeks"
> <c576653@cclabs.missouri.edu> wrote:
>
> > Why does law enforcement primarily deal with after-the-fact
> > repercussions, rather than preventative measures? I know of several
> > instances in which potential future illegal actions were reported to
> > police and blown off because nothing had happened. I see this as very • strange.
>
> I believe it has something to do with the fact that the police are only
> *supposed* to be involved in situations where a crime has been committed.
> No crime, no punishment.
If our country wasn't over run by this "its not a crime unless convicted"
mentality I might find this argument credible. However, so much crime
occurs because it is so hard to put criminals in prison where they belong,
that I would feel safer with more police putting their noses where they
don't belong. This means more police running investigations, more
detectives keeping tabs on known criminals, and "preventing" major crimes
(like 18 innocent people being shot) by catching them in the act of lesser
crimes (like buying/selling stolen/contraband firearms). It doesn't mean
arresting people for thinking about commiting a crime, or even talking about
commiting a crime (which can be punishable under conspiracy laws).
Chris also brings up how often people will report a possible crime and
the police blow it off. These days the police have enough work to do, and
they aren't going to go out of their way for something which is uncertain.
So, obviously, these reports could be looked into if there were more police.
The answer to Chris' question is there is not enough man power to check out
every report, and not at all the answer given above. The duty of the police
is to protect and serve, meaning if there is a possibility of a crime
occuring, they are "supposed" to prevent it. They are not "supposed" to
just clean it up after it happens.
> Can you imagine what would happen if citizens could be punished because
> they potentially *considered* performing a criminal act? We'd all be in
> prison.
No, we'd all be in court - this is America.
--
Have fun!
John ( jdiri14897@email.msn.com ) remove NOSPAM:
John's Lego Web Trade Page:
http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego/index.htm
MOC,CA[cl,bf,cr,fm,bk+++ wp,dm,rk,df++ fk-]++++(6035)
SW,TR,old(456)+++ TO++ PI,SP+ DU--
#+++++ S LS¼ Hy? M+ A+++ LM-- IC12m
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: New Web Page
|
| (...) I believe it has something to do with the fact that the police are only *supposed* to be involved in situations where a crime has been committed. No crime, no punishment. Can you imagine what would happen if citizens could be punished because (...) (25 years ago, 13-May-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
298 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
|
|
|
|
