Criminal justice after proposition 47 (work, accept, time)

[2sleepy]

That's true, I read it and here is the article in it's entirety for you to peruse Inmates released under Prop 47 -- Where are they now? | Local News - KCRA Home - however, if you actually read the article you will find this:

Since Prop 47 passed last November, Placer County has released 28 inmates and four are back in custody -- a return rate of 14 percent.

The numbers are similar in Stanislaus County, where 17 percent of the 619 inmates released have returned -- a total of 106 people.

In San Joaquin County, 12 of the 127 inmates released are now back in custody, a return rate of 9 percent.

But in Sacramento County, 25 of the 42 inmates released are back in custody -- a return rate of 60 percent.

Statewide numbers from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation show that 3,068 inmates were released from California prisons since Prop 47 passed last November. Since then, just 14 have returned -- a recidivism rate of .005 percent.



So what does that tell us? Actually nothing, at least not yet. The Sacramento number might be an outlier, but only time will tell. Now please tell us the relevance of your posting that and what the heck it has to do with Democrats?

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by V8 Vega

I heard on the radio this morning that in Sacrememto county 60% of the crimminals released because of 47 are now back in jail after committing yet another crime against some poor innocent person.
Democrats are always saying their for the little guy. A loss of two weeks pay which is what $950 is to a low wage worker is just devastating. Democrats coulden't care less.

I heard on the radio this morning that spelling ability has seen an alarming decrease in uber-conservo interwebs posts.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

I heard on the radio this morning that spelling ability has seen an alarming decrease in uber-conservo interwebs posts.

I see you have no real response. You sure are racking up the logical fallacies over the last 24 hours.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

I see you have no real response. You sure are racking up the logical fallacies over the last 24 hours.

What is a "logical fallacy" about bdg's observation?

There are plenty of observations you could make about the comment, one way or t'other. But "logical fallacy" is entirely inapplicable.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

What is a "logical fallacy" about bdg's observation?

There are plenty of observations you could make about the comment, one way or t'other. But "logical fallacy" is entirely inapplicable.

Appeal to ridicule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Red Herring

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

Appeal to ridicule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Red Herring

Yes. An "informal fallacy". Not a "logical fallacy". There are no applications of logical reasoning, nor intent, in the ridicule. Nor was there in the statement being ridiculed. Logic is a deductive science. Not a rhetorical jousting match. bdg was applying facetious sophistry to counter ignorant sophistry.

[shooting4life]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Yes. An "informal fallacy". Not a "logical fallacy". There are no applications of logical reasoning, nor intent, in the ridicule. Nor was there in the statement being ridiculed. Logic is a deductive science. Not a rhetorical jousting match. bdg was applying facetious sophistry to counter ignorant sophistry.

It is telling you are more worried about the type of fallacy used than the fallacy itself.

I held you in higher regards; seems I am mistaken.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

It is telling you are more worried about the type of fallacy used than the fallacy itself.

I held you in higher regards; seems I am mistaken.

Heh. No, not a bit "worried" . Amused. In this case by Vega's statements, by bdg's humorous quip, and now by your misapplication of logic to obvious ridicule.

Seems you are the one taking offense? Do you really support Vega's incessantly erroneous vituperations? I doubt it.

[bigdumbgod]

If V8 the Great shall post fantastic truthiness, we simply expect a modicum of basic writing ability, no matter how outlandish the content. To demonstrate less than such ability is to all but negate one's own point, which makes the whole operation silly.

[V8 Vega]

I have a new Chromebook which I absolutely love, at this time I'll never buy a regular computer again, super fast and no wierd computer problems. Only trouble is spell check dosen't work on it and I don't take the time to look up spelling unless its so bad no one could figure it out.