This is what happens when you keep electing liberals... (Boston: 2013, crimes)

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by timberline742

Iceland is a great one.

Is any part of their success attributed to actually reducing sentences? Like you said they invested in other activities (which is of course key, whether it's a public or private/church supported thing).


I still think area any not in the USA is apples/oranges. I've never heard of any state/area of this country that has reported good results from being lenient on drug dealers.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Is any part of their success attributed to actually reducing sentences? Like you said they invested in other activities (which is of course key, whether it's a public or private/church supported thing).

I still think area any not in the USA is apples/oranges. I've never heard of any state/area of this country that has reported good results from being lenient on drug dealers.

They got away from locking people up, and got people to stop starting. These are all linked. And no, not a private/church supported thing, a society supported thing. The society needs to buy in.


I've never heard of any good results from locking people up, either, except, you know, the people that receive all the $$$ we're spending. They like it.


It sure the heck doesn't reduce supply of drugs at all. It's just a waste.


There are so many suckers that vote for politicians to "be tough one crime". Its just a moronic mantra. The same people that vote for that line are the ones that vote for politicians that preach crap like "we need to cut fraud and waste, not raise taxes". These (voting) people are just not smart people. They're suckers.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by timberline742

I've never heard of any good results from locking people up, either, except, you know, the people that receive all the $$$ we're spending. They like it.


It sure the heck doesn't reduce supply of drugs at all. It's just a waste.

No it just serves justice and keeps dangerous people off the street. We are never going to eliminate crime, but a civilized society provides deterrents and punishments for anti-social behavior.

Originally Posted by timberline742

There are so many suckers that vote for politicians to "be tough one crime". Its just a moronic mantra. The same people that vote for that line are the ones that vote for politicians that preach crap like "we need to cut fraud and waste, not raise taxes". These (voting) people are just not smart people. They're suckers.

No more suckers than those who vote for every single tax increase as being "for the children", or think that making guns illegal will stop people from using them illegally.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by massnative71

No it just serves justice and keeps dangerous people off the street. We are never going to eliminate crime, but a civilized society provides deterrents and punishments for anti-social behavior. .

A civilized society actually does things to prevent people from engaging in anti social behavior and doesn't make locking people up profitable. A civilized society knows that throwing people behind bars without changing the facts on the ground is a waste of resources (that can be used to make real changes to benefit society) and actually counter productive to society in the long run.

Originally Posted by massnative71

No more suckers than those who vote for every single tax increase as being "for the children", or think that making guns illegal will stop people from using them illegally.

Actually, those people are FAAAAAR wiser than the right wingers. They actually think, and well, look at data, and reason.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by timberline742

A civilized society actually does things to prevent people from engaging in anti social behavior and doesn't make locking people up profitable. A civilized society knows that throwing people behind bars without changing the facts on the ground is a waste of resources (that can be used to make real changes to benefit society) and actually counter productive to society in the long run.

Uh, all correctional facilities in MA are owned and run by the state.

Originally Posted by timberline742

Actually, those people are FAAAAAR wiser than the right wingers. They actually think, and well, look at data, and reason.

LOL

[chicagoliz]

The war on drugs is responsible for so many ills in our society. It's a good thing that we have fewer incarcerations for drugs. I'd prefer that the police spend their time solving murders and rapes and violent crimes, rather than spending billions of dollars and countless hours finding someone's stash of drugs.

Because of our gun laws, we also have one of the lowest rates of mass shootings.

So, yep -- keep electing the liberals. We need even more.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by chicagoliz

Because of our gun laws, we also have one of the lowest rates of mass shootings.

I get it. We CAN'T confirm that weak drug laws are responsible for the high OD rate, yet the low rate of mass shootings CAN be credited to the stringent gun laws. PLEASE.


FAR more people die from drug overdoses than from mass shootings, it's not even close.

[chicagoliz]

Originally Posted by massnative71

I get it. We CAN'T confirm that weak drug laws are responsible for the high OD rate, yet the low rate of mass shootings CAN be credited to the stringent gun laws. PLEASE.

The high OD rate is because we have an epidemic of depression in our society. The working class can no longer earn a decent living, there is little time for them to engage in meaningful endeavors, and working conditions suck for a huge swath of the population. It's no surprise that the opioid epidemic has been the worst in the hollowed out towns where investment firms bought up the companies that owned the factories that formed the base of the towns and then shut down the factories. When life seems hopeless, you see a high incidence of drug usage.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by massnative71

Uh, all correctional facilities in MA are owned and run by the state.

I know. Did you have a point? Doesn't seem like it.
Do you have any clue how much $$ is made of those facilities? It's OUTSTANDING.

Originally Posted by massnative71

I get it. We CAN'T confirm that weak drug laws are responsible for the high OD rate, yet the low rate of mass shootings CAN be credited to the stringent gun laws. PLEASE. .

Correct, there isn't any shown correlation between statement #1 and definitely no shown causation. While the latter has been shown to have both.

[DanTwohig]

Originally Posted by massnative71

I get it. We CAN'T confirm that weak drug laws are responsible for the high OD rate, yet the low rate of mass shootings CAN be credited to the stringent gun laws. PLEASE.


FAR more people die from drug overdoses than from mass shootings, it's not even close.

Nobody is denying that there are more deaths from OD than from mass shootings. In fact there are more OD deaths in the US than from all shootings combined.

But based on tons of research we know that effective gun laws can and have cut down on gun deaths. There is a mountain of evidence out there. To deny all of it is to deny math and science.

Meanwhile their is evidence that relaxing drug convictions and focusing on rehabilitation is far more effective at curtailing drug dependence. Once again, math and science.

The opioid epidemic is a new wrinkle that has as much to do with depression as anything else - a completely different topic than the drug laws.

If you have scientifically proven evidence to the contrary on any of this - not just your opinion but actual proof - I invite you to share and cite the links to the studies