Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The U.S.A has the largest incarceration rate in the world...larger than China (which is four times larger and supposedly more repressive). How can warehousing millions of our citizens in our jails for years and years be good for our country? It costs an estimated $47,000 a year to warehouse EACH inmate. Multiply that by 2,200,000 prisoners (there were 500,000 prisoners in 1980). and you get 103 BILLION dollars a year (NASA's budget is 16 billion). Not including the cost to society when they are released after years of wasting away in prison.
Should we stop sending people to prison that are non-violent offenders and that have not commited a crime against any individual (ie drug possession, which cost billions more to wage war on, but that's another debate).
The U.S.A has the largest incarceration rate in the world...larger than China (which is four times larger and supposedly more repressive). How can warehousing millions of our citizens in our jails for years and years be good for our country? It costs an estimated $47,000 a year to warehouse EACH inmate. Multiply that by 2,200,000 prisoners (there were 500,000 prisoners in 1980). and you get 103 BILLION dollars a year (NASA's budget is 16 billion). Not including the cost to society when they are released after years of wasting away in prison.
Should we stop sending people to prison that are non-violent offenders and that have not commited a crime against any individual (ie drug possession, which cost billions more to wage war on, but that's another debate).
I was watching an episode of "World Without End" on Dish TV the other night. They had a scene that showed a man locked up in "stocks". Other citizens were having fun throwing fresh cow and horse dung at the defenseless guy. This would now be considered cruel and unusual punishment but is it really? After a shower and thorough scrubbing with soap and water the offender will be as good as new.
Shame can be an effective punishment but in a society where the biggest crime is to NOT be politically correct it is not a very good tool to control behavior. Being locked up in a set of stocks on a Saturday night would probably do more to DETER crime that the Death Penalty. Plus being much cheaper than incarceration.
This would also open up new business opportunities. Instead of spreading the horse manure I collect from mucking out my horses stalls on my garden, I could bag it up in small paper bags and set up a vending stand at the Public Viewing areas near the stocks. Talk about adding value to a product.
I was watching an episode of "World Without End" on Dish TV the other night. They had a scene that showed a man locked up in "stocks". Other citizens were having fun throwing fresh cow and horse dung at the defenseless guy. This would now be considered cruel and unusual punishment but is it really? After a shower and thorough scrubbing with soap and water the offender will be as good as new.
I would take that over two weeks in Central (L.A.'s main county jail) and the stigma of a criminal record. No record, no jail, in exchange for a face-full of horse manure while my hands are bound is actually not too bad of a deal.
If it's serious enough,after convicted, use a 410 handgun at base of skull, rubber bag over head to catch the mess. Otherwise, just horsewhip them. 5 lashes for the first time, 15 for a second offense, 3rd time, it should entail the use of the 410, cause they just won't learn. However, this is for actual offenses that harm someone, not mere dope 'offenses" and about 90% of the felonies now on the books.
Directed towards the OP…
Yes I feel anyone who breaks the law needs to be reprimanded and the just punishment issued.
I think this varies depending what state one resides in.
I know drug possession will get one cited, processed and then detained until the officers can see if the person in question has “priorsâ€
Sometimes this does not even mean the person will be detained, they will be let go on their own and haveto show up for court at a later time.
I.E. My friends estranged husband was stopped about 3 weeks ago while driving, ( He was was swerving all over the road), the officers detained him, found meth and other paraphernalia on his person and took him in, impounded the car and had him call for a ride.
This is not his “first rodeo†he has been picked up before but it has been about 5 years since his last prior incident.
Just because he was only “caught†with possession of a controlled substance does not mean he did not already commit other crimes , he just has not been caught.
He does not steal from the family but he does steal tools from work and blames other electricians, he has stolen car radios, tires with expensive rims, ipods and so forth and has sold them for money to buy drugs.
In my opinion? He has hurt others, just because it has not been a violent crime does not mean these other people were not harmed by him when he decided to steal from them.
I know the lower level crimes you speak of, drug selling, possession, under the influence. Petty theft and so forth. Fraud, writing bad checks, embezzlement. These crimes affect people, those whom have been stolen from.
Here in CA. The department of corrections has already implemented this by releasing lower level crime inmates and handing them over to their respective counties and allowing the counties to deal with them.
The big push behind this is simple, inmates are treated way to well.
The cost of food, laundry alone costs the state millions of dollars a year. Second which is the main reason for this action is Medical care.
While there are millions of decent law abiding citizens that cannot afford medical care there are these inmates getting top notch medical care based on their “civil rights†Surgeries, diabetes medication, pain killers for “pain†Money for specialists. I know this first hand when I had to schedule a surgery for an inmate ( He had a pterygium ) on his right eye which is a growth of clear tissue, it is not fatal, it grows slowly, it affects vision but the person will not die from it.
I cannot imagine how much money it cost the state to transport him to our office safely as well as all the special allowances our office had to make in order to ensure public safety. ( They had to close down the entire left wing of the office) as well as the cost of the surgery, radiation, extra tissue for the affected area as well anesthesia, all these procedures add up.
So back to the county and allow the sheriff’s department to deal with these types.
So since you asked this question, what do you propose?
Tell me how you can reason drugs are not a crime against others? Have you never seen or felt the affects of drugs or alcohol use in a family? The fear a child feels seeing mommy or daddy drunk/high, or their older sibling out of control from using? Have you never realized that a person that drives drunk/high is actually attempted murder for every person/car/pedestrian they pass.
I would like to see far harsher penalties for drugs & DUI. Everyone is so worried about sex offenses but fail to think about repeat drunks & abusers that have a greater impact in families and each generation after.
Tell me how you can reason drugs are not a crime against others? Have you never seen or felt the affects of drugs or alcohol use in a family? The fear a child feels seeing mommy or daddy drunk/high, or their older sibling out of control from using? Have you never realized that a person that drives drunk/high is actually attempted murder for every person/car/pedestrian they pass. Using drugs to me is should not be a crime. Is you are under the influence of any drug and commit a crime then the person should be punished if that crime is sexual assault, rape, battery, etc. He is punished for the crime itself, not for using any type of drug. To make a claim that he or she did not know what he or she was doing because he or she was under the influence of alcohol is not an excuse. I just cannot agree with you that drugs are a crime against others. It not using drugs responsibly.
I would like to see far harsher penalties for drugs & DUI. Everyone is so worried about sex offenses but fail to think about repeat drunks & abusers that have a greater impact in families and each generation after.
I want to agree with you out of emotions but I must stay objective and say that repeat offenders should get harsher sentences for commiting the crimes again, not because they use the drugs.
My point? I do not agree with limiting or restricting certain freedoms on the general population because others are not responsible in exercising their rights.
Now, I do not mind regulating rights. Example: I believe people have the right to drink alcohol but regulating by saying you cannot drive under its influence makes sense, not ban it. The same applies to other drugs the people have banned. Take care.
Tell me how you can reason drugs are not a crime against others? Have you never seen or felt the affects of drugs or alcohol use in a family? The fear a child feels seeing mommy or daddy drunk/high, or their older sibling out of control from using? Have you never realized that a person that drives drunk/high is actually attempted murder for every person/car/pedestrian they pass.
I would like to see far harsher penalties for drugs & DUI. Everyone is so worried about sex offenses but fail to think about repeat drunks & abusers that have a greater impact in families and each generation after.
Of course there are societal risks for people that use drugs/alcohol/tobacco, etc. but the examples that you give are crimes regardless if drugs are used. Driving while intoxicated from, alcohol, prescriptions, drugs, etc.. is illegal because you are jeopardizing the safety of others. But driving under the influence is a crime and alcohol is not a crime. I suppose we could go back to prohibition but that didn't end up so well, did it? All of your examples show the contradiction in our laws because alcohol (which is legal) can be a factor in peoples bad behaviors. Yet it is still legal and rightfully so. I drink responsibly as do most people I know but few are advocating the criminalization of alcohol to solve these societal problems.
If you, in the privacy of your home have a drink should you be thrown in prison? And I don't mean have a drink and go out and drive drunk or beat your kids, etc.. I simply mean have a drink responsibly. Now, if you, in the privacy of your home smoke a joint should you go to jail? Again, not getting high and doing something that is already illegal like abusing your family or driving recklessly or stealing.
What crime against someone are you committing in either scenario? How can you have a drink and not commit a crime, smoke a cigarette and not commit a crime but smoke pot and commit a crime punishable by jail time? That is what I mean by a crime that is not against someone else (ie victimless crime/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victimless_crime). You are the only one that will be affected but shouldn't you have the freedom to make that choice?
Last edited by elfstorage; 10-29-2012 at 10:56 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't agree with wasting money on them.
