Manhattan DA to stop seeking prison sentences in slew of criminal cases (public schools, income)
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.
On that note, I wonder why Singapore needs caning then
So to speak, someone still felt it necessary to throw gum
I talked about this before, but you evidently don't remember. Singapore has a beautiful, efficient, large, and extremely safe subway. When the system was brand new, vandals would stick the gum somewhere in the door-closing system of new subway cars, which would paralyze the subway for a few hours. Since this was intolerable, Singapore criminalized chewing gum. I don't know whether people were caned for chewing a gum, but the punishment was serious.
I am not sure what you are arguing. I don't think anyone felt it necessary to gum up the subway car doors, but obnoxious people certainly felt like doing that - and they were responsible for doing that. Even if they, for some reason (say, a political reason of some type) "felt it necessary" to sabotage the subway, they would still be responsible for doing it. The fact that you "feel it necessary" to do something does not remove your responsibility for doing it.
You are confounding a reason with responsibility. The fact that you have a reason to "feel it necessary" to mug someone does not remove your responsibility for mugging, does not make you not guilty of mugging, does not make it right for you to mug people, and certainly does not oblige people to not protect themselves from you by not locking you up.
Do you need Cliff Notes for this too? If you decide to commit the crime, you are responsible for it, regardless of your reasons for that decision.
I talked about this before, but you evidently don't remember. Singapore has a beautiful, efficient, large, and extremely safe subway. When the system was brand new, vandals would stick the gum somewhere in the door-closing system of new subway cars, which would paralyze the subway for a few hours. Since this was intolerable, Singapore criminalized chewing gum. I don't know whether people were caned for chewing a gum, but the punishment was serious.
I am not sure what you are arguing. I don't think anyone felt it necessary to gum up the subway car doors, but obnoxious people certainly felt like doing that - and they were responsible for doing that. Even if they, for some reason (say, a political reason of some type) "felt it necessary" to sabotage the subway, they would still be responsible for doing it. The fact that you "feel it necessary" to do something does not remove your responsibility for doing it.
You are confounding a reason with responsibility. The fact that you have a reason to "feel it necessary" to mug someone does not remove your responsibility for mugging, does not make you not guilty of mugging, does not make it right for you to mug people, and certainly does not oblige people to not protect themselves from you by not locking you up.
Do you need Cliff Notes for this too? If you decide to commit the crime, you are responsible for it, regardless of your reasons for that decision.
Does Singapore have a "Rikers island" so to speak? If not, then why? Let us just try to see what is the difference? I am asking?
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
Does Singapore have a "Rikers island" so to speak? If not, then why? Let us just try to see what is the difference? I am asking?
You could have looked that up just as easily as I did right now :-). Yes, they have the prison complex in Changi (the same area of their city-state where they have the world's most amazing airport). How does that matter?
The most obvious, and probably most important, difference between Singapore and NYC is the far stricter law enforcement in Singapore.
In Singapore, legal process is rapid, and sentences harsh. Singapore has caning (which is very unpleasant) and capital punishment, and it is not possible to avoid these sentences by endlessly appealing them and postponing them for 30 years. People with criminal ideas don't want to get caned or executed, so they don't act on such ideas. Those who do are very few, and are frequently foreigners who don't quite understand that their sentence WILL indeed be carried out if they break law in Singapore.
It is not possible to achieve the temperature of absolute zero (ie, zero deg Kelvin), yet we use freezers to avoid bacterial growth in food, and cholera is under pretty good control nowadays.
The crime is not absolutely zero in Singapore, but it is darn near zero. They have not achieved that by decarceration :-).
The decision to commit crime is always the decision made by a criminal. The crime will start trending towards zero when enough people stop deciding to commit crime. Nobody else can make that decisions for them.
This is one of the better posts I have come across on this forum in quite awhile.
It says that if you carry a gun, the sentence will also be downgraded from 7 years to about a year. So why all the anti second? Wouldn’t it then make sense to erase NYCs strict gun laws while at it and allow us law abiding citizens to carry?
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.
