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.
If by crime, you mean "initiates force, voluntarily harms or otherwise commits aggression against another individual", then I feel they have forfeited their natural individual rights and can/should receive whatever punishment their victim(s) feel is appropriate.
If by crime, you mean "some sort of hidden violation against some unknown law snuck into the public code by a faceless bureaucrat tyrant", then I feel nothing but rage and hostility that such a state exists where people typically break any number of such "laws," both federal and state, every single day without even being aware.
tl;dr - crimes against people, bad; crimes against faceless bureaucracy, WGAFF.
Violent criminals deserved to be punished. Rapists, murderers, carjackers, lock them up. Smoke pot? You should never be in prison for that. Instead of jailing drug users, have mandatory rehab.
Unfortunately, I have two good friends who committed felony in the past. When they got out, I gave both of them a job and they are by far the best employees I've ever had.
I believe in this situation, A prisoner's incarceration could be the result of a fragile family structure and lack of financial support.
By no means, am I trying to make excuses for them. However, I believe The cycle of bad decisions perpetuates itself, until a person decides to address the basic requirement for access to gainful employment. The need for financial survival will be ongoing and remain chief among the reasons that drive many people back into illicit activities that causes them to recidivate and come back to prison.
Both my friends are good people who can do pretty much everything (legal) for the people they love. They are loyal friends, good family men, and productive members of the society. They are also solid middle class.
One of my brothers is a defense attorney. A good and honest criminal defense attorney is not defending the client's behavior, he or she is defending the client's rights. Whatever a lawyer may think, only a judge or jury can decide guilt or innocence.
As people with problems in need of healing? Or as bad people who need to be punished?
Many of us would say both, but if you had to choose one, which would you lean towards?
Yes, this is massively oversimplifying a complex issue, but there's only so much nuance a poll can capture.
oversimplified is an understatement, as without consideration of the specific 'crime' or general category of crime, the poll is good only to support some social justice issue where facts and numbers are intentionally blurred beyond recognition and have no validity. just what the social justice effort is all about.
Depends entirely on the crime, and crimes without a victim arent really crimes.
Unfortunately the state has criminalized so many non-violent behaviors,habits,vices, etc., as well as created a category of crimes where the state itself is the only victim, by the end of the day any one of us could be a criminal.
Depends entirely on the crime, and crimes without a victim arent really crimes.
Unfortunately the state has criminalized so many behaviors,habits,etc.and created a catagory of crimes where the state itself is the only victim, by the end of the day any one of us could be a criminal.
yeah.. I agree.
war on drugs, I believe its a total failure. Both of my friends committed felony drug offense. Like I said earlier, not making excuses for them, a law is a law. I just can't see which person they have hurt in the past.
Most are broken people who need healing, but whether or not that healing is possible for many of the worst among them is another question. And for the worst of them, no matter the healing process, they don't deserve to come back into society.
I don't think any of your answers match my feelings/views.
Some crimes are idiotic, some are vile, some are barely considered crimes, some shouldn't be considered crimes.
This post ^^^ best describes my thought on it also.
I see no reason to incarcerate people who have committed non-violent crime, and imprison/dispose of the rest and throw away the key. I saw a program once and a woman was in prison for writing bad checks, sentenced to years and years, more than a murderer! With the cost and overcrowding, put the woman in the community under supervision and paying toward the cost of her crime which will make more than enough space to hold the murderer until we can dispose of him/her. Too many bad guys/gals get out because of overcrowding and the costs to the taxpayer for imprisoning these people is sky high. Let them "work off" their non-violent crime by paying back.
We really need to dispose of more of the ones committing the vile crimes as they are evil, and beyond help. They let them out and the recommit. With pedophiles, I outprocessed a couple of them (one at the highest expectation that he would reoffend) years ago, they can actually rate them on scale of how likely they are to reoffend yet they have to let them to reoffend anyway, vile, not in the prison, but under the prison.
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.
When they got out, I gave both of them a job and they are by far the best employees I've ever had.
