How Should Violent Street Criminals be Handled? (drug, weapon, radical)
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 have previously suggested Maybe Arrests of Low-Level Criminals Need to Get a Bit Rough and Tumble. The Courts and prison system really don't have the resources to deal with this kind of very violent crime. Gun control won't solve the problem; these people are the weapon. Given that we are not going to imprison this person for the rest of his life or execute him, maybe the best punishment is on the spot.
Politicians like to be "tough on crime" by raising sentences and pretending to enforce them. Judges likewise issue long sentences knowing full well that they'll never be served. If justice were more "on the spot" the criminals would be afraid of them. Now they just laugh in prosecutors' and judges' faces.
I oppose police violence and excessive force. If it can be avoided, the only moral option is to do so. If it can't, then so be it. But if we start finding excuses to engage in excessive force, we become closer and closer to a despotic police state.
However, there is a problem of inconsistent enforcement. Often, plea deals result in lesser charges, for a variety of different reasons. I say get rid of plea deals entirely. You should be charged with the crime you committed. I also think prisons need to do a better job of addressing why people commit crimes. Some 95% of prisoners will be released, and even if we start doling out life sentences more often and with less discretion (which we should not do), it's not as if that 95% figure will drop by much more.
Many view rehabilitation as weakness in dealing with crime, but I disagree. It's a different kind of strength; moral courage. Authoritarian enforcement is inherently cowardly, and we should avoid engaging in such practices which do nothing but to satisfying a primal instinct. The 'tough' part should come from taking the matters seriously and addressing them consistently. Longer sentences and harsher treatment are not a long term solution.
I never said anything about race. In fact I posted elsewhere that I presume that the attacker is Mormon, Hutterite, Amish or Jewish.
My point was that black criminals are a protected class. The Left complains that high black incarceration rates are unfair. White cops killing black criminals is unfair. Punishing black drug dealers is unfair. Mentioning black-on-black crime is unfair.
Maybe because the penalty isn’t enough of a deterent.
I can't think of a worse hell than life without parole. Some would argue that death is the harshest of punishment (I'd argue that's wrong). Regardless, people still commit crimes that carry these sentences. The deterrent argument assumes that people act rationally; they often don't. They probably act irrationally more so than they do rationally.
The only consideration that would be applied is "how to not get caught," which is not especially helpful. That actually makes matters worse if this person has above average intelligence and could avoid getting caught as they continue whatever it is they're doing. And frankly, even in the cases where rational consideration is taken, this can still mean just thinking through how to cover your tracks. And this is all true for lesser crimes as well. Little evidence seems to suggest that harsh punishment actually acts as a sufficient deterrent. Anecdotal evidence may exist, but it's hardly the solution.
I can't think of a worse hell than life without parole. Some would argue that death is the harshest of punishment (I'd argue that's wrong). Regardless, people still commit crimes that carry these sentences. The deterrent argument assumes that people act rationally; they often don't. They probably act irrationally more so than they do rationally.
The only consideration that would be applied is "how to not get caught," which is not especially helpful. That actually makes matters worse if this person has above average intelligence and could avoid getting caught as they continue whatever it is they're doing. And frankly, even in the cases where rational consideration is taken, this can still mean just thinking through how to cover your tracks. And this is all true for lesser crimes as well. Little evidence seems to suggest that harsh punishment actually acts as a sufficient deterrent. Anecdotal evidence may exist, but it's hardly the solution.
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.
