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.
We throw way too many people into prison for petty drug offenses, which is downright ridiculous. Why should we care if someone is putting something in their body for personal use? Why does the govt regulate such nonsense? Our original drug laws were enacted for racial reasons. Drug laws are incredibly stupid. Keep it illegal, arrest traffickers, whatever... but throwing people in prison for personal use is ridiculous.
Furthermore -- we keep many more people alive then we should. When people, without any doubt, engage in senseless violent crime, murder, rape, armed robbery, molestation, etc they should be killed. It is a waste of tax payer money to keep scum locked up for life. That money can go to school.
The few we do execute (which is too little -- there is no point in keeping alive a child molester or senseless murderer) are done humanely and expensively. What we need to do is simply kill them with a single shot to the head. -- Cheap and effective.
We throw way too many people into prison for petty drug offenses, which is downright ridiculous. Why should we care if someone is putting something in their body for personal use? Why does the govt regulate such nonsense? Our original drug laws were enacted for racial reasons. Drug laws are incredibly stupid. Keep it illegal, arrest traffickers, whatever... but throwing people in prison for personal use is ridiculous.
Furthermore -- we keep many more people alive then we should. When people, without any doubt, engage in senseless violent crime, murder, rape, armed robbery, molestation, etc they should be killed. It is a waste of tax payer money to keep scum locked up for life. That money can go to school.
The few we do execute (which is too little -- there is no point in keeping alive a child molester or senseless murderer) are done humanely and expensively. What we need to do is simply kill them with a single shot to the head. -- Cheap and effective.
If the prison-industrial complex was as sophisticated and lucrative during the Prohibition era as it is today, we'd still be living under prohibition. If powerful people can make money by denying less powerful people pleasure and criminalizing victimless crimes, they will do it. Drug use in and of itself is victimless. If that's how someone wants to cope with life's problems- whatever. I think that we need to address WHY users feel that using is the best way to cope, instead of merely criminalizing the act.
I've said this before, but after 25 years of this "War on Drugs" that has clearly had absolutely no positive social effect whatsoever in the big picture, isn't it time to consider a change in policy? Isn't it ludicrous that we are paroling murderers, rapists, and child molesters so we can make room for drug users in our prisons?
Back to the topic- I think that both sides bring very good points to this debate, but personally, I don't believe that humans are fit to judge whether fellow people are fit to live or die- it's not our place. I feel that while every one of us has free will, and while we all make mistakes on either grand or small scales, we also come into this world to learn certain lessons. Even though one might commit a heinous crime, learning lessons is still possible after the fact (my views are also colored by my belief in reincarnation, so your mileage may vary here). Executing people deprives them of potential opportunities to reflect on what they have done. I think premeditated killing is wrong, and a huge disruption to the cosmic order of things, no matter who is doing the killing. So, no- IMO, two wrongs don't make a right.
Our prisons are overflowing. The costs of keeping each prisoner is tremendous. Our state doesn't even have enough money to fix BASIC THINGS, like freeways, schools, and energy. So, why should state first spend more to protect the lives of those who disregard the lives of others?
What exactly do you suggest California do with it's criminals?
Prisons will be evacuating very soon. Keep in mind that CA did one thing right this last season by voting to legalize pot. Anyone in prison for simple possession will be released retroactively. People who are being held for minor non-violent distribution will most likely be released.
These inmates add up to 10s of thousands in CA alone.
There's going to be plenty of space for real criminals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb919
If the prison-industrial complex was as sophisticated and lucrative during the Prohibition era as it is today, we'd still be living under prohibition. If powerful people can make money by denying less powerful people pleasure and criminalizing victimless crimes, they will do it. Drug use in and of itself is victimless. If that's how someone wants to cope with life's problems- whatever. I think that we need to address WHY users feel that using is the best way to cope, instead of merely criminalizing the act.
I've said this before, but after 25 years of this "War on Drugs" that has clearly had absolutely no positive social effect whatsoever in the big picture, isn't it time to consider a change in policy? Isn't it ludicrous that we are paroling murderers, rapists, and child molesters so we can make room for drug users in our prisons?
Countries moved away from capital punishment because of cases where people were being killed by the state who were later found innocent. Another reason is this: Most cultures simply don't view the death penalty as punishment, because it isn't.
It isn't a case of "two wrongs don't make a right" because one side of the ledger isnt a wrong at all. A just society executes people who commit heinous crimes. An unjust society allows the families of victims to know that the killer of their loved one gets to live out a natural life.
Where the death penalty is not on the table, I believe people have the natural right to engage in vigilante justice.
If the prison-industrial complex was as sophisticated and lucrative during the Prohibition era as it is today, we'd still be living under prohibition. If powerful people can make money by denying less powerful people pleasure and criminalizing victimless crimes, they will do it. Drug use in and of itself is victimless. If that's how someone wants to cope with life's problems- whatever. I think that we need to address WHY users feel that using is the best way to cope, instead of merely criminalizing the act.
I've said this before, but after 25 years of this "War on Drugs" that has clearly had absolutely no positive social effect whatsoever in the big picture, isn't it time to consider a change in policy? Isn't it ludicrous that we are paroling murderers, rapists, and child molesters so we can make room for drug users in our prisons?
Back to the topic- I think that both sides bring very good points to this debate, but personally, I don't believe that humans are fit to judge whether fellow people are fit to live or die- it's not our place. I feel that while every one of us has free will, and while we all make mistakes on either grand or small scales, we also come into this world to learn certain lessons. Even though one might commit a heinous crime, learning lessons is still possible after the fact (my views are also colored by my belief in reincarnation, so your mileage may vary here). Executing people deprives them of potential opportunities to reflect on what they have done. I think premeditated killing is wrong, and a huge disruption to the cosmic order of things, no matter who is doing the killing. So, no- IMO, two wrongs don't make a right.
Nonsense.
When there are lawyers and social justice warriors advocating for criminals and their rights in prison, that's non sense.
Sheriff Joe had the right idea. Tent city-low cost for the tax payer. Chain gang where inmates SERVE their time.
If found guilty of murder, cold blooded murder, I feel code of Hammurabi is to return to it's fullest effect.
Bludgeon someone with a boulder/rock, their surviving family get to do the same to you.
Burn someone's house down while they're asleep inside, you get strapped to the bed and torched.
Do a driveby well you just enlisted for firing squad ballistics research.
No sitting in jail fighting appeals and getting 3 hots and a cot, free tv weights to lift to beat up inmates and learn how to become better criminals on the tax payers dime...
Better yet. I have a far better idea.
Wanna kill someone? Be a ruthless violent thug? A scourge to society? But Don't want the death penalty? Fine.
You don't get to sit in prison. Know what? You get dropped in areas of conflict such as Afghanistan Iraq Syria and given enough supplies and ammo to last a week. Put a dent in ISIS and jihadists. If you die. No major loss to society. Your time will be served. Death may come swift especially if we stitch American flags to them. That's what you do with the violent ones. Non violent criminals-thieves and such, well there's a wall needing building, roads that need re-paving, bridges that need fixing. Put those bums to work! They relinquished their rights via committing crime and being a menace to society.
Now the harsh unrealistic penalties on drugs many years ago is laughable. But one thing I could never understand... How most liberal states have a basically catch and release program... Ok I can understand stupid civic offenses such as speeding/seatbelt/fix it tickets-they're revenue generators for the town/state...
But if you have some thug, who after 3 times caught slinging dope, or who has been arrested for violent crimes repeating one after another after another, causing property damage, committing grand larceny etc... The system failed. To release someone violent for whatever die hard blue blood excuses for them are, they can't be for real to believe 4 walls surrounded by armed guards and steel bars that they are behind rehabilitated.
Prison gangs-worse than street gangs.
OP is hell bent over tookie, he should acquaint himself with some of our other lesser known criminals like that one that just got the death sentence. He's another scourge of the earth. Good riddance!
What I wanna express with my Questions is actually that I simply cant wont
and never will understand Death Row.
It sorry for my french [mod cut] me up in the worst way.
It pissed me even more off when it came to the decision about
Stanly"Tookie"Williams(Part Former of the notorious Crip-Gang).
That Man wrote Books warning Kids the youth to step into a streetgang.
I saw in the news how Bloods getting interviewed sayin if they let
Tookie alive the Pirus will make sure that they will put their Guns down
and try to give L.A a better reputation and make it to a safer place.
I mean Im not sophisticated and be convinced that everybody would live then in peace and there is no Blood Gang no more but that was a start and a chance for a change.N that dumba-SS governor of Arnold Schwarzenegger,which is unfortunetely Austrian as I am stays more less cold and let him gettin executed, and he died painfully too by the Outflow of his execution.
And I have the feeling since that they the situation just went way worser with the streetgangs for real.It suprised me that their was no riots.
And what was hittin Arnold bad was that in my Hometown you have a big Soccerstadium which is named after him and to days after the Execution they changed the name of the staduim and with a statement of an austrian soccer legend it gave him the rest, he said:Its better they change the name of the stadium,not just for the reputation of austria,but why should we name something after somebody when he is backin up this "2 wrongs make it right" Move,although he is an austrian n he knows that austria is a neutral state.
And since that they on I hate arnold Schwarzenegger as I hate Death Row but I hated Death Row already way befor anyway.
And I dont understand people which are for Death Row.
Its simply dump
And if you try to justify something Bad with anotha Bad Move,
You simply dump to.
If in the act of committing a crime, ANY CRIME, you cause someone else to lose their life, YOU lose your life. PERIOD.
If you know that going in BEFORE you engage in any illegal activity, you MIGHT think twice about committing that crime.
It is THEIR CHOICE.
Then we the usual , "And if you try to justify something Bad with anotha Bad Move,
You simply dump to"
In other words ANYBODY who DISAGREES with YOU is DUMB.
I suggest you take along hard look into a mirror.
"Those that cast the insult are the ones usually GUILTY of the insult.
I hope you don't expect to get any serous discussion on this issue since you think people are DUMB if the don't agree with you.
You did a horrific and nightmarish crime, no question about your guilt...done in one year or less.
Judicially-mandated-homicide is not the same thing as MURDER.
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.
And what was hittin Arnold bad was that in my Hometown you have a big Soccerstadium which is named after him and to days after the Execution they changed the name of the staduim and with a statement of an austrian soccer legend it gave him the rest, he said:Its better they change the name of the stadium,not just for the reputation of austria,but why should we name something after somebody when he is backin up this "2 wrongs make it right" Move,although he is an austrian n he knows that austria is a neutral state.
