guns?

[CallMeLaura]

Originally Posted by Gretchen_SDCA

I agree with you on the entitlement thing with children. I do take issue with your "rehabilitating criminals" statement. How much research have you done on this issue? In fact, as is evident in the US system, locking people up with long sentences and "harsh punishment" has miserably failed. It becomes a breeding ground for gangs and only further educates criminals to become better criminals.

For certain classes of prisoners, rehabilitation is the better choice. Remember, rehabilitation does NOT necessarily mean treating them like angels. Many tough rehabilitation programs for minor offenders are hard and many prisoners would rather choose hard time. But some have been very successful.

These programs are not appropriate for all classes of prisoners - some prisoners indeed need VERY LONG sentences, preferably in isolation. But to reject the rehabilitation theory entirely is not only a mistake, but it is not at all supported by criminal justice statistics.

I believe in moderation of all things. Locking everybody up and throwing away the key is no answer. Acting like everyone is 'fixed' when their time is up is foolish as well.

I have read quite a bit about crime and punishment, in the US, in other countries, currently and historically.

My ideal system would be a combination of education, rehabilitation, and permanent incarceration. Education mainly in the form of how to raise kids to not become criminals. Rehabilitation to give convicts some way to earn an income and the tools to deal with today's issues. Sentences wouldn't be finished until rehabilitation was complete. And life sentences to those who won't be changed by any amount of counseling.

Right now, what we have is a tax payer funded crime university. Inmates learn new techniques from cell mates and are released right back into society. Some commit crimes as soon as they get out because they don't know any other life and get room and board. Now tell me what art therapy is going to do for them?

(I guess it's fair to say that I don't think the rehabilitation idea is crap, just the way we implement it in most cases. There are definitely good programs out there, include horse training programs, which do actually teach life lessons, and I support those.)

[Gretchen_SDCA]

Originally Posted by CallMeLaura

I believe in moderation of all things. Locking everybody up and throwing away the key is no answer. Acting like everyone is 'fixed' when their time is up is foolish as well.

I have read quite a bit about crime and punishment, in the US, in other countries, currently and historically.

My ideal system would be a combination of education, rehabilitation, and permanent incarceration. Education mainly in the form of how to raise kids to not become criminals. Rehabilitation to give convicts some way to earn an income and the tools to deal with today's issues. Sentences wouldn't be finished until rehabilitation was complete. And life sentences to those who won't be changed by any amount of counseling.

Right now, what we have is a tax payer funded crime university. Inmates learn new techniques from cell mates and are released right back into society. Some commit crimes as soon as they get out because they don't know any other life and get room and board. Now tell me what art therapy is going to do for them?

(I guess it's fair to say that I don't think the rehabilitation idea is crap, just the way we implement it in most cases. There are definitely good programs out there, include horse training programs, which do actually teach life lessons, and I support those.)

You are 100% correct - this is exactly how I feel about the issue. You had just misrepresented your views somewhat in your earlier post.

[butahara]

hi i been readin the post here and i read someone bought a 22 cal long rifle what if someone is shot in the head with a .22 cal. rifle what are the chances of survival?or any vital organ for that matter

[caendaniels]

Originally Posted by butahara

hi i been readin the post here and i read someone bought a 22 cal long rifle what if someone is shot in the head with a .22 cal. rifle what are the chances of survival?or any vital organ for that matter

Better than average survival. There is no gurantee that a .22 would penetrate the skull. I would guestimate 60/40 against penetration, assuming average adult and not a point blank shot. Nasty cut and a trip to the hospital with at least an overnight stay, maybe a fracture. There is a strong probability of being knocked unconscious.

Vital organs would be similar, I doubt it would penetrate deep enough to hit anything vital. Again average adult, not point balnk and clothes on. Guesstimated survival rises to 95%. That percentage includes lead poisoning and infection deaths. Most people shot would have a scar and a story. I've got one.

Not all .22 cal bullets contain powder, some are just a primer. However, both instances one would want to avoid. I will also note that a .22 magnum is drastically more powerful than a .22 or .22 long and is considered a "belly gun". ie put it directly against someones belly and fire. It can penetrate deep enough to mortally wound, namely the liver.

[butahara]

ohh ok thanks.. just as long as it is not in real contact to whatever you shot at

[caendaniels]

Originally Posted by butahara

ohh ok thanks.. just as long as it is not in real contact to whatever you shot at

It seems I may have down played the danger factor by being focused on mortality. Being small and less powerful does not mean it is a toy. Whatever you shoot at, you should mean to hit it. That includeds the death of what was shot at.

Maybe I am misinterpting your reply?

[butahara]

oh ok
i see know

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by caendaniels

How do you judge the intent of someone who has broken into your house?

Absolutely right!

This one has almost certainly been covered/discussed before, but last year Texas finally passed the so-called "castle doctrine" and "stand your ground" bill which presumes (operative word) that someone breaking into your occupied home, business or vehicle is there to do you serious bodily injury and that you have the right to use deadly force. Also, if you are attacked in a public place, you have no duty to retreat before using deadly force (assuming you are otherwise justified in using it).

Of course, prior to that, Texas law didn't specificially require one attempt to retreat, it merely said that before using deadly force (except in the instance of unlawful entry into ones home, which was specifically exempted) that a qualifying factor would be "if a reasonable person in the actors situation would not have retreated." Now though (rightfully in my opinion) a failure to retreat cannot be considered in whether or not the victim of the assault or violation was justified in using deadly force.

[goneoflife]

it took me awhile to come back here and post for the first time. this is the story.

Wakingdark and butahara are the same person. this person used this forum to obtain information about gun laws, etc. soon after her last post as butahara on this thread she took her own life with the gun that she speaks of buying. this is not a sick joke. this is the truth, i have the obituary to prove it. im not saying that anything that took place here was wrong, but i wanted to let the people on here know what really happened (i am a close friend). this thread stands as her last few days to us.

also, please do not delete this thread (i dont post here but its a memory and story of our friend) thank you.