On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:48:20 -0700 (PDT), M_P <m_p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On Mar 28, 1:22 pm, Gunner <gun...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 11:13:34 -0700 (PDT), destroyfbicia
>> <gsos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >On Mar 28, 5:11 am, Anonymous <cri...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> >> Excellent post.
>>
>> >> > The higest rate of incarceration in the entire world? In the land
of
>> >> > the free?
>>
>> >> Incarceration Nation
>>
>> >> Not only are the prisons full but the majority of inmates have been
>> >> convicted of victimless crimes or "conspiracy" without having done
>> >> anything while murderers, rapists, and robbers are still on the
>> >> loose. It's clearly not about crime at all. It's just what this
poster
>> >> explained so well. It's about butt****ing the citizenry and creating
an
>> >> incarceration nation where everyone lives in fear of the fascist
>> >> pigs.
>>
>> >excellent posts, folks; the law is indeed used by the fbi and their
>> >punk police associates (and judges) across the nation as an instrument
>> >of torture, false imprisonment and murder. The only law one can now
>> >trust is the law of the street where each man deals with the other in
>> >a language they understand and respect. The punks in the fbi/cia and
>> >police agencies across the nation now begin to realize that the
>> >enlightened citizenry has no regard for the so called 'brave' men in
>> >blue, but instead view the badge toting armed thugs as threats to
>> >individual liberties, freedom of movement, and Human Rights. Thank
>> >you.geral sosbee
>>
>> So perhaps you prefer the Chinese model? They have very low
>> incarceration rates.
>>
>> They simply shoot their criminals.
>>
>> Keeps the prisons empty
>
>I prefer the liberty-loving model in which laws against victimless
>"crimes" like drug sale and use are repealed.
Now, an argument could be made that, as to the nearly half of crimes
that fall into other categories (property crime, drug crime, etc.), we
should be incarcerating fewer prisoners. That argument has less force
when you start looking at the actual people who are serving these
sentences. In virtually all cases, their records are lengthy,
sometimes containing violent offenses in their past. The drug seller
may have a record including felony assaults. The guy serving 32 months
for car theft may have a carjacking on his record within the last ten
years.
And there are almost no pure users in prison. Here in California, the
vast majority of state prisoners incarcerated for simple possession
are in prison because, within the last five years, they have a serious
or violent felony on their record — crimes like arson, kidnapping, and
rape. Therefore, they don’t qualify for the Proposition 36 drug
treatment program, as virtually all other defendants with possession
cases do.
So yeah, you could set free the property or drug criminals, but in
many cases you’d be setting free potentially violent people. But even
if you didn’t care and you kicked every last one of them out of
prison, you’d still be left with over 600,000 state prisoners in
prison for violent crimes. That would still be a high number compared
to other countries.
That doesn’t mean we have an incarceration problem. We have a violent
crime problem.
Exactly which violent criminals should we not be incarcerating?
|
