Author Topic: The Root Cause of Crime... (Read 2450 times)

Torque · « **Reply #60 on:** January 28, 2007, 05:56:42 PM »

the judge should give the eulogy.

SteveBailey · « **Reply #61 on:** January 29, 2007, 01:09:13 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
Who knew that a call for decency was a liberal drivel...

That's it... stay consistent... like the "fairness doctrine" call it a pretty name.... still smells like poop. "call for decency" *derisive snort*

lazs2 · « **Reply #62 on:** January 29, 2007, 08:19:36 AM »

mini... not sure I follow... are you saying that the current drug addicts have plenty of money for drugs but are stealing to pay for food and rent?

I don't think you know how widespread the hard drug problem is and how easy, yet expensive, they are.

If they were legal and cheap then the addicts would not be stealing to buy them... crime would indeed go down..

Put em in a section eight housing track and give their worthless selves food stamps and enough money to buy a few pounds of crank or heroin a month and let em overdose..

With all the room you save in the prisons you can put violent criminals and theives in jail.

Anyone who watched would know that doing the drugs would make you unemployable so not choose that lifestyle. it could be stigamtized instead of "bad boy criminal hero". It would just be "laughable loser".

lazs

SwS · « **Reply #63 on:** January 29, 2007, 11:22:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lukster
The problem here loser, as I alluded to, is that leniency is becoming the standard but without any real restoration. Many of these judges think it their responsibility only to give the offender another chance or a light sentence.

You are trying to state your opinion as fact and it just isn't so...if you don't like the way that your local judges do business then go get your own law degree and change it.

mietla · « **Reply #64 on:** January 29, 2007, 11:29:12 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by SwS
You are trying to state your opinion as fact and it just isn't so...if you don't like the way that your local judges do business then go get your own law degree and change it.

yeah, and if the car mechanic rips you off, do not complain. Get the car mechanic training and fix your car yourself.

Angus · « **Reply #65 on:** January 29, 2007, 01:52:51 PM »

A thing like this happens in many countries.
I wonder why. Okay getting through the system takes a while, but in cases like this, the guy is facing a sentence for granted when he commits the crime, and if you think about it he is certainly facing some sentence as an absolute minimum. So why can't he be put away IMMEDIATELY for that time?
In my country, the authorities sometimes go into the grey zone, putting people into custody (sp?) for a while, the time is then later on subtracted from the final sentence decided in court.
Thoughts?

Shuckins · « **Reply #66 on:** January 29, 2007, 04:31:02 PM »

As more of the facts become public, this whole affair becomes more sordid.

The punk was paroled from prison at some point within the last two years. He had transferred to a young adult offender unit from our juvenile facility when he turned 18.

Since that time he apparently committed four rapes in various communities in southeast Arkansas. These offenses predate the ones he committed in the Dermott area. According to the information I received today, at the time he committed the assault on the elderly couple and the rape of a black woman he was being sought by the local and state police, as well as the feds.

Now, after raping the black woman, he was apprehended and held for identification by the victim and questioning by the police. Despite a positive identification by the woman, the authorities performed a polygraph test....which he passed.

On the basis of the results of the polygraph, he was RELEASED! This is unbelieveable, considering the fact that a polygraph test result cannot be used as evidence in court, and that the perp was being actively sought by three different law enforcement agencies for a lengthy series of crimes....and was a former convict.

This is nuclear-powered incompetence! It is beyond moronic! It is CRIMINAL!:furious

Helrazr1 · « **Reply #67 on:** January 30, 2007, 02:04:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Angus
A thing like this happens in many countries.
I wonder why. Okay getting through the system takes a while, but in cases like this, the guy is facing a sentence for granted when he commits the crime, and if you think about it he is certainly facing some sentence as an absolute minimum. So why can't he be put away IMMEDIATELY for that time?
In my country, the authorities sometimes go into the grey zone, putting people into custody (sp?) for a while, the time is then later on subtracted from the final sentence decided in court.
Thoughts?

It is that way here as well. It's called "credit for time served". If you sat in jail for a year before being convicted and sentenced to 3 years, you only have 2 years left to go.

Angus · « **Reply #68 on:** January 30, 2007, 02:49:29 AM »

That "credit" could be used more perhaps. Similar stuff happens around the world, but luckily not often so bad.

Maverick · « **Reply #69 on:** January 30, 2007, 11:27:21 AM »

Angus,

That credit is used all the time. Many defendants are not allowed bail as they are either a flight from prosecution risk, or they are simply too dangerous to be allowed out to prey on either victims or witnesses. The "time served" issue also applies to the sentence they receive at the end of the trial.

In addition to reducing the sentence with time served, there is another little bit of joy. It's called "good time" vs "bad time". If the convict behaves themselves thery get 2 for one credit on time served. In other words, every good behavior day counts as if he had served 2 days not just one. This further cuts the time spent in incarceration. It helps avoid overcrowding of prisoners so they can be released to prey on victims again.

Angus · « **Reply #70 on:** January 30, 2007, 12:20:18 PM »

So this is a screwup case, or so it looks.

x0847Marine · « **Reply #71 on:** January 30, 2007, 04:28:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
Angus,

That credit is used all the time. Many defendants are not allowed bail as they are either a flight from prosecution risk, or they are simply too dangerous to be allowed out to prey on either victims or witnesses. The "time served" issue also applies to the sentence they receive at the end of the trial.

In addition to reducing the sentence with time served, there is another little bit of joy. It's called "good time" vs "bad time". If the convict behaves themselves thery get 2 for one credit on time served. In other words, every good behavior day counts as if he had served 2 days not just one. This further cuts the time spent in incarceration. It helps avoid overcrowding of prisoners so they can be released to prey on victims again.

LA County jail gives 3 days credit for every 1, 5/1 days for trustees, they wont accept outstanding warrants unless the total is $10k+. An average traffic citation warrant is about $250. Some folks get the option to spend the weekend in jail which consists of 6hours being booked in, then booked out.

Now imagine non violent drug offenders were kicked out, there just might be room to hold rapist scum.

Keep in mind how inefficient the illegal drug market is.. which inflates prices. If drugs were made legal you can bet corporate America would churn them out at 1/100th the price, the .gov would tax the mofo out of them. Coke could offer their original formula with just enough stimulant to give a buzz, RJRs pack'o pot cigs would be $4.00, opiate teas sold like beer with ID over the counter.. etc These smaller more pure dosages are controlled, just like beers can only have a certain alcohol %..

Why do junkies get so desperate?, to avoid withdrawals.. which is physical torture, rather than steal your radio.. the addict can go to 7-11 and buy a 6-pack of Coke with coke for the same price as beer.

lazs2 · « **Reply #72 on:** January 31, 2007, 09:22:22 AM »

I would say less than beer... sell him a pound of crank or coke or heroin for what it costs to make... or... if he can't afford it just give him a pound. If he gives it away or sells it... put him in prison.

lazs

Gunthr · « **Reply #73 on:** January 31, 2007, 11:10:13 AM »

The idea of legalizing dangerous drugs has a seductive logic to it, but I'm against it for a couple of good reasons.

1. the nature of recreational drug use is escapism. this will inevitablely spill over into pursuits that contribute to society - sometimes called "gainful employment". for many recreational users, addiction will occur whether intentional or not. bad for production.

2. if dangerous drugs are more available, there will be more emotionally and intellectually impaired, and more intensely impaired, people around - not a good thing as far as I'm concerned. legalizing dangerous drugs makes their use more socially acceptable, therefore, numbers of users will increase.

3. legalizing drugs would inevitablely turn us into a socialist country.

john9001 · « **Reply #74 on:** January 31, 2007, 11:43:56 AM »

define "dangerous drugs " please.