Hi everyone, I think that every person has his right to live in a society no matter even if he was a prisoner in his early life. Most of the prisoners are racial or ethnic minorities and have difficulty in re-entering the society as they are faced with poverty and this leads to crime for which they are re-arrested are convicted and re-incarcerated and this adds a burden on the government in respect of tax-payers. What are your views on this?
You must consider that they are not "prisoners" because they are racial or ethnic minorities, but because they live in poverty to begin with. The underlying social factor here is not race or ethnicity, but poverty. In short, every American citizen is guaranteed equal rights and equal protection. The playing field is far from level, however, but the conditions to personally level it are quite fair. In effect, while not everyone is presented with the same financial situation, everyone has the capacity to seek employment and to provide for themselves and/or their family a decent living.Quote by: tuhgfrasd
Being held accountable for crimes, however, may forsake some opportunities. These are the ramifications of a personal choice. They are personal consequences.
Often it's argued that reducing long-term poverty reduces the risk of anti-social behavior, and I agree wholeheartedly.
Grandpa h.
Post by post, building his arguments by smashing a couple of theirs -- for America.
On the face of it a good idea but probably will go to waist due to inefficient and corrupt bureaucratic system
I believe the "justice system" is set up (intentionally or not) to be self-sustaining. There is virtually no rehabilitation whatso*ever* available and the primary skills learned in prison are only useful with regards to living within *that* society, not the greater society.
Bad stuff all the way around.
I don't think prisons are intended to "work"...let alone designed that way.
Grandpa h.
Post by post, building his arguments by smashing a couple of theirs -- for America.
Those who commit offenses against society have no inherent right of return. That they are allowed to return to society is solely a benevolence on the part of the society and they should be thankful for it and show their appreciation by being model citizens.
Now, for some of the nonsense in your post, poverty does not lead to crime! There are millions of poor people in the United States who are not out there committing crimes. What leads to crime is people making the choice to commit crimes. Crime is solely an act of the will.
How benevolent is a society that maintains prisons as a cure for much of
human incompetence or evil? Also, define "model citizen."
Grandpa h.
Post by post, building his arguments by smashing a couple of theirs -- for America.
You, sir, have clearly never gone days without being able to buy food.Now, for some of the nonsense in your post, poverty does not lead to crime! There are millions of poor people in the United States who are not out there committing crimes. What leads to crime is people making the choice to commit crimes. Crime is solely an act of the will.
Not all poor commit crime, obviously, but the vast majority of crime is committed by the poor. The rich have very little incentive to commit most crimes (though they do have their own varieties), whereas the poor can significantly improve their lives with just a few misdemeanors. Not all will choose to do so, but they do have the choice to make, every day. For most rich folk, such choices never enter serious consideration.
Those for whom the system works have far more respect for it; the rest are inclined to consider it a con, to which they feel no moral obligation to accede.
Whoa! Most acts of petty crime are committed by the poor, but the biggest crimes of all are drafted by the rich and powerful.
In fact, the rich and power seek to control access to land, food, energy and our capacity for trade 9and even access to information).
In 2000, Cuba was actually allowed to purchase more than $140 million worth of U.S. food, including rice, wheat,
beans, peas, pork lard, apples, and some brand-name packaged products. What does this exchange between US and Cuban officials indicate? That elites seek to do just what I say. They might compete with each other on some level, but what they do is still essentially tyrannical and makes for ignorant and unwholesome societies.
So of course poverty often leads to anti-social behavior, though Chancellor abides by the fantastical idea that class struggle doesn't create such problems.
Obviously, billions of women say "yes" to prostitution the world over, and if one feels he/she needs to steal or rob someone to get by, the person might just do it. It's not rocket science. We can either be ideological like Chancellor, or we can exercise common sense logical deduction.
Grandpa h.
Post by post, building his arguments by smashing a couple of theirs -- for America.
Actually, I have.
No, MOST poor people don't commit crimes. In fact, it is such a significant majority of poor people that do not commit crimes that it eliminates poverty as a cause.Not all poor commit crime, obviously, but the vast majority of crime is committed by the poor.
Well, their incentives are just different, e.g. because they can get away with it.The rich have very little incentive to commit most crimes (though they do have their own varieties), whereas the poor can significantly improve their lives with just a few misdemeanors. Not all will choose to do so, but they do have the choice to make, every day. For most rich folk, such choices never enter serious consideration.
But it still doesn't make poverty a cause of crime. There is only one actual cause of crime: personal choice.Those for whom the system works have far more respect for it; the rest are inclined to consider it a con, to which they feel no moral obligation to accede.
On this issue, you always seem to assume we're making a 100% causative argument. We're not. We're talking about probability, likelihood. There is certainly no perfect explanation for why people commit anti-social acts, but common sense indicates that poverty -- that is, lack of resources, education and opportunities -- is one of them. Your explanation is philosophical hype having little to do with life as it happens. It's nice to assume some in hard times are totally above theft, robbery, prostitution and killing, but when it comes down to it many are not -- and for common sense reasons. Most will do what they have to in order to get by.
Grandpa h.
Post by post, building his arguments by smashing a couple of theirs -- for America.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks