1 in 100 US adults now in prison

[grandpa]

Quote by: Piscean What it means is that our society is way more nazi than anyone wants to face.

In fact, neo-Nazi groups (and other right-wing extremist groups) have never totally gone away.
I've even heard such groups have grown in membership in recent years.

Grandpa h.

[ironeagle]

There are certainly many reasons for the intense growth and sheer mass of criminals in our country. To name a few not mentioned here, fathers or mothers jailed for non payment of child support are one of the highest incarcerated in the u.s. Even though being too poor to afford to pay is not a crime, the states continue to put them behind bars, costing the tax payers more money and ultematley having no effect what so ever on the child getting any support. Fines will not solve the problem most would rather serve the time because they won't be able to pay the fines anyway.

Another problem is we have become to socialistic whereas we require individuals to pruchase insurance for vehicles, or the like againts their will and they can't afford it or don't want it. Laws of these nature undermin freedom of choice and privacy and are causing too many things to be considered crimes. I also don't agree only "violent criminals should be behind bars, because those who commit fraud unless jailed will continue to defraud innocent people of their life savings, and people who got in a bar fight are not necisarily violent criminals society should fear and lock away for life.

[Nono]

Quote by: eagle We have become to socialistic whereas we require individuals to pruchase insurance for vehicles, or the like againts their will and they can't afford it or don't want it. Laws of these nature undermin freedom of choice and privacy and are causing too many things to be considered crimes.

Oh well it follows then that Finland-Sweden-Norway-Canada etc.etc. will have a similarly absurd number (or greater) of their citizens behind bars.

They don't though. So better think again.

[JaneDoe321]

Quote by: ironeagle There are certainly many reasons for the intense growth and sheer mass of criminals in our country. To name a few not mentioned here, fathers or mothers jailed for non payment of child support are one of the highest incarcerated in the u.s. Even though being too poor to afford to pay is not a crime, the states continue to put them behind bars, costing the tax payers more money and ultematley having no effect what so ever on the child getting any support. Fines will not solve the problem most would rather serve the time because they won't be able to pay the fines anyway.

In addition, by giving people a "record" you make it less likely they can afford decent paying jobs, and so they're LESS likely to pay their support (using the example), etc etc etc.

It's really ridiculous.

I don't think it's due to socialist ideals, though. I think it's due to Americans being LAZY and not wanting to have to *think* about situations so they create one-size-fits-nobody reactions for things (zero tolerance, three strikes you're out, mandatory sentencing, etc etc).

[ThoughtCriminal]

Quote by: JaneDoe321 In addition, by giving people a "record" you make it less likely they can afford decent paying jobs, and so they're LESS likely to pay their support (using the example), etc etc etc. It's really ridiculous. I don't think it's due to socialist ideals, though. I think it's due to Americans being LAZY and not wanting to have to *think* about situations so they create one-size-fits-nobody reactions for things (zero tolerance, three strikes you're out, mandatory sentencing, etc etc).

More simply it's the pointless war on drugs.

TC

[ironeagle]

Americans are not all lazy, in fact it is lazy socialists who do not believe they should have to become as highley educated, and earn higher wages to pay for the things they want that are lazy. Americans can work as hard as they want to and still never be able to make a fair living, and that directly effects crime.

[JaneDoe321]

Quote by: ThoughtCriminal More simply it's the pointless war on drugs. TC

It's not just the war on drugs, though, at least that would give us a tangible, definable thing to rail against.

[ThoughtCriminal]

Quote by: JaneDoe321 It's not just the war on drugs, though, at least that would give us a tangible, definable thing to rail against.

No, really, drug-related crimes are what fill our prisons. If we legalized (and, of course, regulated) drugs, we'd have empty prisons.

TC

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Nono OK, there's a strong streak of Old-Testament vindictiveness in the American mindset. Not to mention a mint to be made from prisons privatized by a crony-friendly government. But my question is what's going to happen when the proportion of incarcerated population begins to outweigh the capacity to keep 'em behind bars. Only a matter of time.

What are we supposed to do?

If someone is caught selling coke for the first time just slap the wrist and say move along? Or "oh it's only a minor assault charge" or a "minor" DUI. Feel free to get off easy this time.

Or let me guess... legalize drugs, lower the drinking age, and legalize prostitution, and drop the age of majority laws? Keep people out of jail by dropping laws and sayings it's all good, feel free to get high, have sex for cash, and F*ck 14 year olds.

[grandpa]

Quote by: HelioPrime What are we supposed to do? If someone is caught selling coke for the first time just slap the wrist and say move along?

There are a number of options.

(a) don't buy cocaine yourself
(b) organize to give people something better to do with their time

As I have said before, society offers many reasons to totally drop out and use harmful drugs. It's a dog-eat-dog world. Many people are willing to build a log cabin on you.

Grandpa h.

[ThoughtCriminal]

Quote by: HelioPrime What are we supposed to do? If someone is caught selling coke for the first time just slap the wrist and say move along? Or "oh it's only a minor assault charge" or a "minor" DUI. Feel free to get off easy this time. Or let me guess... legalize drugs, lower the drinking age, and legalize prostitution, and drop the age of majority laws? Keep people out of jail by dropping laws and sayings it's all good, feel free to get high, have sex for cash, and F*ck 14 year olds.

Legalize, but regulate, drugs. Lower the drinking age to 18 across the board, because it's absurd to tell legal adults they can't drink. As for sex, we need laws that protect children, but not laws that make sex itself a crime.

TC

[JaneDoe321]

Quote by: HelioPrime What are we supposed to do? If someone is caught selling coke for the first time just slap the wrist and say move along? Or "oh it's only a minor assault charge" or a "minor" DUI. Feel free to get off easy this time. Or let me guess... legalize drugs, lower the drinking age, and legalize prostitution, and drop the age of majority laws? Keep people out of jail by dropping laws and sayings it's all good, feel free to get high, have sex for cash, and F*ck 14 year olds.

Well we could swing wildly off onto a tangent, I suppose...

I don't think the majority of people favor (not that the "majority" should rule, but for argument's sake) descending into complete anarchy. I personally don't trust people that much.

However, the attempt to legislate "sense" has pretty much backfired. IN fact, I would say that over-regulation of ~everything~ has resulted in a society where prisons are overflowing and we're STILL not safe on the4 streets, so yes, I DO think a serious look at overhaul is in order.

[Jack]

Another problem is we have become to socialistic whereas we require individuals to pruchase insurance for vehicles, or the like againts their will and they can't afford it or don't want it.

While I'm not usually one to defend the insurance industry, I do not care if someone cannot afford or doesn't want insurance. If they can't afford it they shouldn't drive. It's no different than if they can't afford gas. Gas, oil, maintenance, a license and insurance are all required if you want to operate a vehicle on public roads. If they don't want insurance, too bad. We don't necessarily carry insurance to protect ourselves. We carry it to protect others. Your insurance provides me with compensation should you plow into me while mine protects you. You don't have to have insurance. At least in California you can set aside funds in a bank account to provide compensation in place of insurance.

[ironeagle]

One point aboput insurance I would like to make is that , the government does not have the right to force citizens to buy a product, insurance although useful is a product. Additionaly the laws need to be equal for all, so if insurance is required then an insurance company should not have the right to decide a person cannot have their policy.

[ThoughtCriminal]

Quote by: ironeagle One point aboput insurance I would like to make is that , the government does not have the right to force citizens to buy a product, insurance although useful is a product. Additionaly the laws need to be equal for all, so if insurance is required then an insurance company should not have the right to decide a person cannot have their policy.

Auto insurance is highyl regulated, so it's not trivial for a customer to be refused. Instead, if they're high risk then they're given a high price, which tends to send them elsewhere.

In any case, the goal here is to protect people from uninsured drivers who do not have the assets to be successfully sued. Some states allow, as an alternative to insurance, for people to self-insure.

TC

[Sweet Katie]

There is a breakdown that begins with parents not teaching responsibilities and not providing strong moral foundations for their children. Then, the breakdown continues with an extremely flawed educational system with teachers pointing fingers at parents when situations occur. The common dominator for school shootings is that the students feel (think) that they are not a part of their institutions of learning. Schools needs to focus on better participation and acceptance of all students, including all school personnel taking personal responsibility when situations occur and ask, "Where are we failing the students and how can we do better?"

If more attention would be paid to teaching children responsibility and adults taking responsibility the prison rate would decrease within a couple of generations.

[ThoughtCriminal]

Quote by: Sweet Katie There is a breakdown that begins with parents not teaching responsibilities and not providing strong moral foundations for their children. Then, the breakdown continues with an extremely flawed educational system with teachers pointing fingers at parents when situations occur. The common dominator for school shootings is that the students feel (think) that they are not a part of their institutions of learning. Schools needs to focus on better participation and acceptance of all students, including all school personnel taking personal responsibility when situations occur and ask, "Where are we failing the students and how can we do better?" If more attention would be paid to teaching children responsibility and adults taking responsibility the prison rate would decrease within a couple of generations.

I'm not sure that this is an answer. I suggest two things:

First of all, if you want to lower crime, the main thing you can do is keep society stable. If people have jobs, they have too much to lose, thus dissuading them from genuine criminal acts. This means social programs that help people get back on their feet so they can be part of the economy in a legal way.

Second, we need to stop imprisoning people for things that are not genuine criminal acts. I'm not a big fan of either recreational drug use or prostitution, but criminalization is an utter failure, resulting in little impact on the activity but lots of generally decent people behind bars. By legalizing but regulating these activities, we gain some ability to offset the bad parts, without flooding our prisons.

TC

[grandpa]

Quote by: ThoughtCriminal I'm not sure that this is an answer. I suggest two things: First of all, if you want to lower crime, the main thing you can do is keep society stable.

I agree, but jobs don't necessarily mean "stability," economically or otherwise. As any worthwhile economist will tell you, instability is part of the program.

Grandpa h.

[Sweet Katie]

Quote by: ThoughtCriminal I'm not sure that this is an answer. I suggest two things: First of all, if you want to lower crime, the main thing you can do is keep society stable. If people have jobs, they have too much to lose, thus dissuading them from genuine criminal acts. This means social programs that help people get back on their feet so they can be part of the economy in a legal way. Second, we need to stop imprisoning people for things that are not genuine criminal acts. I'm not a big fan of either recreational drug use or prostitution, but criminalization is an utter failure, resulting in little impact on the activity but lots of generally decent people behind bars. By legalizing but regulating these activities, we gain some ability to offset the bad parts, without flooding our prisons. TC

Absolutely disagree. The solution to reducing criminal acts isn't making less acts criminal.

Also, while I agree that economic independence may reduce certain criminal acts, employment doesn't guarantee social responsibility or a higher moral integrity. Specific examples: I am employed by a relatively small company (approximately 400 people). In the past month, there have been two serious criminal incidents. One employee was shot/killed by the local police. The other employee shot another person in a round-the-way, neighborhood scuffle. Interestingly enough, the brother of the person shot in the second example also works at the same company.

Furthermore, the argument has been made through studies that sociopathic tendencies are a shared characteristic among leaders. Given the skills required to succeed in the aggressive, competitive business world and my own experiences, I agree with studies. White collar crime is common and frequently companies deal with it internally.

[ThoughtCriminal]

Quote by: grandpa I agree, but jobs don't necessarily mean "stability," economically or otherwise. As any worthwhile economist will tell you, instability is part of the program. Grandpa h.

I understand your point, but what I was getting at is that people who have a steady income have more to lose from crime and less time to do things like riot in the streets.

TC