Cue-Ball
Regular Member
imported post
Blackthorne is the first thing I thought of as well.
Blackthorne is the first thing I thought of as well.
Great discussion Guys! This is what I was looking for!Exactly. This argument goes to very heart of individual liberty.
Suppressing the actions of others because they may be risky (according to the currently elected majority) is prejudice.
Actions that actually harm others, on the other hand, should be punished swiftly, consistantly, and firmly.
Perhaps our entire library of laws could be replaced with "If its not yours don't touch it."
You aren't gaining any popularity as the DE OC poster child. I wonder what law enforcement and others think when they read posts like this? I know they read this forum because we discuss it. This is the kind of crap that hurtsthe mission.
If you think about it, this:
asforme wrote:"tough on crime" because that usually means tough on freedom Therefor living in the world we do, I would rather have more murderers and rapists on the streets due to a lax punishment system
"
Is simply a parphrase of Benjamin Franklin's famous quote; "[t]hose who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Possibly combined with Blackthorne's "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
There are thousands of years worth of quotes along these lines. And they are all correct.
I would rather be at risk of dieing at the hand of an individual whom I can cautiously avoid or defend myself against then try to defend myself against the government who is willing to give up my freedom as collateral damage in insuring public safety.Jim675 wrote:If you think about it, this:
asforme wrote:"tough on crime" because that usually means tough on freedom Therefor living in the world we do, I would rather have more murderers and rapists on the streets due to a lax punishment system
"
Is simply a parphrase of Benjamin Franklin's famous quote; "[t]hose who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Possibly combined with Blackthorne's "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
There are thousands of years worth of quotes along these lines. And they are all correct.
But what if rather than the one innocent not suffer the one innocent dies. You argument right there is contradictory in that allowing those ten to go free will just as easily result in the one innocent suffereing as it will in one innocent not suffering.
Or are you saying that it is OK to allow people to drive drunk and kill someone as long as we don't stop any innocent non-drunks.
Most of us will suffer death, indeed we suffer life (as in endure) and others illiteracy. Suffering is not limited to unnecessarily prolonged pain.But what if rather than the one innocent not suffer the one innocent dies. You argument right there is contradictory in that allowing those ten to go free will just as easily result in the one innocent suffereing as it will in one innocent not suffering.
Or are you saying that it is OK to allow people to drive drunk and kill someone as long as we don't stop any innocent non-drunks.
Every man dies... Not every man truly lives.Most of us will suffer death, indeed we suffer life (as in endure) and others illiteracy. Suffering is not limited to unnecessarily prolonged pain.
I am NOT government-bashing. I am suggesting improvements, or rather corrections to return us to a course closer to that of what the founding fathers envisioned.How do you feel personally about defendingour country? How about military service?With all this talk of freedom, how far are you willing to really go to protect that freedom? Would you lay down your life for the freedoms that are provided to you by this country? So far I just hear government bashing rhetoric, bad laws, infringed rights. So what is it?
If you libertarians want to espouse your principles, I get the same shot, too.
+100Hawker wrote:I am NOT government-bashing. I am suggesting improvements, or rather corrections to return us to a course closer to that of what the founding fathers envisioned.How do you feel personally about defendingour country? How about military service?With all this talk of freedom, how far are you willing to really go to protect that freedom? Would you lay down your life for the freedoms that are provided to you by this country? So far I just hear government bashing rhetoric, bad laws, infringed rights. So what is it?
If you libertarians want to espouse your principles, I get the same shot, too.
I chose to be in the Army for 12 years, including deployment to Desert Storm (OK - it was the only war going while I was in ). I do not feel that gov. service should ever be coerced via a draft.
I've never accepted a handout from anyone. I am middle-aged, a parent and a grand-parent. I've been employed and financially independant since I was 14.
I welcome you to espouse your principles. I just hope they're something more than "if you disagree with me you're scum".
Any other personal complaints or does that now make it valid for me to have an opinion?
I feel that it is a great cause for those willing to do it.How do you feel personally about defendingour country?
Currently the missions that the current administration has our military involved in have little to do with defending our country. I have no interest in military service under the current administration.How about military service?
If I was willing to die for the freedoms that the founding fathers fought for I would be staging a second American revolutions. Obviously I am not because I have decided that staying alive to provide for my wife and son are more important to me than any political principles.With all this talk of freedom, how far are you willing to really go to protect that freedom? Would you lay down your life for the freedoms that are provided to you by this country?
Yes, I have very little trust or respect for the current American government. While it is still the best in the world, it is a far cry from what the founding fathers created 200 years ago.So far I just hear government bashing rhetoric, bad laws, infringed rights. So what is it?
What principles? I have not read any articulation of values or ideas for what you think the system of government should be, only attacks against those who favor a Constitutional limited government. I would love to debate principles with you, but you have not presented any, instead you have simply continued with personal attacks, the latest of which seems to be a baseless, typical neo-conservative attack on my patriotism.If you libertarians want to espouse your principles, I get the same shot, too.
Libertarian's do not advocate a "free-for-all" society. We simply advocate limited government. The government should prevent use of force against unconsenting others - nothing more, nothing less.Libertarians are all about free-for-all issues and it will invoke a response from what I've been called... a "neo-conservative", whatever that is.
I commend your enthusiasm for freedom, but I do not agree with you. I notice you are 20 years old. That says alot. I'm 58 now, graduated from a military academy, served my country in the US Army in wartime, raised a family, and finished up a career flying jet aircraft for 30 years.
We (you and me) represent different cultures and will make decisions based on life's experiences. I suspect when you get some more experience you will become somewhat more conservative in your thinking. Right now I'll bet you might even be an Obama supporter. I'm not.
Have a good day. I don't have any more to contribute to this. Thanks for your posts.
I believe the system is totally messed up. Criminals aren't afraid of the consequences of their actions. Heck, even after years in prison, many are released and commit another (the same) crime right away. Wait. Wasn't he just rehabilitated? NOT.
Good post. My thought exactly. I'd make them work!. Got a Skill? Any bussiness can come pick you up like day workers. Pay the system a fair wage but none goes to the criminal. Buy him a bag lunch. End of the day, back to jail. No tv!. Lights out at sunset. Lock down!I believe the system is totally messed up. Criminals aren't afraid of the consequences of their actions. Heck, even after years in prison, many are released and commit another (the same) crime right away. Wait. Wasn't he just rehabilitated? NOT.
Imagine this:I'm at the lowest point of my life, and maybe on the brink of homelessness or starvation, why wouldn't I commit a crime and get sent to jail? Desperation causes bad decisions. Face it: maybe I think it can't get any worse, and I have nothing to lose (I've already lost it all). Actually, maybe it would be seen as a good decision: for some individuals, jail is probably better than what they have now! I mean, free room and board, entertainment, exercise, TV, library, etc. It's allprovided to inmates. Andhaven't some inmates sued for better conditions, and won?
Perhaps making jail a less positive place would be a good start? Maybe having inmates WORK their butts off instead of freeloading off the system would be a good start? No TV for entertainment. No weight rooms to get stronger to inflict more pain onto victims later. Maybe they have to work to earn their meals. Maybe they have to take some classes and earn a degree before they can get out....
I don't know what would help. But something has to change inside the "system" or else nothing will change outside the system.
That's why I find so much of the discussion of prison sentences irrelevant. I support the death penalty not as a deterrent, but because it removes that person from society permanently.I believe the system is totally messed up. Criminals aren't afraid of the consequences of their actions. Heck, even after years in prison, many are released and commit another (the same) crime right away. Wait. Wasn't he just rehabilitated? NOT.
There was a great study that I read a few years ago about the effect of increased punishment on crime reduction and rehabilitation. I have no idea who did the study but I remember they interview prisoners serving time for everything from minor offenses to murder trying to determine if the length of the possible sentence had any effect on whether they comminted the crime or not.
What they found was that the length of the possible sentence had little effect as 87% of all prisoners said that they had no idea that they would ever be caught. Whether it was 3 month, 3 years or 30 years had no effect on the decision to commit the crime as getting caught was the last thing on their mind.
Now keeping someone in jail 30 years vs. 3 months will keep them from committing a crime against the public for an addidtional 29+ years but when they get out if they aren't worried about getting caught then there hasn't been much rehabilitation. What this study basically said was that about 13% of prisoners can be rehabilitated but the rest might as well stay locked up forever.
I'd have to disagree with Dave here... Encarceration does not equal rehabilitation -- that's just 'paying their debt to society.' Unless there are social and counciling programs available inside of the institution aimed towards correcting the behavior and preparing them for reintegration into society, the added stigma of being a convict, in conjunction with whatever socioeconomic situation they have at home has a strong possibility of leading to recidivism.dave_in_delaware wrote:Good post. My thought exactly. I'd make them work!. Got a Skill? Any bussiness can come pick you up like day workers. Pay the system a fair wage but none goes to the criminal. Buy him a bag lunch. End of the day, back to jail. No tv!. Lights out at sunset. Lock down!I believe the system is totally messed up. Criminals aren't afraid of the consequences of their actions. Heck, even after years in prison, many are released and commit another (the same) crime right away. Wait. Wasn't he just rehabilitated? NOT.
Imagine this:I'm at the lowest point of my life, and maybe on the brink of homelessness or starvation, why wouldn't I commit a crime and get sent to jail? Desperation causes bad decisions. Face it: maybe I think it can't get any worse, and I have nothing to lose (I've already lost it all). Actually, maybe it would be seen as a good decision: for some individuals, jail is probably better than what they have now! I mean, free room and board, entertainment, exercise, TV, library, etc. It's allprovided to inmates. Andhaven't some inmates sued for better conditions, and won?
Perhaps making jail a less positive place would be a good start? Maybe having inmates WORK their butts off instead of freeloading off the system would be a good start? No TV for entertainment. No weight rooms to get stronger to inflict more pain onto victims later. Maybe they have to work to earn their meals. Maybe they have to take some classes and earn a degree before they can get out....
I don't know what would help. But something has to change inside the "system" or else nothing will change outside the system.
Thanks