5 facts behind America's high incarceration rate

[CFM]

Let that be a lesson not to make such assumptions. I do agree with liberals on some issues, but I also disagree with them on a number. Not everybody is so black & white partisan.

Some people are fence riders that lack the ability to stand up for principles. They go with the way the wind blows.

 

[TrippyHippy]

That you call it stupid means you believe anyone not looking at it your way is stupid. Since it's not your money, making that statement proves you're an arrogant bastard.

I could say the same thing. That you call my position on it being stupid, stupid means you believe anyone not looking at it your way is stupid. Also, I seem to recall countless judgements on your part of my personal habits. Even in discussions miles away from the topic. So you are being pretty damn hypocritical here. I have the right to my personal opinion. I do not consider blowing all your money on lottery tickets and casino chips rather than saving it to be very smart. The important part in this discussion is that despite my personal opinion on it, I would never think of criminalizing it as people have a right to make their own mistakes.

Also, the bolded. You are resorting to personal attacks again. You did really good on the post before this. I would like to see you return to that manner of civility so we can continue this discussion.

That you think drug use itself only affects the person doing it is foolish and proves you haven't a clue about reality. If the sole reason someone takes the action is because the drug use caused it, you can't separate the two. If the person wouldn't have done it had drugs not been involved proves that.

So alcohol should be illegal then? Because the sole reason anybody would be driving under the influence is because they were under the influence. Nobody would drink and drive if nobody drank. But that's ludicrous, plenty of people drink without drinking and driving. It's the same damn concept. Hold people accountable for the actions they actually do, not for doing things that could lead to those actions. We can still arrest people who drink and drive without arresting people for just drinking. In the same way, we can arrest people who commit harmful acts while under the influence of drugs without arresting people for just using those drugs.

That there are a lot of laws which can be numbered is objective. Whether or not it's too many is subjective. My opposition to the gun laws aren't that they don't work because criminals for which they are designed don't follow them.

Well my opposition to the hundreds of thousands of laws we have governing every sphere of human interaction is that they don't work. Because you can't follow laws you don't even know exist. If we simplified our laws and reduced the number of them, people would have an easier time obeying them.

And btw that logic ("the criminals don't follow them") could be applied to literally any laws. Including and especially drug laws. That is the quintessential hypocrisy of many conservatives. Gun laws don't work because criminals don't follow laws. But somehow guns are pretty much the only type of laws that logic is applied to. Why is beyond me. Well....actually let me correct myself. It's because you like guns. And think we should have them. This is the very thing you accused me of doing earlier. And that's what I mean when I say you like to deflect alot. You accuse me of shit you're doing yourself to try and distract from you doing it.

Using the common sense argument claiming people that don't agree with you don't have it shows arrogance. You're saying you're right and everyone else is wrong. Again, that's arrogance.

It's still subjective no matter how hard you try to claim it isn't.

Why are you so intent on people agreeing with you. I know. Arrogance.

I don't care if people agree with me. I really don't. And to the point I don't think people should be locked up for doing things I don't agree with. Like drug use, gun use, gambling, etc. I'm perfectly within my right to have a personal opinion on effectiveness or intelligence of doing certain things as long as I don't force that view onto others.

You're the one that has convicted people on a daily basis without a trial.

Again, deflection. That is literally what you have done. You are assuming people arrested have probably done what they were arrested for, and thus should be held awaiting trial because it's dangerous to do otherwise. You are the one who is convicting people without a trial here.

If you want those that CLAIM they're not guilty to roam the streets until they're convicted, maybe the killer, rapist, etc. that should be held because they are a threat to society will make you or a family member your next victim. That may shock your drug addled brain back to reality.

We should most definitely hold people who are a threat to society. Like killers, rapists. We should not hold people who aren't. This is why you convict people of a crime before you lock them up. And we could do this immediately if our criminal justice system wasn't so bogged down with petty and nonviolent crimes. If our criminal justice system were focused on such egregious, inhuman acts like rape and murder. This way we can keep the dangerous people in our society away from others while actually operating like the free, just country we claim to be.

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

How is an objective number of 3 arbitrary?

I typed the wrong word and didn't feel like correcting it.



I thought Yurt would be the first to correct me, you win.

 

[TrippyHippy]

Some people are fence riders that lack the ability to stand up for principles. They go with the way the wind blows.

Not this again. Partisanship =/= principle. I have conviction in my principles, my principles just don't neatly fit into one camp or another. It's called thinking for yourself. Try it sometime.

 

[Getin the ring]

My theory on the incarceration rate being so high is that most of us choose to live in peace, without fear of someone attacking us in some way, be it theft, selling drugs on our streets, physical attack, or just not caring enough to understand right from wrong.
So you act like an idiot, off you go.

I also happen to think if we had zero tolorence we could practically eliminate crime. people by nature don't like punishment, but also by nature don't respect soft sentencing.

 

[Legion]

Which president signed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act?

Spoiler

Hint: it was her husband.

 

[CFM]

I could say the same thing. That you call my position on it being stupid, stupid means you believe anyone not looking at it your way is stupid. Also, I seem to recall countless judgements on your part of my personal habits. Even in discussions miles away from the topic. So you are being pretty damn hypocritical here. I have the right to my personal opinion. I do not consider blowing all your money on lottery tickets and casino chips rather than saving it to be very smart. The important part in this discussion is that despite my personal opinion on it, I would never think of criminalizing it as people have a right to make their own mistakes.

Also, the bolded. You are resorting to personal attacks again. You did really good on the post before this. I would like to see you return to that manner of civility so we can continue this discussion.



So alcohol should be illegal then? Because the sole reason anybody would be driving under the influence is because they were under the influence. Nobody would drink and drive if nobody drank. But that's ludicrous, plenty of people drink without drinking and driving. It's the same damn concept. Hold people accountable for the actions they actually do, not for doing things that could lead to those actions. We can still arrest people who drink and drive without arresting people for just drinking. In the same way, we can arrest people who commit harmful acts while under the influence of drugs without arresting people for just using those drugs.



Well my opposition to the hundreds of thousands of laws we have governing every sphere of human interaction is that they don't work. Because you can't follow laws you don't even know exist. If we simplified our laws and reduced the number of them, people would have an easier time obeying them.

And btw that logic ("the criminals don't follow them") could be applied to literally any laws. Including and especially drug laws. That is the quintessential hypocrisy of many conservatives. Gun laws don't work because criminals don't follow laws. But somehow guns are pretty much the only type of laws that logic is applied to. Why is beyond me. Well....actually let me correct myself. It's because you like guns. And think we should have them. This is the very thing you accused me of doing earlier. And that's what I mean when I say you like to deflect alot. You accuse me of shit you're doing yourself to try and distract from you doing it.



I don't care if people agree with me. I really don't. And to the point I don't think people should be locked up for doing things I don't agree with. Like drug use, gun use, gambling, etc. I'm perfectly within my right to have a personal opinion on effectiveness or intelligence of doing certain things as long as I don't force that view onto others.



Again, deflection. That is literally what you have done. You are assuming people arrested have probably done what they were arrested for, and thus should be held awaiting trial because it's dangerous to do otherwise. You are the one who is convicting people without a trial here.



We should most definitely hold people who are a threat to society. Like killers, rapists. We should not hold people who aren't. This is why you convict people of a crime before you lock them up. And we could do this immediately if our criminal justice system wasn't so bogged down with petty and nonviolent crimes. If our criminal justice system were focused on such egregious, inhuman acts like rape and murder. This way we can keep the dangerous people in our society away from others while actually operating like the free, just country we claim to be.

When you use terms like stupid and claim what you believe is common sense, it makes you an arrogant bastard because you believe your opinion is the only one that matters. that's more than stating an opinion. It's claiming that anyone that doesn't believe like you isn't practicing common sense as YOU define it. Also, it's not an attack on you when it's true.

Just like I hope those that support illegals here are affected by the actions of one, I hope someone gets behind the wheel of a car while smoked up and affects the person you love the most.

There could be 10 laws and people would still break them. It's not the number, it's the person.

What it boils down do is you're a spoiled brat that want to do drugs and doesn't like it when someone tells you no or makes it illegal to do so. It's that simple. You don't like being told no or people not agreeing with you. Arrogant bastard.

When you use terms like common sense, it proves you want people to agree with you. In your opinion, if they don't look at things like you they aren't using it. Is it that they aren't using common sense or aren't using what YOU define as common sense. There is a difference.

Who are you to determine who is a threat to society and who isn't? Who are you to determine whether something is a petty crime or not?

A free society doesn't mean YOU can do whatever YOU want, whenever YOU want, however YOU want to do it while expecting everyone to cater to you wants. That's not a society at all. Societies have rules. Sometimes those rule are ones you don't like. In those cases, you have three options. Live with it, change it, or move on. Since there are laws you obviously don't want to live with, you're left with two options. My suggestion, then, is you get going to try and change them or get the fuck out. YOU'RE choice. All I've seen from you so far is whining which goes back to the claim that you're a spoiled little brat that's only interested in how much pot he can smoke.

 

[CFM]

I typed the wrong word and didn't feel like correcting it.



I thought Yurt would be the first to correct me, you win.

OK.

It's really not a correction nor about winning. It was a question. Did you see the "?"

 

[CFM]

Not this again. Partisanship =/= principle. I have conviction in my principles, my principles just don't neatly fit into one camp or another. It's called thinking for yourself. Try it sometime.

If your principles align with that side it does.

When you go from one camp to another, that's not principled nor does it mean you are thinking. It means you can't decide.

BTW, thanks for once again proving that your arrogance hasn't gone away believing that someone taking a side isn't thinking and the only way someone can think is if they do it like you.

 

[TrippyHippy]

When you use terms like stupid and claim what you believe is common sense, it makes you an arrogant bastard because you believe your opinion is the only one that matters. that's more than stating an opinion. It's claiming that anyone that doesn't believe like you isn't practicing common sense as YOU define it. Also, it's not an attack on you when it's true.

Just like I hope those that support illegals here are affected by the actions of one, I hope someone gets behind the wheel of a car while smoked up and affects the person you love the most.

There could be 10 laws and people would still break them. It's not the number, it's the person.

What it boils down do is you're a spoiled brat that want to do drugs and doesn't like it when someone tells you no or makes it illegal to do so. It's that simple. You don't like being told no or people not agreeing with you. Arrogant bastard.

When you use terms like common sense, it proves you want people to agree with you. In your opinion, if they don't look at things like you they aren't using it. Is it that they aren't using common sense or aren't using what YOU define as common sense. There is a difference.

Who are you to determine who is a threat to society and who isn't? Who are you to determine whether something is a petty crime or not?

A free society doesn't mean YOU can do whatever YOU want, whenever YOU want, however YOU want to do it while expecting everyone to cater to you wants. That's not a society at all. Societies have rules. Sometimes those rule are ones you don't like. In those cases, you have three options. Live with it, change it, or move on. Since there are laws you obviously don't want to live with, you're left with two options. My suggestion, then, is you get going to try and change them or get the fuck out. YOU'RE choice. All I've seen from you so far is whining which goes back to the claim that you're a spoiled little brat that's only interested in how much pot he can smoke.

Nice. You somehow managed to dodge *every single* argument I made in favor of basically "you're a spoiled brat who likes pot lol." Oh and can't forget your signature "hope somebody drives while smoking a joint and kills your family." Guess we're done. It really is difficult for you to be civil and intelligent isn't it?




p.s I did try.

 

[CFM]

Nice. You somehow managed to dodge *every single* argument I made in favor of basically "you're a spoiled brat who likes pot lol." Oh and can't forget your signature "hope somebody drives while smoking a joint and kills your family." Guess we're done. It really is difficult for you to be civil and intelligent isn't it?




p.s I did try.

When you act like a spoiled brat that thinks people should agree with what you call common sense, don't be shocked if someone identifies you as one.

As for hoping someone smoking pot gets behind the wheel and affects your family, since you believe smoking pot should be legal, why should I think it should happen to me?

I noticed you, like so many other cowards when people don't agree, hide behind the thread ban like a fucking pussy. Typical of those that expect people to say what they want to hear and say it in a manner they want to hear it. Guess you're just another punk bitch that runs when he doesn't get want he wants.