They Say Crime Is On The Decrease....

[two fingers]

We are a society that has knowingly put innocent people to death.

"Knowingly"? In recent history? And you have proof?

I'm not taking a position on the death penalty. But flinging around accusations such as yours without a credible source is just irresponsible.

 

[loveandbass]

"Knowingly"? In recent history? And you have proof?

I'm not taking a position on the death penalty. But flinging around accusations such as yours without a credible source is just irresponsible.

Let me clarify...we NOW know that we have put innocent people to death. As far as knowing at the time; I dont have any info on that.

Sorry, i wasnt clear initially

 

[Pacman]

"Knowingly"? In recent history? And you have proof?

I'm not taking a position on the death penalty. But flinging around accusations such as yours without a credible source is just irresponsible.

Well, I remember a case recently of a Texas prosecutor who withheld evidence to get a death penalty conviction very recently.

 

[two fingers]

Well, I remember a case recently of a Texas prosecutor who withheld evidence to get a death penalty conviction very recently.

If proven that guy should be on trial for murder himself. That's not "a society knowingly" killing innocents. That's one jerk who should be on death row himself. Pre-meditated murder if you ask me.

 

[two fingers]

Let me clarify...we NOW know that we have put innocent people to death. As far as knowing at the time; I dont have any info on that.

Sorry, i wasnt clear initially

Fair enough. Sorry for the knee jerk.

 

[slobake]

Hey where did ZenG go? You still with us my brother?

 

[ZenG]

Yes...

One show I was watching it came down to "would you let your kids play outside by themselves now?".....and people on the show were espousing how they used to play unattended right up even when it got dark and they weren't near home.

In the area where I live alone I can cite 4 or 5 events recently in the past several months of strangers lurking in vans offering rides to children. There are also in the same area reports from women of guys exposing themselves and doing lewd things. And in the recent past in these same areas there have been rapes and murders on hiking trails.

Obviously when growing up these things occurred here and elsewhere as well......but I never heard of them like I do today ( yes...I know.....easier access to information and "real time").

Now it was said on one show that the child is far more likely to die or be injured from being driven to school than from being abducted.

And.....why are you worrying about terrorists when heart disease and diabetes kill more people than have ever been killed by terrorists?

There was that one woman who received an international sh*tstorm of abuse for letting her 9 year old child take the subway to school alone.

And now they are saying that "bubblewrapping" your kids is not good......they won't know what to do in a real encounter in life.

And that you should give them more "free range".....because it's good for them.

But personally I would not do that because of the sheer number of times I read/see about these aforementioned encounters on the news all the time.

So I'm not sure if the crime rate is really down. The stats often point to it being so. And they say you can't argue with stats ( although you could certainly argue with manipulated stats).......

But if this the safest time to live in history, I shudder to think what it was like at it's worst...

There is "perceived" crime...and then there's crime that actually happens.

The cases of arson up here (just where I live.....not "globally") seem to be rampant...it's hard to argue with watching a building burning down on the news and the fire chief saying it was arson....

Ditto for break-ins....road rage....assaults....computer rip-off crimes.....riots....etc etc .

On the other hand,it is more difficult for a person who has been incarcerated to get a job after that. Often they are refused work because of their record..

There must be a lot of people in North America who have a rough time finding a job due to the large number of people consistently being incarcerated in North America.
Many of these incarcerations are for "low end' trivial crimes.......crimes where the person could have turned their lives around with some counselling etc. but are now faced with a life long record.

It costs a lot of money to keep a person in prison. Was the public cost of incarceration worth the actual crime?

 

[Creede]

1) Old-fashioned racism. (Caucasians account for more than 60% of arrests for incarceratable crimes, but less than 20% of incarcerated convictions, while Hispanics and African-Americans account for less than 40% of arrests, but more than 70% of incarcerations.)

2) Prison is a profitable industry.

3) They need to be visible to retain their "value" to society.

4) They'll tell you that it's an answer to the increase in quality and capabilities of civilian arms, but you don't really see police actually use their hi-tech stuff against well-armed civilians. It's really to keep them safer while they violate your rights.

5) Because once we showed we were willing to have personal liberties curtailed in the name of security, they seized the opportunity and haven't let go of it since.

1) Correlation doesn't mean causation. Maybe more black and hispanic people are found guilty (which I don't believe is racism), so more are sent to prison. I don't think that enough people are racist for such a huge difference.

2) It costs money to keep people in prison. People aren't in prison because they produce cash, they're in prison because they're criminals.

3) That's easily one of the worst anti-cop arguments ever. If there is less crime, then there are more cops available, which means more cops arrive at a scence. Also, more cops means the criminal is less likely to do something drastic and kill/hurt someone.

4) The well-armed side of the police force only ever comes out when there is a riot that needs to be put down, or something else of that caliber. They are well-armed for the safety of the innocent people.

5) I really find nothing wrong with that, as long as it means the good people of this country (USA) are safe.

Yes...

One show I was watching it came down to "would you let your kids play outside by themselves now?".....and people on the show were espousing how they used to play unattended right up even when it got dark and they weren't near home.

In the area where I live alone I can cite 4 or 5 events recently in the past several months of strangers lurking in vans offering rides to children. There are also in the same area reports from women of guys exposing themselves and doing lewd things. And in the recent past in these same areas there have been rapes and murders on hiking trails.

Obviously when growing up these things occurred here and elsewhere as well......but I never heard of them like I do today ( yes...I know.....easier access to information and "real time").

Now it was said on one show that the child is far more likely to die or be injured from being driven to school than from being abducted.

And.....why are you worrying about terrorists when heart disease and diabetes kill more people than have ever been killed by terrorists?

There was that one woman who received an international sh*tstorm of abuse for letting her 9 year old child take the subway to school alone.

And now they are saying that "bubblewrapping" your kids is not good......they won't know what to do in a real encounter in life.

And that you should give them more "free range".....because it's good for them.

But personally I would not do that because of the sheer number of times I read/see about these aforementioned encounters on the news all the time.

So I'm not sure if the crime rate is really down. The stats often point to it being so. And they say you can't argue with stats ( although you could certainly argue with manipulated stats).......

But if this the safest time to live in history, I shudder to think what it was like at it's worst...

There is "perceived" crime...and then there's crime that actually happens.

The cases of arson up here (just where I live.....not "globally") seem to be rampant...it's hard to argue with watching a building burning down on the news and the fire chief saying it was arson....

Ditto for break-ins....road rage....assaults....computer rip-off crimes.....riots....etc etc .

On the other hand,it is more difficult for a person who has been incarcerated to get a job after that. Often they are refused work because of their record..

There must be a lot of people in North America who have a rough time finding a job due to the large number of people consistently being incarcerated in North America.
Many of these incarcerations are for "low end' trivial crimes.......crimes where the person could have turned their lives around with some counselling etc. but are now faced with a life long record.

It costs a lot of money to keep a person in prison. Was the public cost of incarceration worth the actual crime?

Maybe crime has gone down in certain areas, yet raised in others. What I mean by that is maybe the murder count is down while the kidnap or rape count is up. There might also be a lot less theivery now because of more security for stores and such.

Why do I worry (I don't really, but it's an issue) about terrorism when health issues kill more people? Because the individual does not choose to be killed by a terrorist. An individual does choose to live an unhealthy lifestyle that leads to their own death, but that is their own choice.

It is the criminal's choice to commit the crime. Are you suggesting we don't punish them for that? Sure, some counceling COULD help, but it isn't guaranteed. I think that putting someone in prison is worth the cost, if they commited the crime.

 

[slobake]

If we agree that crime is on the rise and things are worse, what should/can we do about it?

 

[fdeck]

An interesting blog post, not scientific or anything:

16 theories for why crime plummeted in the US - Vox

The apparent message is that are multiple hypotheses for the drop in crime, and there are doubts about each one.

 

[Pacman]

If proven that guy should be on trial for murder himself. That's not "a society knowingly" killing innocents. That's one jerk who should be on death row himself. Pre-meditated murder if you ask me.

I agree, nearly 100%. But if you think this is the only time this has happened, I think you're being naive.

 

[Richland123]

The city I live in for a couple decades in a row was annually named the safest metropolitan area in the U.S. It was ranked as number one out of 343 metropolitan areas as the city lowest in violent and property crimes. However, over the last 5 years, violent crimes such as frequent murders, beatings, robberies, burglary, etc. have increased drastically to erase that safest city designation. According to local authorities, 90% of the recent crimes are drug related and many of those crimes are caused by people who moved to the area from other cities and are either involved in drug trafficking activity or region residents who are stealing, shooting and such due to drug addiction.

So, we have not seen any decrease in crime but a major increase in crime in our area instead. It is a shame and a very sad state of affairs locally.

 

[Creede]

The death penalty isn't a terrible idea, we just need a surefire way that absolutely no innocent people are killed, which is an issue.

 

[slobake]

The city I live in for a couple decades in a row was annually named the safest metropolitan area in the U.S. It was ranked as number one out of 343 metropolitan areas as the city lowest in violent and property crimes. However, over the last 5 years, violent crimes such as frequent murders, beatings, robberies, burglary, etc. have increased drastically to erase that safest city designation. According to local authorities, 90% of the recent crimes are drug related and many of those crimes are caused by people who moved to the area from other cities and are either involved in drug trafficking activity or region residents who are stealing, shooting and such due to drug addiction.

So, we have not seen any decrease in crime but a major increase in crime in our area instead. It is a shame and a very sad state of affairs locally.

This is interesting. Do you think it is true that use of narcotics increases crime rates? Probably so. I did a little research to see if countries where they register addicts and give them drugs have lower crime rates. I couldn't come up with anything conclusive. There are a lot of other factors involved in crime rates.
Is it possible that registiring addicts and distributing drugs would reduce crime in the U.S.? I would almost certianly cut down on our prison population.

 

[yodedude2]

If proven that guy should be on trial for murder himself. That's not "a society knowingly" killing innocents. That's one jerk who should be on death row himself. Pre-meditated murder if you ask me.

if you're truly interested, here's a place to begin: Dallas County Cases Where DNA Has Proven Innocence — The Innocence Project

i believe the prosecuting attorney responsible for many of these incarcerations is dead. he was also accused of withholding evidence he believed might lessen his chance of a conviction, but i have not done much research on that myself so consider it hearsay. there was an interesting article in texas monthly at some point regarding cornelius dupree.

edit: the point is that the court system representing the interests of society was corrupted to such a degree by those entrusted to maintain a high ethical standard.

 

[Richland123]

This is interesting. Do you think it is true that use of narcotics increases crime rates? Probably so. I did a little research to see if countries where they register addicts and give them drugs have lower crime rates. I couldn't come up with anything conclusive. There are a lot of other factors involved in crime rates.
Is it possible that registiring addicts and distributing drugs would reduce crime in the U.S.? I would almost certianly cut down on our prison population.

I was at a meeting recently with the police chief in the large township where I live outside of the city. He told us that the huge spike in violent crime in the township and surrounding municipalities lately is mostly due to heroin sales and usage as well as some other drugs. He also told us that almost of the retail theft in the township is drug related too.

 

[monkeyfinger]

Heroine abuse is a massive epidemic thanks to in large part to oxycodone.

 

[two fingers]

I agree, nearly 100%. But if you think this is the only time this has happened, I think you're being naive.

Oh I don't doubt that.

But if we get rid of everything that human nature run amuck could possibly use for unintended evil purposes there would be no guns (not even law enforcement because they are, after all, human), no cars, no computers, no medications that are toxic if taken in high doses, etc.

So, getting rid of the death penalty because of three or four evil guys is a bit naive as well. The deterrent that it is for society (in my view if course) is worth the risk.

That being said, I have always been for creative punishment. If a prosecutor is found guilty of such misconduct, the family of the victim should be able to throw the switch on him.

 

[Creede]

Oh I don't doubt that.

But if we get rid of everything that human nature run amuck could possibly use for unintended evil purposes there would be no guns (not even law enforcement because they are, after all, human), no cars, no computers, no medications that are toxic if taken in high doses, etc.

So, getting rid of the death penalty because of three or four evil guys is a bit naive as well. The deterrent that it is for society (in my view if course) is worth the risk.

That being said, I have always been for creative punishment. If a prosecutor is found guilty of such misconduct, the family of the victim should be able to throw the switch on him.

Really, I agree with you mostly. I don't think families should get a choice, because it would cause a bunch of emotional damage. If you had to choose between letting you father live or die, that would wreck you emotionally (more than if he was sentenced to death by the gov't).

Like I said earlier, I think that we should be 99.9% certain that someone is guilty before we execute said person. I'd say 100%, but the fact is that it's near impossible to be 100% sure of anything. Oh, and if you withhold evidence that would deter someone from being executed, then you should be put on trial for murder as well.

 

[One Drop]

Oh I don't doubt that.

But if we get rid of everything that human nature run amuck could possibly use for unintended evil purposes there would be no guns (not even law enforcement because they are, after all, human), no cars, no computers, no medications that are toxic if taken in high doses, etc.

So, getting rid of the death penalty because of three or four evil guys is a bit naive as well. The deterrent that it is for society (in my view if course) is worth the risk.

That being said, I have always been for creative punishment. If a prosecutor is found guilty of such misconduct, the family of the victim should be able to throw the switch on him.

Unfortunately the death penalty is not a deterrent.