Two New York cops shot dead, execution style

[warhorse78]

That is not what happens at all.

Sure it is. It's a big money making scheme for the prison owners and the drug owners (it's why Marijuana is still a controversey) and the sad fact that most of the prisoners are in there for drug offenses. The war on drugs is just one giant money making scheme for the few powerful elite.

It's not. I never said that it was. I just said that being harsher isn't the answer. The problem there, I think, is that American society doesn't give a **** about the mentally ill.

Not sure it's American society, but more about the insurance companies not wanting to foot the bill.

 

[The Question]

Sure it is. It's a big money making scheme for the prison owners and the drug owners (it's why Marijuana is still a controversey) and the sad fact that most of the prisoners are in there for drug offenses. The war on drugs is just one giant money making scheme for the few powerful elite.

All of that is true, but none of that equates to the criminal justice system being too lenient. It, in fact, all points to the criminal justice system being too harsh. People being in prison forever makes these folks money, so they want to keep people in prison forever.

Not sure it's American society, but more about the insurance companies not wanting to foot the bill.

Possibly. But either way, harsher approached to crime wouldn't solve the problem.

 

[Victarion]

1: If putting an effort into keeping people alive is your definition of too lenient, I think your priorities are skewed.

2: People in the waiting room in the ER are waiting to be examined by a doctor to determine what is wrong with them. Prisoners who are sent to the ER are sent there by prison doctors who have already either determined what is wrong with them or determined that whatever is wrong with them is serious enough for an ER visit.

3: How else is a prisoner going to be taken to the ER besides an ambulance? And how is taking them in an ambulance being too lenient? That is what ambulances are for.

4: I want to point out that your opinion isn't based on the actual living conditions within a prison.

5: Rehabilitative models of corrections are more effective and reduce crime. What is the value in being harsh?

Points 1-3: The inmates taking up a bed that could be put to better use feels wrong to me. Wjy should a criminal get a room ahead of noncriminals? Harsher in the sense of meals.providing a.baseline nutritional need, less free exercise time etc.

 

[The Question]

Points 1-3: The inmates taking up a bed that could be put to better use feels wrong to me. Wjy should a criminal get a room ahead of noncriminals?

Because they're human beings. Committing a crime doesn't mean that you don't have just as much of a right to medical treatment for serious health problems as anyone else.

ERs treat people based on the order that they arrive and the severity of their condition. What they may or may not have done outside of the hospital is never a factor. That is how it should be.

Harsher in the sense of meals.providing a.baseline nutritional need, less free exercise time etc.

Why shouldn't they have free exercise time? What would limiting that accomplish? And what do you mean by a "baseline nutritional meal?"

 

[roach]

The problem is the 24 hour news cycle just fed us a few months worth of "all cops are bad". It's not surprising that a few troubled individuals would take it too far.people are dumb and want to see the world in black and white.
Not all black males are up to no good.
Not all cops are racists.

Racism will go away when two things happen:
When the world sees me as a man and not a black man.
When I see myself as a man and not a black man.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

Well, SpideyFan866 has now been banned, but so I have to assume he was serious afterall (read his posts on the first page).

 

[Victarion]

Because they're human beings. Committing a crime doesn't mean that you don't have just as much of a right to medical treatment for serious health problems as anyone else.

ERs treat people based on the order that they arrive and the severity of their condition. What they may or may not have done outside of the hospital is never a factor. That is how it should be.



Why shouldn't they have free exercise time? What would limiting that accomplish? And what do you mean by a "baseline nutritional meal?"

We will have to agree to disagree on the first point. Baseline means the bare minimum of what's needed to survive. Taking away exercise time, keeping them penned for the majority of their term and reduce meals are what I meant by whatever I said earlier.

Or we could just burn them on the stake.

@Roach: I wish you the best of luck in making that a reality. Complexities just aren't palatable enough for people looking for something/someone to be angry at/about.

 

[roach]

We will have to agree to disagree on the first point. Baseline means the bare minimum of what's needed to survive. Taking away exercise time, keeping them penned for the majority of their term and reduce meals are what I meant by whatever I said earlier.

Or we could just burn them on the stake.

@Roach: I wish you the best of luck in making that a reality. Complexities just aren't palatable enough for people looking for something/someone to be angry at/about.

It will never come about because as time goes on we continue to segregate ourselves into little groups.

 

[DirtyHarry]

Well, SpideyFan866 has now been banned, but so I have to assume he was serious afterall (read his posts on the first page).

I want to start this off by saying that I won't do what many banned posters would do in this situation. I won't bad talk any other posters, nor will I bad talk the mods; particularly the mod banned me (and all things considered, I have a good idea who it was).

What I want to say is that I'm sorry.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone with my posts, and I'm sorry if you think any less of me for making them. But most of all, I'm sorry and disappointed (particularly in myself) that you couldn't see that they were meant to be taken as sarcasm and mockery, and not genuine feelings/trollish remarks about the situation this thread was created to shed light on:

The execution style murder of two NYC police officers.

Now don't mistake me. I don't mean to sound catty or petty in that remark. And I realize how that will likely be taken by a select few. But, I feel the need to say this because (more so than the ban itself) I'm sad that a few on SHH thought I was venting my real feelings in those posts, when my actual feelings are far removed than what might have been taken away from them. Also, I'm sad that I wasn't able to return to the thread and make my intent clear, before being banned.

My posts were meant to mock the mindset of those who cheered on, would cheer on, and would defend/justify the deaths of those police officers. Nothing more, nothing less. And by the time I saw that people were not understanding this, it was too late.

Once again, I'm sorry if I offended anyone, came off as a troll (which is what my ban is for), or if anyone mistook my intentions. In retrospect, perhaps the posts were ill-thought out, and could've been written to better convey my intentions. In which case..... I'm sorry I suck at getting across sarcasm. And if you feel I'm not being genuine with this post, then sorry about that as well, and i wish that wasn't case.


All the best, SpideyFan866



P.S. I thank DirtyHarry for posting this on my behalf.

 

[bullets]

I didn't see what happened here but I enjoyed reading some of your thoughts on movies and wrestling in other parts of the forum. So best of luck spideyfan

 

[The Question]

We will have to agree to disagree on the first point. Baseline means the bare minimum of what's needed to survive. Taking away exercise time, keeping them penned for the majority of their term and reduce meals are what I meant by whatever I said earlier.

What would that accomplish?

 

[Victarion]

What would that accomplish?

A more humane punishment that doesn't rely on "prison justice" that also removes some of the perks of being in prison.

 

[The Question]

A more humane punishment that doesn't rely on "prison justice" that also removes some of the perks of being in prison.

What's the point of reming some of the "perks" of being in prison? What does that accomplish?

 

[Victarion]

What's the point of reming some of the "perks" of being in prison? What does that accomplish?

Strips them of comforts or distractions. Punishment that doesn't resort to physical or sexual violence.

 

[The Question]

Strips them of comforts or distractions. Punishment that doesn't resort to physical or sexual violence.

And what is the value of stripping them of comforts and distractions?

Also, how would this stop physical and sexual violence in prisons?

 

[Victarion]

And what is the value of stripping them of comforts and distractions?

Also, how would this stop physical and sexual violence in prisons?

A criminal doesn't deserve the same comforts, or lifestyle, as someone who hasn't committed a crime. I don't think they deserve to live with the threat of being raped or shanked. Keeping them in isolation greatly reduces the threat of harm at the hands of other prisoners.

As an aside, I'm surprised at how liberal my stance on the prison system is compared to some of the other liberals I know. A couple of them believe that criminals are subhuman and deserve nothing but a cell and some meager rations...or executed outright.

 

[The Question]

A criminal doesn't deserve the same comforts, or lifestyle, as someone who hasn't committed a crime. I don't think they deserve to live with the threat of being raped or shanked. Keeping them in isolation greatly reduces the threat of harm at the hands of other prisoners.

As an aside, I'm surprised at how liberal my stance on the prison system is compared to some of the other liberals I know. A couple of them believe that criminals are subhuman and deserve nothing but a cell and some meager rations...or executed outright.

Forcing people to live in isolation is also recognized as a form of torture:

http://ccrjustice.org/solitary-factsheet

So beyond ephemeral notions of "deserving" and "not deserving," there's no practical benefit to denying comforts and a decent quality of life to prisoners. It's just something you think they don't "deserve." I don't think that gives it any value.

Prisons should be like this:

[YT]2g56susrNQY[/YT]

Norway has a 7% recidivism rate, as opposed to America's 70% recidivism rate, and the way that they run their prisons is a huge factor in that.

There's no value in punishment beyond making people on the outside feel better. We need to focus on rehabilitation for the good of society.

 

[Victarion]

Since our taxes pay for the prison system, I do think it merits considering what the general populace believe the incarcerated do and do not deserve. In the case, the luxuries/amenities or what have you. Bare minimum.

 

[The Question]

Since our taxes pay for the prison system, I do think it merits considering what the general populace believe the incarcerated do and do not deserve. In the case, the luxuries/amenities or what have you. Bare minimum.

In this case, what the tax payers believe is and is not deserved has no relation to what is good for society. Rehabilitative models of correction reduce the overall rate of crime. Punishment models increase it. We shouldn't tailor our corrections systems to make people feel better, we should tailor it to make less crime happen.

 

[The Question]

The full video on the corrections model the USA should adopt.

[YT]HfEsz812Q1I[/YT]

 

[Feenix]

In this case, what the tax payers believe is and is not deserved has no relation to what is good for society. Rehabilitative models of correction reduce the overall rate of crime. Punishment models increase it. We shouldn't tailor our corrections systems to make people feel better, we should tailor it to make less crime happen.

I second this. People don't like to hear it, but harsher punishments will not reduce crime. Crime rates do not depend on fear of punishment, so the idea that making prison less cushy for prisoners so that they don't want to go to prison again is ridiculous. We know from statistics that this doesn't work.

The problem is that people want their idea of justice done for crimes committed against them. The system is very individualistic. People don't care if the robber that robbed them will rob their neighbour once they get out of jail as long as they went to jail for the initial robbery. If you're more community oriented, you'll be okay with a robber receiving rehabilitation treatment instead of prison time if it means that they will never rob someone again.

 

[The Question]

I second this. People don't like to hear it, but harsher punishments will not reduce crime. Crime rates do not depend on fear of punishment, so the idea that making prison less cushy for prisoners so that they don't want to go to prison again is ridiculous. We know from statistics that this doesn't work.

The problem is that people want their idea of justice done for crimes committed against them. The system is very individualistic. People don't care if the robber that robbed them will rob their neighbour once they get out of jail as long as they went to jail for the initial robbery. If you're more community oriented, you'll be okay with a robber receiving rehabilitation treatment instead of prison time if it means that they will never rob someone again.

What most people don't understand about criminal behavior is that, for the most part, the decision to commit a crime is not a logical one. Most people who commit crimes do not carefully weigh the costs versus the benefits before deciding to offend. Most of the time, they commit their crime because on some level, for whatever reason, they believe that they don't have any other choice. Wether or not they are correct in this belief in any given context doesn't matter. The point is that it is almost always an emotional response born from a sense of desperation, and so creating harsh punishments as a deterrent will not work to curb crime. The vast majority of criminals simply don't think about their behavior in those terms.

 

[Ilikecomics123]

I took a "history of the prison system" class when I was in college. Pretty much everything has been tried (torture, no torture, isolation, no isolation and lots of freedoms, rehabilitation, no rehabilitation, mix of punishment and rehabilitation, etc.)

After the semester was over it felt like everything has been tried and nothing works perfectly.

 

[Feenix]

I took a "history of the prison system" class when I was in college. Pretty much everything has been tried (torture, no torture, isolation, no isolation and lots of freedoms, rehabilitation, no rehabilitation, mix of punishment and rehabilitation, etc.)

After the semester was over it felt like everything has been tried and nothing works perfectly.

Nothing ever works perfectly, but some are much worse than others. The US system is one of the worst.

Like The Question already posted, Norway has a 7% recidivism rate versus the US' 70%.

 

[Chance Jackson]

So...where are the protest?

given that the rates of police being murdered is on a decline and the perp will easily be indicted and easily be convicted and probably serve no less than 2 life sentences it hardly seems like a protest is warranted; what happened to these cops was terrible and counter productive in lots of ways but what i hate most is that unarmed blacks being killed by cops will be lost in the anti lib/anti dem/anti obama narrative that will be painted for weeks by Fox and the rest of the conservative political industrial complex

Correction:
I had only read today that the perp had killed himself, so there won't be any indictments, or convictions but had he not killed himself and he had been taken into custody I'm sure the jury wouldn't have wasted too much time deliberating