Two New York cops shot dead, execution style

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Well...who would be getting protested?

Would protesters be protesting against criminals?

 

[zeroapoc]

I'll never understand people that don't believe attempts at rehabilitation should be a vital part of the prison system. Upwards of 95% of prisoners will be out in the world again some day. Seems pretty simple to me.

I mean if it's mass murderers and the rest of the worst of the worst that are in there for life, then yeah, screw it. But that's a small minority.

 

[The Apocalypse]

I'll never understand people that don't believe attempts at rehabilitation should be a vital part of the prison system. Upwards of 95% of prisoners will be out in the world again some day. Seems pretty simple to me.

I mean if it's mass murderers and the rest of the worst of the worst that are in there for life, then yeah, screw it. But that's a small minority.

It costs too much money. That's all it is.

 

[terry78]

It's cheaper and easier to just incarcerate or execute than take all that time sending them to shrinks, basically. Changing a person could take years and may be a crapshoot, whereas with option 1 you already know the outcome pretty much.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Eh....you get some heavy handed officials who will always make the claim that it will become a ruse for leniency against criminals.

That and the money are always going to be the biggest proponents against rehabilitation.

With all the information that's been coming out about the killer, he doesn't sound like someone who was supposed to be in jail, but in probably an asylum.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Humans are vicious creatures by nature. Wise? Not so much. I always felt like our scientific name was poorly thought out.

 

[The Question]

It costs too much money. That's all it is.

Not really, no. A rehabilitative model means a lower recidivism rate. A lower recidivism rate means a smaller prison population. Smaller prison population means lower costs.

It's cheaper and easier to just incarcerate or execute than take all that time sending them to shrinks, basically. Changing a person could take years and may be a crapshoot, whereas with option 1 you already know the outcome pretty much.

That's completely ridiculous. Sure, with option 1 you know what you're going to get, but that includes a much higher recidivism rate and overcrowded prisons. Rehabilitation may be uncertain on an indicidual level, but in general it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to decrease the likelihood of recidivism.

 

[Feenix]

Humans are vicious creatures by nature. Wise? Not so much. I always felt like our scientific name was poorly thought out.

Meaning what exactly? I don't understand what this has to do with the debate about the criminal justice system.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Meaning what exactly? I don't understand what this has to do with the debate about the criminal justice system.

That humans by nature care more about punishment than any sort of rehabilitation. Our system is built around the former, with the latter being an afterthought, if it's a thought at all.

 

[Feenix]

That humans by nature care more about punishment than any sort of rehabilitation. Our system is built around the former, with the latter being an afterthought, if it's a thought at all.

I think that's a bit of a sweeping generalization given that there are plenty of countries that have successfully adopted a rehabilitative model.

 

[Thundercrack85]

I think Norway is an unusual state.

 

[Tempest]

How do you think that longer sentences would help?

Well shorter sentencing and counseling has done nothing to help him. So....longer sentences mean he has less opportunity to victimize the rest of society.

I love my cousin. I want what's best for him. And honestly, I think the only option left is to whack his head against the wall a few times.

Here's the thing. He knows that he shouldn't do the things he does. He knows it, and he does it anyway. Not because he couldn't afford the things that he steals. Or because he can't live without pot. He steals and smokes because he wants to, and he finds it annoying that police officers 'hassle' him.

It's not that hard to NOT break the law. Even if you're poor. Even if you're having a hard time in life.

Now, granted, when someone IS desperate, I can understand the idea behind stealing food, or even stealing someone's wallet. When you have nothing, and you need to eat, or to feed your family, that's one thing. Those are the people who need help and guidance.

But a lot of these people who break the law? No. **** them. They know better. They just don't care.

 

[terry78]

Everything is ridiculous. You're not exactly treading new ground.

 

[Feenix]

Well shorter sentencing and counseling has done nothing to help him. So....longer sentences mean he has less opportunity to victimize the rest of society.

I love my cousin. I want what's best for him. And honestly, I think the only option left is to whack his head against the wall a few times.

Here's the thing. He knows that he shouldn't do the things he does. He knows it, and he does it anyway. Not because he couldn't afford the things that he steals. Or because he can't live without pot. He steals and smokes because he wants to, and he finds it annoying that police officers 'hassle' him.

It's not that hard to NOT break the law. Even if you're poor. Even if you're having a hard time in life.

Now, granted, when someone IS desperate, I can understand the idea behind stealing food, or even stealing someone's wallet. When you have nothing, and you need to eat, or to feed your family, that's one thing. Those are the people who need help and guidance.

But a lot of these people who break the law? No. **** them. They know better. They just don't care.

Your argument is based off of anecdotal evidence. The fact is that longer and harsher prison sentences do not reduce crime. You assume that people are thinking logically before they commit a crime and ignore reason. That is simply not true.

 

[Victarion]

I don't see the logic in committing a crime that risks you not being able to help whomever you're seeking to help. I'm not saying it isn't there, just that I have a hard time following it.

 

[The Question]

I don't see the logic in committing a crime that risks you not being able to help whomever you're seeking to help. I'm not saying it isn't there, just that I have a hard time following it.

As I have said before, most criminals don't act from a place of logic. They act from a place of emotion.

 

[Tempest]

Your argument is based off of anecdotal evidence. The fact is that longer and harsher prison sentences do not reduce crime. You assume that people are thinking logically before they commit a crime and ignore reason. That is simply not true.

I don't believe that. There might be a few people who believe that, but most people try to avoid being identified when they commit crimes. They will flee from or fight the police, they will cover their faces, they will try to remove evidence that they were at the scene of the crime, and so on.

Those are not the actions of someone so emotionally swept away that all reason has left them.

As I said, there are some people who truly do things out of desperation; stealing a wallet or stealing food in order to literally survive. Those people need help, not prison time...and there have been several stories in the news recently where officers have responded to those kinds of situations with compassion and deep concern for the person they were supposed to arrest.

You're going to have to give some supporting evidence that is scientific or something to convince me that most crime is done out of emotion and not a choice, because the actions of criminals completely disproves that.

 

[Victarion]

As I have said before, most criminals don't act from a place of logic. They act from a place of emotion.

I can't really defend or excuse their decision.

 

[The Question]

I can't really defend or excuse their decision.

No one is asking you to.

 

[Feenix]

I don't believe that. There might be a few people who believe that, but most people try to avoid being identified when they commit crimes. They will flee from or fight the police, they will cover their faces, they will try to remove evidence that they were at the scene of the crime, and so on.

Those are not the actions of someone so emotionally swept away that all reason has left them.

As I said, there are some people who truly do things out of desperation; stealing a wallet or stealing food in order to literally survive. Those people need help, not prison time...and there have been several stories in the news recently where officers have responded to those kinds of situations with compassion and deep concern for the person they were supposed to arrest.

You're going to have to give some supporting evidence that is scientific or something to convince me that most crime is done out of emotion and not a choice, because the actions of criminals completely disproves that.

What exactly is your argument? Do you think harsher prison sentences reduce crime?

The problem with your idea that criminals choose to commit crime is that it assumes the criminal thinks about their actions before they commit them. If they think about their actions, they think about the consequences. If that is the case and a crime is punishable by incarceration, then a logical person would not commit a crime. You're talking about the Rational Choice Theory that suggests that people weigh the pros and cons of their choices. The theory falls short when dealing with criminality because its vision is too narrow. There are many more factors at play when a crime is committed than just the pros and cons of the choice. Rational Choice Theory makes one very large assumption: that a person committing a crime is thinking rationally. As rational as you or I. It's a very large brush to paint all criminals with.

Since you asked for data, here:

http://crime.about.com/od/prison/a/harsh_punishment.htm

http://criminology.utoronto.ca/wp-c.../DWG-GeneralDeterrenceHighlights14Feb2013.pdf

http://justspeak.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Does-imprisonment-deter-crime.pdf

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090810025245.htm

http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/pnshnt-rcdvsm/index-eng.aspx

http://www.sagepub.com/tibbetts/study/articles/SectionII/De Haan_Vos.pdf

Keep in mind that I'm talking about street crime and not "suite crime" (white collar crime). That is a totally different beast.

I spent 4 years learning about criminality. You clearly don't like the idea of rehabilitation, but the current system in the US does not reduce prison populations. It increases it.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

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.

Awww man. Now I feel bad. I honestly thought he was speaking his mind, since I've seen so many people on my FB pretty much say the same things without any irony. Well.... crap. To be fair, it probably wasn't the most ideal time to be sarcastic. But still, what bad luck to get banned over it. Hopefully the mods let him come back under a new name.

 

[Chance Jackson]

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 had been taken into custody I'm sure the jury wouldn't have wasted too much time deliberating

 

[Destructus86]

Longer sentences is just a way to sweep the issues under the rug so we don't actually have to deal with the issues to begin with. No wonder we have one of the highest incarceration numbers of any 1st world country.

 

[warhorse78]

Not really, no. A rehabilitative model means a lower recidivism rate. A lower recidivism rate means a smaller prison population. Smaller prison population means lower costs.

Since the prisons are now privatized, and the shareholders of those prisons are getting anywhere from 25,000 to 40,000 per year per inmate, you honestly think that Congress, who I am pretty sure gets a piece of that pie, is going to want to do something to reduce the prison population? Keep dreaming pal.

 

[The Question]

Since the prisons are now privatized, and the shareholders of those prisons are getting anywhere from 25,000 to 40,000 per year per inmate, you honestly think that Congress, who I am pretty sure gets a piece of that pie, is going to want to do something to reduce the prison population? Keep dreaming pal.

Yes, that is a problem. It also doesn't actually address my point at all, not does it prove your point that harsher prison sentences are good or that our prison system is too lenient. You have yet to prove either of those claims.