In Killing's Aftermath, State's Penal System Again Hotly Debate...

[Linux Geek]

FROG - okay I hear ya, and I dig lots of what you say but u've not been real specific. What would you do to the system other than more of the same.
DOG - You are growling and foaming at the mouth. Do you need a rabies shot? Frog makes some good points - tho he lacks detail. What proof do you have that three strikes laws have worked in other states?
JBC - I'm down with deep-sixing 50 cent and all his boyz. How do you suggest we do it?

Linux Geek
Stop paying the Microsoft Tax - www.ubuntu.com

[sheepdog]

Greenfrog wrote:

<quoted text>
I must not be a liberal then. I do believe in crime, I understand that it happens, I want to do something about it. And if you are implying that I regard perpetrators as “victims” you haven’t been reading what I have said.
<quoted text>
I don’t know the specifics of the cases you are referring to. I also don’t know what “rehab” programs we are talking about because as far as I am concerned we don’t have any meaningful programs aimed at reducing repeat offenders. The ones I’m looking for wouldn’t look much like “coddling”.(In fact, nobody here has bothered to ask me exactly what sort of programs I would be in favor of. You and SD simply assume I support free admission to country clubs for convicted axe-murderers.) You wouldn’t want to be in prison under Warden Greenfrog. You also wouldn’t be likely to come back for seconds.
<quoted text>
Amen! Let’s add kids and teenagers whose parents purchase for them and allow them to play unbelievably realistic video games where you accrue points for killing people in horrendously violent ways. Let’s add movies that glorify disrespect and violence and murder. I’m with you 100%. This is the beginning of getting at the real root of the problem.
Unfortunately there are billions of marketing dollars behind the distribution of this crap. Hey, let the market decide, right?
<quoted text>
Again, amen. How do we do it?

"Hey, let the market decide, right?"
Generally, free markets "work" with exceptions. Depends on how a system is designed. Competition doesn't always bring lower prices, sometimes it brings higher prices (ie. our utilities). Some commodities do need to be regulated or "capped."
There's no relationship between the cost to produce and supply electricity and the price to consumers from what I can see.

"Unfortunately there are billions of marketing dollars behind the distribution of this crap." True. Unfortunately, there are those who buy the bill of goods put out by mainstream media. If only teenagers could be immunized against that crap.

[sheepdog]

Linux Geek wrote:

FROG - okay I hear ya, and I dig lots of what you say but u've not been real specific. What would you do to the system other than more of the same.
DOG - You are growling and foaming at the mouth. Do you need a rabies shot? Frog makes some good points - tho he lacks detail. What proof do you have that three strikes laws have worked in other states?
JBC - I'm down with deep-sixing 50 cent and all his boyz. How do you suggest we do it?
Linux Geek
Stop paying the Microsoft Tax - www.ubuntu.com

I'm so sorry that my passion about this issue seems to bother you. But, I hope you realize that I'm entitled to my opinion and this is an open forum. Which do you consider "good points" so that I'll know what you're talking to me about?
Not all three strikes laws are written alike, nor are they administered exactly alike. That would be impossible. For instance, I don't like the one they have in CA. Do I need to send links or do you think you could do some research yourself?
You can even try a new search engine. Try Blingo.com

[Greenfrog]

Linux Geek wrote:

FROG - okay I hear ya, and I dig lots of what you say but u've not been real specific. What would you do to the system other than more of the same?

Geek -

Okay, I'll byte ;)... but it may take a while and a number of posts. The answers are not easy, and the specifics depend on the situation. Also, as both SD and JBC implied yesterday some of the root causes of the social problems go all the way back to the things we expose our kids to early in life - music, movies, television, and other forms of entertainment that teach kids to regard other people as objects, that desensitize them to the feelings and needs of others (the "empathy" thing SD was talking about) that glorify violence, that say "it's okay to hate and to kill".

I don't mind SDs "growling and frothing at the mouth" - I live about 5 miles from where the Petits did in a neighborhood that isn't all that different from Sorgum Mill Dr. I share his outrage and anger. His responses to me express justified frustration in a system that isn't working. I don't take it personally, and he doesn't seem inclined to bite.

My perspective is that we HAVE been increasing prison sentences, the use of mandatory minimums, and imposing tougher restrictions on those released from custody. It isn't working. What SD is suggesting looks to me like more of the same.

What I hear SD saying is that my solution (as he understands it) isn't "tough" enough, coddles criminals, and hearkens back to the 1970s rehab programs that didn't work. What I am suggesting looks to SD like more of the same.

So you're right ... let me work on what I feel are constructive alternatives.

[Greenfrog]

sheepdog wrote:

Generally, free markets "work" with exceptions. Depends on how a system is designed. Competition doesn't always bring lower prices, sometimes it brings higher prices (ie. our utilities). Some commodities do need to be regulated or "capped."
There's no relationship between the cost to produce and supply electricity and the price to consumers from what I can see.

Once again, you and I seem to be in agreement here. I was referring more to the tendency of the market to reward those who produce toxins just as it rewards those who produce nutrients. Not sure how to fix this.

sheepdog wrote:

"Unfortunately there are billions of marketing dollars behind the distribution of this crap." True. Unfortunately, there are those who buy the bill of goods put out by mainstream media. If only teenagers could be immunized against that crap.

Agreed. Unfortunately there is no such vaccine. In the absence of a vaccine it is the duty of parents to control the exposure their kids to the "pathogens" - as in starting early on with, "No - I will not tolerate that music in our house. It uses language we don't believe in here. Killing people is not good. Calling women dirty names is not something we do here." and "No - we are not going to buy 'Grand Theft Auto' for your video game. Even pretending to kill people is not something we do in this house." And "No. You are not going to sit in front of the television." Let's go fishing, let's spend time together as a family, let's take a walk in the woods ..."

If these messages start early and are consistent - if the message about what is and isn't acceptable behavior is communicated from the beginning we end up with kids that don't become part of the penal system.

Unfortunately it is hard for parents to resist the millions of dollars of marketing and peer pressure that results.(Not to mention the fact that many of today's young parents grew up in a world where this stuff was the "norm" ... and don't see it as a problem.

Any suggestions on how we address this?

[sheepdog]

Greenfrog wrote:

<quoted text>
Once again, you and I seem to be in agreement here. I was referring more to the tendency of the market to reward those who produce toxins just as it rewards those who produce nutrients. Not sure how to fix this.
<quoted text>
Agreed. Unfortunately there is no such vaccine. In the absence of a vaccine it is the duty of parents to control the exposure their kids to the "pathogens" - as in starting early on with, "No - I will not tolerate that music in our house. It uses language we don't believe in here. Killing people is not good. Calling women dirty names is not something we do here." and "No - we are not going to buy 'Grand Theft Auto' for your video game. Even pretending to kill people is not something we do in this house." And "No. You are not going to sit in front of the television." Let's go fishing, let's spend time together as a family, let's take a walk in the woods ..."
If these messages start early and are consistent - if the message about what is and isn't acceptable behavior is communicated from the beginning we end up with kids that don't become part of the penal system.
Unfortunately it is hard for parents to resist the millions of dollars of marketing and peer pressure that results.(Not to mention the fact that many of today's young parents grew up in a world where this stuff was the "norm" ... and don't see it as a problem.
Any suggestions on how we address this?

" I was referring more to the tendency of the market to reward those who produce toxins just as it rewards those who produce nutrients. Not sure how to fix this."
It's the "any means to an end" philosophy, and the end is money, so the crap is produced by those who have decided not to discern between toxins and nutrients. But since people(especially children) learn vicariously, the onus ultimately rests with the parents. Yes, parents need to set boundaries. That's what many criminals have difficulty recognizing. Boundaries.
"Unfortunately, it is hard for parents to resist the millions of dollars of marketing and peer pressure that results." It's difficult to discipline children and teenagers. It takes time, thought, effort and a strong resolve to produce a human being who will end up independent(not a lemming), self reliant, productive and a contributor to society. It's easier to abdicate parental responsibility and leave that job to schools or anyone else who will willingly take on the job. I'm not willing to take up that job though.
Back to a three strikes law. By the time a criminal has committed two violent felonies, we're not looking for a deterrent. We're looking for an incapacitator and I think a strict three strikes law if implemented properly could ensure that an unredeemable criminal will be removed from society.

[JBC]

Linux Geek wrote:

FROG - okay I hear ya, and I dig lots of what you say but u've not been real specific. What would you do to the system other than more of the same.
DOG - You are growling and foaming at the mouth. Do you need a rabies shot? Frog makes some good points - tho he lacks detail. What proof do you have that three strikes laws have worked in other states?
JBC - I'm down with deep-sixing 50 cent and all his boyz. How do you suggest we do it?
Linux Geek
Stop paying the Microsoft Tax - www.ubuntu.com

Also try NeoOffice - great FREE suite for Mac OSX. > VersionTracker.com

[doglove]

sheepdog wrote:

<quoted text>Stop the nonsense, and at least make an attempt to offer something constructive.

Now I know why your name has sheep in it. You will ramble on all day with anyone with no cares for the content or lies.
How about your buddie "Watcher" who pretends to be a cop? Everyone else knows he is a liar, but sheep says;

Watcher wrote:
<quoted text>
Do either you or Frog have 20+ years "hands on" experience working/counseling in the criminal justice environment?
If not, I have. Any questions, fire away. I'm retired so I have plenty of time.
sheep:
In exactly what capacity did you work in the criminal justice environment?

Does it make you feel good to pretend your talking to 'important' people?

Why don't you stop your nonsense?

[sheepdog]

doglove wrote:

<quoted text>
Now I know why your name has sheep in it. You will ramble on all day with anyone with no cares for the content or lies.
How about your buddie "Watcher" who pretends to be a cop? Everyone else knows he is a liar, but sheep says;
Watcher wrote:
<quoted text>
Do either you or Frog have 20+ years "hands on" experience working/counseling in the criminal justice environment?
If not, I have. Any questions, fire away. I'm retired so I have plenty of time.
sheep:
In exactly what capacity did you work in the criminal justice environment?
Does it make you feel good to pretend your talking to 'important' people?
Why don't you stop your nonsense?

If I'm going to communicate with a poster who says he's had "hands on" experience working/counseling in the criminal justice environment, it's important for me to know more about his frame of reference.
What's your problem with that? Oh, never mind, it's probably some illogical reason anyway.

[doglove]

sheepdog wrote:

<quoted text>If I'm going to communicate with a poster who says he's had "hands on" experience working/counseling in the criminal justice environment, it's important for me to know more about his frame of reference.
What's your problem with that? Oh, never mind, it's probably some illogical reason anyway.

My frame of reference is, it was quite obvious that he was a scam.

I've met more doctors, brain surgeons, detectives, judges, etc., on-line and the more they brag on, the more you know they are lying. If the thread is about crime, they always have 20 years experience, the authority, big shots.

Don't tell me what to post and I will do the same for you.