Populist Vs Realist

RainyDay said:
I'd like to see the data to support this conclusion.
Click to expand...

Id say its simple Maths and common sense to say that the less time the criminals are out of prison the less time they have to commit more crime.
 
redbhoy said:
Id say its simple Maths and common sense to say that the less time the criminals are out of prison the less time they have to commit more crime.
Click to expand...
It is neither maths nor common sense. Crimes can occur both inside & outside of prison. But the real issue is not about what happens for the period in prison. It is about what happens when the person comes out of prison. I've never seen any data that shows that tougher sentancing leads to reduced recidivist rates.
 
RainyDay said:
I've never seen any data that shows that tougher sentancing leads to reduced recidivist rates.
Click to expand...
and
RainyDay said:
Is there any evidence that tougher sentancing leads to reduced crime levels?
Click to expand...

OK, lets say we have a habitual criminal (20+ convictions) facing sentence. Do you really doubt that locking him up will reduce the crime level experienced by the general population outside prison?
 
Well, you've convinced me. Violent criminals should be sentenced to mandatory group hugs and self esteem classes and put straight back on the streets, the money saved (i think it costs €1000+ per week to keep these poor unfortunate victims of society behind bars) could be used to compensate victims of crime.
 
To Observer:
" lets say" and "really doubt" are no facts, no evidence. RainyDay asked for evidence.
This is "ask about money" here, so facts and numbers please!
And to michaelm:
The bill that the Afghani and Iraqui people might send to the Irish State (who made huge profits on selling goods like kerosine to the war criminals at Shannon) - how high do you think that would be? What would it cost the Irish economy to stop this terror? Compare like with like, dead with dead.
Some desperate people might decide to send a dirty bomb to Shannon, just to stop the blood shed for a week or two, to give some time to breathe. Those who are determined will always get what they want said George Bubble dooh. During the Vietnam war some determined people blasted the head commanding station of the US air force in Heidelberg, saving tens of thousands of lifes, lifes that where destroyed under the "maximum killing" strategy of US minister Kissinger.
This can happen here, every day. Do you really feel threatened by a few muggers in Dublin? Welcome to reality.....
 
heinbloed said:
This is "ask about money" here, so facts and numbers please!
Click to expand...

Indeed!

heinbloed said:
the Irish State (who made huge profits on selling goods like kerosine to the war criminals at Shannon) - how high do you think that would be?
Click to expand...

I don't know, why don't you produce some
heinbloed said:
facts and numbers please!
Click to expand...
to let us know?
 
Observer said:
and

OK, lets say we have a habitual criminal (20+ convictions) facing sentence. Do you really doubt that locking him up will reduce the crime level experienced by the general population outside prison?
Click to expand...
It certainly hasn't helped reduce crime in the USA where heavy sentances are commonplace - the prison population is growing (and is heavily biased towards non-whites).
 
I don't know why the profits of supporting the war criminals are outweighing the disadvantages of becoming a legitimate target. I have not seen the accounts. Has anyone ever asked for them ? And had they been produced ? Let me know.
Facts and numbers please. Or as said before: support the data!
Why does it pay to run a harsh head- off regime? Are all numbers included in the bill ? Or is it the US way to run accounts that is prefered ?
Where guns are cheap and lifes cost little.....
 
Wow, that came from left field . Better to express it than to bottle it all up I suppose. I thought those mushrooms were illegal now.
 
Hi Rainyday,

I've pretty much given up wasting my time arguing with you on most issues, but since you're maligning my newly adopted home, I think it's worth setting the record straight on this issue.

It certainly hasn't helped reduce crime in the USA where heavy sentances are commonplace - the prison population is growing
Click to expand...

Have YOU figures to defend your claim that it CERTAINLY hasn't helped reduce crime in the USA. Crime has fallen dramatically and continuously in the USA for well over a decade. It's even lower now than in the early 70's.

You seem to interpret the growing prison population as evidence of increased crime.
What else would you expect to happen to the prison population if sentences are increased?
Tougher sentencing means more people in jail for longer. The increased prison population is evidence of tougher sentencing, not evidence of incresed crime. Records for serious and violent crime show declines, accross the board, in pretty much every state.

I don't know what if any direct impact tougher sentencing had on the drop in crime, but I wouldn't be as brave as you and claim that it CERTAINLY hasn't helped.

I'm assuming that given your insistance on evidence from others to back up every little claim, that you wouldn't have made such a sweeping claim without your own evidence to back it up.

Even a cursory search of google will tell the story of falling crime rates in the USA. I happen to be skeptical about tougher prison sentences being the main cause of the drop. I think there are other factors that deserve more credit, but I don't see how anyone could be CERTAIN that it hasn't helped at all.

There are some studies that agree with you, but they are a long way from the certainty you seem to have on the issue. Perhaps you have some evidence I haven't seen. Or were you merely offering an opinion?

I'm surprised Clubman's Opinion Radar hasn't tracked down your post and challenged you to back up your claims. Perhaps you've been granted the privilage of being allowed to post unsubstantiated opinions dressed up as fact or certainty. Is there an application form that other posters can fill out to get similar privilages????

PS. Say what you like about the USA, and there's pleanty negative that can be said, but at least they have meaningful crime statistics. I can tell that Car Crime in the area I live in is 18% of the national average. Murder is about 50%. All other crimes in or around the 50% mark except for Rape which for some reason is 176%.

I can leave my car unlocked, with the roof down and not worry about it. When I drive at the speed limit or slightly below, I don't find cars queuing up behind me, because most other people around here are obeying it too.

If I refuse to give a Breath, Blood, or Urine sample when stopped by police, I lose my licence for one year end of story. As a result the percentage of fatalities where alcohol was a factor has dropped from 52% in 1983 to 32% in 2004.

On the flipside If I'm caught speeding I get penalty points and pay a fine. But if I take Drivers Education classes, the penalty points are scrapped. Common sense. Something I never found an abundance of when driving in Ireland.

-Rd


Evidence of falling crime rates in the USA:

All major categories of violent crime in the United States declined in 2004, bringing the rates of the most serious offenses, including murders, rapes, robberies and assaults, to a level 32 percent lower than those reported in 1995, the new figures show.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/10/17/crime.rate/

Chart 1973 to 2003
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/viort.htm

The increase brings to a close a decade of remarkable declines in illicit activity, which helped revitalize the nation's urban areas and brought a renewed a sense of civility and security for millions of Americans.
Even with this increase, crime rates remain some of the lowest in a generation.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0625/p02s01-usju.htm
 
CNN (the warmongers speaking organ!) has reported repeatedly the US population never felt so much under threat as in recent times/years. That was one of the reasons why the security laws had been tightened, the people felt threatened. Made fearful by CNN, FOX and the league of Mafiosis. Never before we had so many killings at schools. Never before US households stored arms and armunition in such quantities- and made use of them. Killing someone legally is not a crime no more- and the killing that used to be called murder untill a few years ago is made legal now (by whom? By George Bubble Dooh's brother in Florida for example !). Of course this brings down the number of illegal crime-when crime becomes legal. The German Office of Foreign Affairs (and others as well) are warning all Florida tourists that they "should not look threatening". They might be shot- legally.
And plastering mountain valleys with MOABs as in Tora Bora is no crime. Using the would- be- criminals ( poverty draw might not mean anything to some idiots but it is a fact of live in the US) as tools who can live their wired phantasies in the Army is no crime at all, isn't it? During the Vietnam war the official crime rate dropped as well, the young and willing where needed somewhere abroad.
Every single slab in the face, every rude word, every push and every hit is a single crime that is counted in the statistics as a single crime. Not any more, "some pigs are more equal than other pigs" and pigs commit no countable crimes. http://www.salon.com/news/abu_ghraib/2006/03/14/introduction/
 
Has tougher 'sentencing' on speed reduced our road deaths?
Most would agree that enforcement is the critical issue.
This is also the case with crime. If criminals feel they won't get caught then they will take their chance. Tougher sentences only has these people laughing. Enforcement is the real issue.
 
Hi RD - Welcome back - It's nice to hear that you are enjoying yourself over there.

I have to admid that it's a fair cop - It was an off the cuff remark and on mature reflection, it isn't supported by the data. I guess some of the concerns that I was trying to refer to are as follows;

From http://www.pcusa.org/washington/issuenet/crrl-021014.htm

From http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/usa/incarceration/

Contrary to popular perception, violent crime is not responsible for the quadrupling of the incarcerated population in the United States since 1980. In fact, violent crime rates have been relatively constant or declining over the past two decades. The exploding prison population has been propelled by public policy changes that have increased the use of prison sentences as well as the length of time served, e.g. through mandatory minimum sentencing, "three strikes" laws, and reductions in the availability of parole or early release.


FOr me, the USA is certainly not a role model to follow....
 
>Welcome back

I'm not back. I don't like the way AAM is moderated and I've taken your advice and stopped participating. On this occasion it was such a blatant example of the double standard that caused me to leave that I thought it was worth pointing out.

I have seen new posters on AAM offer an opinion only to be met with the rebuke "Oh I see you made that up". While you can post what you like without being challenged in the same way. New posters ask legitimate questions about Stamp Duty, and have their posts moved to Letting Off Steam, where they can't contribute. That's not a type of forum that I want to be a member of.

Contrary to popular perception, violent crime is not responsible for the quadrupling of the incarcerated population in the United States since 1980. In fact, violent crime rates have been relatively constant or declining over the past two decades.
Click to expand...

Where is this popular perception that "violent crime is responsible for the quadrupling of the incarcerated population?" I haven't heard it, or claimed it.

There IS a popular perception that the quadrupling of the incarcerated population is responsible for the declining violent crime. I'm sure you can see the subtle difference. It is THIS perception that the original poster held and that you challenged.

Ironically your quote supports the popular perception. Although as I mentioned I'm not convinced that it should be considered the primary factor.

The rest of your post is off topic and has no relevance to the earlier post about the impact of sentencing on crime. The proportion of minorities in US Prison is a reflection of social inequality in the US, not a reflection of their ability to tackle crime.

When you consider that the minorities are over represented in the lower socio economic groups in the US you begin to see why they are over represented in the Prison population.

Is Ireland any better? You seem to think so. I'm not so sure.

How well represented are the Middle and Upper Classes in Irish Prisons?
The reason Irish prisons don't have an disproportionate non-white population is because the Irish poor also happen to be white.

Paint all your poor green and see how over represented the green population will be in Irish Jails.

Nearly three quarters of new admissions to state prison were convicted of nonviolent crimes
Click to expand...

Have you checked what constitutes non-violent crime?
What proportion of all crime is non-violent?
Is it nearly three quarters???? If so might that explain something?
Are violent criminals more likely to be in Federal prison? wouldn't that increase the likelyhood that a state
prison inmate is nonviolent?

Would drunk driving be a non-violent crime? If so do you disagree with locking up drunk drivers?
How many times would someone have to drink drive before you'd agree with locking them up?
How about posessing child pronography, should that carry prison time?
How about being in the country illegally?
How about posessing a kilo of cocaine?

Are there people in jail in the USA for offenses that we in Ireland might consider trivial? Yes.
Is the 3 strikes rule particularly harsh? Yes
Is America's crime declining at an extraordinary rate over a prolongued period of time. Yes.

When someone points out something from somewhere else that works (or seems to work), you reject it out of hand (based on a false assumption).
When called on the false assumption you find some other unrelated aspect of life in the suggested regime that you don't like to defend your earlier rejection. But you don't bother to ask whether or not this negative feature is already present in your own country.

Perhaps instead of demanding figures everytime someone posts something you disagree with, you could start out by considering your own prejudices on the issue. Put forward your own contrary opinion if you have one, offer some opposing evidence if you can find any. That will either kill the original point, or convince the original poster to dig up some evidence, or stronger logic of their own.

If you did that, I think AAM might get back to some of the more interesting discussions that it used to host.

-Rd
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register