retired

Will It Make Any Difference?

51 posts in this topic

3 minutes ago, Rael said:

Much like the argument for the death penalty (which I am against by the way) the simplest answer is for that one year that one criminal won't pull a gun on one innocent civilian. 

It's better than nothing but it won't slow down crime. You'll just have a revolving door of these guys getting out one year later and then picking up where they left off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pickle20 said:

It should be 5 years. These kids will take a year like it's breakfast.

That's what project exile was ......

Like I asked above, whatever happened to that? .....

That was in vogue once and was part og Ehrlich's campaign.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Rael said:

Much like the argument for the death penalty (which I am against by the way) the simplest answer is for that one year that one criminal won't pull a gun on one innocent civilian. 

I don't disagree. My point is though, why stop at a year? Put some teeth into it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Eastside Terp said:

That's what project exile was ......

Like I asked above, whatever happened to that? .....

That was in vogue once and was part og Ehrlich's campaign.....

From what I've read Project exile eventually become state exile programs and were eventually phased out. Partly because of some studies that showed it wasn't effective as previously thought

Quote

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

7 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

I don't disagree. My point is though, why stop at a year? Put some teeth into it.

I thought I read in another article that 1 year was the best the city could do because of state laws.

Edited by ivanbalt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ivanbalt said:

I thought I read in another article that 1 year was the best the city could do because of state laws.

I guess that would make sense. Time to take it to Annapolis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, AugusteDupin said:

This argument should be strongly debated in Annapolis. 

Ahhhhh gang...... I said that much earlier....roll back and read. The GA blew it off.

Ohhh and tell White Marsh ken that if he took me off ignore....he would know that.

Edited by Guido2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Guido2 said:

Ahhhhh gang...... I said that much earlier....roll back and read. The GA blew it off.

Ohhh and tell White Marsh ken that if he took me off ignore....he would know that.

Does sound familiar doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a great idea but it should be five years.  I think it will curtail the violence because those people with guns will be locked away and not killing anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bogart said:

I think it's a great idea but it should be five years.  I think it will curtail the violence because those people with guns will be locked away and not killing anyone.

One year is really not curtailing anything. They'll likely be out before there's any noticeable impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bmore_ken said:

We could start with eliminating a program that's been failing for over 40 years

If you're speaking of legalizing/decriminalizing drugs, I'm all for it, but-- and I think we've had this discussion before-- I wouldn't expect that to make much difference in the rate of violent crime.  Drugs don't cause the crime, associated with it yes, but not the cause. The drug thugs are not going to toss away their guns the day after legalization and head down to the unemployment office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Saticon3 said:

If you're speaking of legalizing/decriminalizing drugs, I'm all for it, but-- and I think we've had this discussion before-- I wouldn't expect that to make much difference in the rate of violent crime.  Drugs don't cause the crime, associated with it yes, but not the cause. The drug thugs are not going to toss away their guns the day after legalization and head down to the unemployment office.

Drugs are the main reason for gun violence in America. Legalizing them doesn't eliminate all the crime. You're never going to have zero crime. But why continue a policy that has clearly failed in it's purpose. Drug use and overdosing is at an all time high. More drugs are coming into the country than ever. Why continue a failed policy that's the main contributor to the violence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

Drugs are the main reason for gun violence in America. Legalizing them doesn't eliminate all the crime. You're never going to have zero crime. But why continue a policy that has clearly failed in it's purpose. Drug use and overdosing is at an all time high. More drugs are coming into the country than ever. Why continue a failed policy that's the main contributor to the violence?

Not to mention wasting billions and billions of dollars in the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

17 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

Drugs are the main reason for gun violence in America. Legalizing them doesn't eliminate all the crime. You're never going to have zero crime. But why continue a policy that has clearly failed in it's pIf you're speaking of legalizing/decriminalizing drugs, I'm all for it, but-- and I think we've had this discussion before-- I wouldn't expect that to make much difference in the rate of violent crime.urpose. Drug use and overdosing is at an all time high. More drugs are coming into the country than ever. Why continue a failed policy that's the main contributor to the violence?

I disagree with the bold, underline statement, but, as I said, we've done this before so I won't bother, just ask did alcohol cause the violence back in prohibition days?

But, I'm with you on  legalize/decriminalize. And you seem to be with me at locking up known present bad guys we know will commit future violent crimes for a long, long time.

( I see you seem to be having trouble with the quote/reply too? I'm finding it works better on firefox, it always gives me problems on chrome)

Edited by Saticon3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

20 minutes ago, Saticon3 said:

I disagree with the bold, underline statement, but, as I said, we've done this before so I won't bother, just ask did alcohol cause the violence back in prohibition days?

 

Of course it did. Al Capone was a nobody two bit thug until prohibition made him rich. I can't believe you even asked that. :lol:

Edited by bmore_ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

Of course it did. Al Capone was a nobody two bit thug until prohibition made him rich. I can't believe you even asked that. :lol:

I don't know about Al Capone so much but the mobs ruled by violence before during and after prohibition in rackets such as prostitution, protection, money laundering and out and out heists. Capone actually had a very short run at the top, 6- 7 years. Drugs is a nice little excuse they have going for the current violence, it allows folks to shrug their shoulders and accept it as inevitable. I know we discussed murders before in this vein, and since, I have posed the question to many of my former colleagues, now this is of course no scientific or comprehensive, definitive "study" but they all agree with me that, by far, the vast majority of murders  that we have personal knowledge of  where we could reach a conclusion as to motive, were not caused by drugs, drugs were a tangent or peripheral factor if at all,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Saticon3 said:

I don't know about Al Capone so much but the mobs ruled by violence before during and after prohibition in rackets such as prostitution, protection, money laundering and out and out heists. Capone actually had a very short run at the top, 6- 7 years. Drugs is a nice little excuse they have going for the current violence, it allows folks to shrug their shoulders and accept it as inevitable. I know we discussed murders before in this vein, and since, I have posed the question to many of my former colleagues, now this is of course no scientific or comprehensive, definitive "study" but they all agree with me that, by far, the vast majority of murders  that we have personal knowledge of  where we could reach a conclusion as to motive, were not caused by drugs, drugs were a tangent or peripheral factor if at all,

 

I can't speak to your comrades and their obvious expertise. However when a murder happens in East Baltimore at 2AM, you can be pretty sure drugs is involved. When a little girl is killed by stray bullets by two guys shooting at each other on her street, you better believe that's  more than likely drug related. You see the problem with people like your colleagues is if there is a murder and there are no drugs around, it's classified a not drug related, when the likelihood is the shooter and victim had some type of beef over a drug transaction.  We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a scant article but gives the idea, I know substance abuse is mentioned, but by that I think they mean drug users- well tend to do more wacked out things than non users but I thought your idea of drugs causing most violence was like due to turf wars and such

"

"Personal conflicts biggest cause of murders in U.S."

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-deaths-usa-idUSTRE64C53R20100513

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

25 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

I can't speak to your comrades and their obvious expertise. However when a murder happens in East Baltimore at 2AM, you can be pretty sure drugs is involved. When a little girl is killed by stray bullets by two guys shooting at each other on her street, you better believe that's  more than likely drug related. You see the problem with people like your colleagues is if there is a murder and there are no drugs around, it's classified a not drug related, when the likelihood is the shooter and victim had some type of beef over a drug transaction.  We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. 

Actually, I think in your scenarios the motives are more likely to be of revenge than drugs

I think the problem is when no one knows who murdered a person or why and they can somehow chalk it up to drugs, they do, even with nothing but for lack of a solution,  its easier to do, easier to deal with society and the --- as for the cases  me and my colleagues are speaking of, I did place the qualifier in my earlier post " where we could conclude a motive" and by that I meant by if not out and out knowing through investigation, a reasonable conclusion suggested by the facts as known, not an handy excuse for something.

( can't speak to my colleagues expertise. huh?-- which implies you have no respect or even contemplate the notion that I might have some)

Edited by Saticon3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

"

Cliff Gilley, B.A. Psychology & Sociology, University of Washington (1997)
 
Most murders have unknown causes (36% of total murders from 2005-2009).  More than likely, these are unsolved murders, as the counts include all reported murders.

The majority of the murders with known causes committed in the United States are one-time offenses, generally committed in the "heat of the moment", during arguments, often among people who know each other (25%).

Running a far 3rd are all felony-related murders (15%), of which Robbery (6%) and Drug offenses (4%) comprise the top two.

It's interesting to note that gang killings account for about the same percent of total murders as robberies (6% combining two categories).

In other words, you're far more likely to be killed in an argument with someone than you are to be gunned down by a robber or drug addict."

 

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-top-three-reasons-that-explain-why-murders-are-committed

 

https://hubpages.com/politics/why_do_people_get_murdered

Edited by Saticon3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, bmore_ken said:

Drugs are the main reason for gun violence in America. Legalizing them doesn't eliminate all the crime. You're never going to have zero crime. But why continue a policy that has clearly failed in it's purpose. Drug use and overdosing is at an all time high. More drugs are coming into the country than ever. Why continue a failed policy that's the main contributor to the violence?

OOOOHhhhh so that is thingy you were referring to.....40 years of the war on drugs.....instead of it being a war on drug abuse.

Got it. I am with you on that. Hard as it may seem to believe

But just give us bullet points. What is your master plan?

We remove certain penalties for illegal drugs and????????????????????????????

Since I am on ignore by his the highness .....care to comment?

Twist on the word btw.

Edited by Guido2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Saticon3 said:

"

Cliff Gilley, B.A. Psychology & Sociology, University of Washington (1997)
 
Most murders have unknown causes (36% of total murders from 2005-2009).  More than likely, these are unsolved murders, as the counts include all reported murders.

The majority of the murders with known causes committed in the United States are one-time offenses, generally committed in the "heat of the moment", during arguments, often among people who know each other (25%).

Running a far 3rd are all felony-related murders (15%), of which Robbery (6%) and Drug offenses (4%) comprise the top two.

It's interesting to note that gang killings account for about the same percent of total murders as robberies (6% combining two categories).

In other words, you're far more likely to be killed in an argument with someone than you are to be gunned down by a robber or drug addict."

 

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-top-three-reasons-that-explain-why-murders-are-committed

 

https://hubpages.com/politics/why_do_people_get_murdered

2

Yet some on here have this specious belief that they have the answers to all. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Saticon3 said:

 

( can't speak to my colleagues expertise. huh?-- which implies you have no respect or even contemplate the notion that I might have some)

Your colleagues mean well. But there's a difference in patrolling the streets and living them.  I Iived them and not the mean streets of Anne Arundel County. 

Edited by bmore_ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah so there are no native Baltimoreans that are police officers patrolling the streets who have also "lived the streets". Got it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Build more Jails. Construction Jobs! More Jobs for the Jailers too, that is if you pay them enough not to be Crooked instead of Minimum Wage like Security people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now