One of the most right-wing posts I've ever seen on DU.

...murderers, rapists and such should not be in for life?

If so why?

For a variety of reasons:

- The criminal justice system is classiest and racist. It will NEVER put rich white people in jail forever. Its delusional to think otherwise. So.. What you're really suggesting is looking up minorities and the poor forever.
- We can't afford to lock up that many people for life.
- As a rule criminal justice has always had a reform aspect; ditching that for whatever reasons you have won't happen.

So we can't and won't and even if we tried it wouldn't be fairly applied.

If you'd like to see a system that works check out Scandinavia - which has the lowest recidivism rates in the world. Also check out places with lower crime rates and see how they accomplish that; it's not through threats of harsher punishment. In fact the US has some of the most harsh punishment of any 1st world country and some of the worst crime rates. Make the obvious connection: tough punishments don't prevent crime. And endless jail terms don't prevent repeat offenders. And making the US prison population even larger (it's already the world's largest - and that includes China) won't stop violent crime.

Recidivism is a problem.
I don't like the idea of violent felons having access to firearms.
I don't like the idea of violent felons having access to knives over 3 inches long either.

When there is a system that reforms and rehabilitates the violent aggressors, I would consider the idea that they can be free.

There are many Scandinavian systems and practices that would have a positive effect in this country. I would encourage working to incorporate those into our government, economy and social behaviors.

We don't. We also don't have universal health care of a fair criminal justice system or affordable college or racial justice or proper policing etc etc etc.

What we have and what we should and could have are in many cases different but they don't have to be... As you note.

I believe - like with the war on drugs - and campaign finance - there's plenty of examples around the world of solutions that produce results; we should emulate success, not double down on failure.

Finally: we don't have the resources to lock up every murder and rapist and violent criminal forever. It's a non-starter. It's about as realistic as training unicorns to prevent gun violence in Chicago; wouldn't that be amazing... But it's literally never going to happen.

weren't the case before the reforms? What makes you think what might work in, say Germany, will work in a completely different culture like ours? Canada's and our cultures aren't even the same.

Actually we do, or would if we simply repeal a lot of stupid laws that make felons out of otherwise peaceful people, like the average pot grower. Most violent crimes are committed by very few people. The 80/20 rule is pretty universal.

Of course, there is Richmond, California
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/04/richmond-california-anti-violence_n_7504554.html

Scandinavian prisons weren't always the way the are now.

And no we don't have the resources. At all. We endlessly release people early due to lack of resources. Of course changing laws to lower prison populations would help, but they wouldn't create the cash needed for $740,000 x the number of violent offender a year for decades.

Between 2000-08 96,000 violent criminals were imprisoned on a state level alone: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States

That's $71,712,000,000 just to permanently jail violent offenders on a state level from just those 9 years. That doesn't include federal prisoners. And it's not even one decade.

How many hundreds of billions do you actually think the US should spend to lock up people forever? Especially since it doesn't lower crime rates.

Scandinavian recidivism rates before and after.

I didn't say all violent offenders, only those who can't be rehabilitated.

Because those few are a threat to society. Sociopaths are born not made. You are OK with letting sociopaths loose but barring the victims the means of defending themselves?

Funny you mention that, since the largest consensus of criminologists say the same thing about gun laws.

Check it out yourself. You probably wouldn't believe me anyway.

As for Sociopaths being born, that's exactly the opposite of true. You're thinking of psychopaths:

" Psychology researchers generally believe that psychopaths tends to be born — it’s likely a genetic predisposition — while sociopaths tend to be made by their environment. (Which is not to say that psychopaths may not also suffer from some sort of childhood trauma.)"

http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2015/02/12/differences-between-a-psychopath-vs-sociopath/

Like I said earlier in this discussion some people do need to be removed from society. But.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy

15-25% of people in prison are considered to be psychopaths/sociolaths. And yet, 50% of those incarcerated are violent criminals.

In the general 1% or less is considered to be either a sociopath or a psychopath. In the US though 0.08 percrntage is in prison. And 0.04 is in prison for violence.

Of course the percentage of psychopathy is the same in Europe, but Europe has much lower crime rates and smaller prison populations and lower recidivism rates.

And guess what, Americans have more access to guns to defend themselves and still suffer much more from crime than Europeans and Canadians who don't claim they need guns for defense from 1% of the population.

Actually, not really true either. Most of the crime is where gun laws are strict, like Chicago and Newark. Also, most of our murders are criminals killing each other.

Funny you mention that, since Canada and Europe had lower crime rates when they had no gun control at all. Once again, post hoc ergo propter hoc, and maybe a little card stacking on the side.

Psychopaths are rare in any society. BTW, "tend to believe" isn't proof.

you can EASILY check gun violence vs strict gun laws and see that's not true.

You can also see - if you bothered to check - that the majority of gun violence isn't criminals killing each other at all.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls

Europeans and Canadians do have lower crime rates, but some European countries have had gun control for close to 100 years, like Germany. Others still have had it since before handguns were relatively affordable. Others still have strong cultural disgust with guns, like France. Over time those became strict gun control policies. No country in Europe had a lot of guns and low gun crime. Then strict gun control and a lot of gun crime. That's not a thing.

and if you remove suicide from the definition of "gun violence" you will find that there is zero correlation. BTW, that table in the UCR doesn't back up your claim. It is a break down of gender and race.

No.

Actually, there were a lot of inexpensive guns made in Europe at the time, and it doesn't go back 100 years. I wouldn't define German law at the time as strict. Canada started registering and licencing handguns in the 1930s, machine guns and long guns were not regulated until machine guns had to be registered in the 1950s before being banned in 1977. None of it had anything to do with culture, it had everything to do with the Red Scare in the 1920s. BTW, France's gun ownership rate is somewhere between New Zealand and France. The high ownership rates in Europe, depending on the UN study you go by, are Norway, Finland, Czech Republic, Iceland, Switzerland. Some studies put Finland ahead of us, and Germany as fourth.

BTW, Brazil, Mexico, and Valenzuela all have stricter gun laws than Europe or Canada. USVI has roughly the same gun laws as Hawaii. Guam is about the same as Illinois. Yet, there doesn't seem to be any benefit. Again post hoc ergo propter hoc.

At this point, you are just making shit up.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/blog/Kleck_Patterson.pdf

We could lock up more of them if the 10% of the those in prison now (for drug crimes) weren't there. For that matter, without drugs as a motive or involved factor, we'd likely see fewer murders and not as many violent crime in general. Mostly murder is a crime of passion, convenience or necessity. All of those circumstances involve other crimes, for instance drugs.

What do you mean by "more" ?

This started out as a call to lock up every violent offender forever.

Not more than we do now but all.

And how are you deciding which won't be locked up forever? Or will it just be poor folks and minorities like it is now?

Finally - drugs are obviously a huge factor in the US prison population. Obviously. But realistically we'd still be talking about 10s of billions spent, in perpetuity, with little or no reduction in crime to speak of. Because there's no statistical connection to stiffer sentences and lower crime rates.

So... As far as I can see we're back where we started. An impossible idea that won't accomplish anything much.

What do you suggest?

of permanently locking up all violent offenders?

It's not feasible and won't happen so being for it is a waste of time IMO.

It's like not being for levitating - if it was possible maybe I'd reconsider, but as it's not...

Anyway, there's ENDLESS things America needs to do to lower it's crime and violent crime rates:

- reform the economy
- reform the education system
- reform the welfare system
- meaningfully work towards racial equality
- introduce meaningful gun control
- reassert the primacy of democracy over capitalism
- reform the criminal justice system
- close for profit prisons
- outlaw lobbying and mandate that all elections are state funded
- legalise drugs and treat addiction like an illness
- etc etc etc


Crime is a symptom largely, not a disease. Treat the disease and the symptoms will greatly lessen, at worst.

I agree. I'll get back to you.
This will be more than I'd want to type on my phone.

Take your time 👍

Our system (social, economic, justice...) needs to offer people more options and more support.
- Minimum wage needs to about double.
- Non-violent offenders NEVER go to prison.
- Healthcare needs to be a civil service job run by the individual states and federally subsidized.
- True capitalism maximizing small business opportunities needs to be simplified and the field leveled.
- Prisons, schools, hospitals, health insurance and healthcare overall need to be operated as non-profit preferably by government entities.
- Election reform (so major a topic it's beyond the scope of anything I could say in less than 1,000)
- Drugs: I'm almost at the point where I think we should have no laws at all on recreational drugs. The $5,000+/week addiction clinics need to be taken over by the states and publicly funded and managed just like public healthcare.
- Income inequality needs to be addressed and social support for people needs to be available.
- Volunteerism needs to be popularize, focused, expanded and built as a community resource.
- Firearm ownership transfers (sales, gifts, rentals, loans...) outside of immediate family need to go through a BGC at the local police or sheriff's office.
- Prisoners (the violent ones) have a phased return to the community: work within the facility and prove worthy of trust and your can move on (prison operated businesses, work release and ultimately parole.)
- Parole is a one per lifetime shot; screw it up and you're serve the remaining sentence. Subsequent convictions don't have parole as an option.
- Congressional reform: I'm not sure how or what but I don't really buy that 435 people can represent 320,000,000 (700,000+ each).
- Tax reform: from 1944 through 1963 to top marginal tax rate was over 90%. I've heard the '50s were some of the best years ever.

That's a start on my thinking.

Our system (social, economic, justice...) needs to offer people more options and more support.
- Minimum wage needs to about double.

Absolutely... and in some places it should be even higher... if you can't afford to live on 40 hours a week, with a child, the system is failing you massively. I won't dwell on it, but here in Ireland it's MUCH MUCH MUCH easier to raise a family. And society benefits from that.

- Non-violent offenders NEVER go to prison.

I'd not be ok with this if I'm honest, but I'd think prison has to be more like Swedish style prison. The goal has to be rehabilitation as much as punishment. Unless you're mentally ill crime is largely a sign of a larger problem which society has the obligation to acknowledge and address IMO.

- Healthcare needs to be a civil service job run by the individual states and federally subsidized.

I'm not sure why it needs to be run by states, unless you mean to make it more responsive, etc. I'd say that healthcare is LARGELY the same from state to state though, so national standards and local control is probably a good model.

- True capitalism maximizing small business opportunities needs to be simplified and the field leveled.

Sure, but true capitalism doesn't really exist anywhere - especially when government is levelling fields, so to speak. Innovation and job creation must be encouraged and protected, but... if we're all being honest... the economy is changing radically and will only continue to push people out of work in massive numbers. More important than small businesses (I am a small business owner btw) is protecting society as a whole.

- Prisons, schools, hospitals, health insurance and healthcare overall need to be operated as non-profit preferably by government entities.

100% - except health insurance as Americans think of it is anachronistic and should be done away with completely.

- Election reform (so major a topic it's beyond the scope of anything I could say in less than 1,000)

Agreed - this should be job one of any President.

- Drugs: I'm almost at the point where I think we should have no laws at all on recreational drugs. The $5,000+/week addiction clinics need to be taken over by the states and publicly funded and managed just like public healthcare.

Look at models that work: decriminalize and then treat addiction like a mental/physical health issue. That will also cut crime dramatically in many places almost immediately.

- Income inequality needs to be addressed and social support for people needs to be available.

That should be the secondary goal of any American government until it's accomplished.

- Volunteerism needs to be popularize, focused, expanded and built as a community resource.

Agreed... people want to be part of something larger and society needs all the help it can get.


- Firearm ownership transfers (sales, gifts, rentals, loans...) outside of immediate family need to go through a BGC at the local police or sheriff's office.

I personally think America needs an immediate moratorium on all gun sales, including private sales, and a 5 year plan to completely buy back all guns off the street. I ahve no interest in gun control that lowers gun crime and death by 10% - great though it would be - because that still means 27,000 dead Americans at the end of a gun every year - hardly a successful policy.

- Prisoners (the violent ones) have a phased return to the community: work within the facility and prove worthy of trust and your can move on (prison operated businesses, work release and ultimately parole.)

We don't disagree, but I think that it need a more holistic approach than that. You have to help people become trustworthy, not just reward some people who are already most of the way there. Rehabilitation is about helping people become part of society to lower recidivism and more importantly make society better for everyone. It's not just about segregating broken people into a hole and forgetting about them.

- Parole is a one per lifetime shot; screw it up and you're serve the remaining sentence. Subsequent convictions don't have parole as an option.

Again, it's like a driving instructor that only produces people that can't pass a driving test... who's to blame? the failed drivers or the instructor? If you can't rehabilitate people the system is broken. Some systems work and so there's no excuses really. If people do really repeat consistently a holistic view needs to be taken towards their life. It's much cheaper as well to help them outside of prison than in. IF they have mental health or addiction issues these need to be addressed.

- Congressional reform: I'm not sure how or what but I don't really buy that 435 people can represent 320,000,000 (700,000+ each).
Well, that's what local government is supposedly for. But yeah.. there' a MASSIVE disconnect between states and DC and that needs to be addressed.

- Tax reform: from 1944 through 1963 to top marginal tax rate was over 90%. I've heard the '50s were some of the best years ever.

Indeed. But it has to be acknowledged that the economy was wildly different back then. I'd suggest a more meaningful solution in 2016 (or 2020 or 2030) would be a guaranteed minimum income. It's coming in Europe in my lifetime, and in Asia to some degree. We're going to have extreme job losses in the coming decades and have to decide if we want to live in a dystopia or not.

That's a start on my thinking.

ABT - Always Be Thinking!

I currently see prison as neither punishment nor rehab. For me, prison would be 'you have a bad habit of hurting others so you're no longer allowed to be with them'...period.




In the US doctors and other professionals are licensed by the state(s) in which the practice. The US theory is that states regulate individuals and interpersonal behavior. The federal government regulates interstate activities, crimes and commerce. States set standards for their schools, they license doctors, teachers and drivers. States in many cases recognize each others licenses. Some states have certain taxes that you have to pay like an income tax but if you don't live in that state, your home state will credit some or all of the tax paid to the state where you work off of what you owe the home state.




BTW, I've had dealings with a jeweler in Ireland. Great folks, great products.




On the TV show Jeopardy, "The answer is 'health insurance' and the correct question would be: "How can we increase the cost of healthcare by 10-20% across the board with no benefit?"




I don't agree nor do I see that being any real answer. As was said in the movie Lord of War: "Where there's a will, there's a weapon." I do fundamentally agree that violent crime is mostly a symptom caused by other problems.




I've been talking to some co-workers about the same idea. I figure lots of people would be better off and the country would save money overall.


You have a nice night if you're still reading. If not have a great day when you're back.

like what good banning lobbying would do. There isn't a group that would support this. Lobbying is a form of petitioning the government and communicating with your representatives. Everyone is a member of at least two "special interest groups". Or are you saying that people should simply submit to politicians and political parties? I'm interesting on what you define as "reform" and other weasel words. What specific proposals. You have already said that you are for gun prohibition. Head up, if you happen to live in Norway, there are parts where the law mandates owning and carrying a firearm when not in the city. Just thought I would mention that.
Mine? We do know that Latin America has eight percent of the population, but one third of all homicides not counting military and para military operations. All of them have much stricter gun control laws than anywhere in Europe including the UK.
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-50-most-violent-cities-in-the-world-2015-1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate
Here are the fifty worst cities in the world, here is what they have in common. Out of the list, only three doesn't have strict gun control. Those are NOLA, St Louis, and Detroit.
What do they have in common?
As the article says, drug trafficking, gang wars, political instability, corruption, and poverty.
Let's focus on the US and expand it to not only the three listed above include DC, Chicago, Trenton, Memphis, Newark, Oakland, and Baltimore. Even then, it is concentrated in specific areas. What do these cities have in common? Like the rest they have
---political corruption
---gang warfare
---drug trafficking hubs
---poverty
---crumbling infrastructure in affected areas
---high illiteracy rate among high school graduates in affected areas
---anti intellectualism
food deserts more on that later.
---little to no opportunities for legitimate unemployment.
I have been in the poorest neighborhoods in Korea, Japan, and Germany. I did not see any of the above conditions. In Denver, DC, Metro Manila, San Francisco, I did.
Back to the food desert. Sometime ago, Obama said that it is easier to buy a gun than a fresh vegetable in parts of Chicago. Many of the gun blogs ridiculed him as being ignorant to the fact that there are no gun stores in Chicago, probably none in Cook County. I understood exactly what he meant. If you want to buy a gun in those parts of Chicago, you go see the guy that you get your weed or coke from. He might be next door. If you want to eat something other than shit loaded with chemicals and sodium from process foods isle at a gas station, then you have to travel a distance. That is why poor people are more obese than affluent people in this country. Since this is rather long, I will list some of my specific ideas.

Lobbying isn't really petitioning in a reasonable way. Lobbying is a "sell to the highest bidder" system of campaign financing. Politicians shouldn't have to be lobbied to represent their constituencies properly...and if we're honest... go spend some time on the open secrets website and see just what percentage of groups lobbying politicians represent the people and what percent represent corporations, foreign nations, and military contractors... for example.

I am for complete gun prohibition, in the same way a dad takes away a car from his son who keeps wrecking it; prove you can drive and we'll talk about giving you the keys back. I understand that some places can have guns and not have massive gun violence, but that's not America. I'm personally unwilling to just accept 30K dead Americans a year for no good reason.. or even 30K - 10% or 30K - 20%. No American SHOULD be, and if it was say, terrorism killing 30K a year Americans wouldn't be. Why we all just shrug when guns kill as many in 5-6 weeks as died on 9/11 is really unfathomable... well, it would be if you never met any American gun "enthusiasts".

As for Latin America, is that the goal for America? Rampant poverty, horrible infrastructure? Endemic crime?

I find these sorts of comparisons frankly nonsensical. We're not Costa Rica or Columbia, but if you wanna compare us, did you know that Louisiana has a similar gun violence rate to Costa Rico?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

It's also worse than the gun violence rate in Mexico, Paraguay, Peru and Argentina.

And it has a 44% gun ownership rate.

That's a US state, part of one of the richest countries in the world...

And yet Costa Rica's "healthcare system is ranked higher than that of the United States, despite having a fraction of its GDP" and until recently is had fewer uninsured people per capita than America.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costa_Rica

Anyway, we shouldn't be comparing one of the richest countries in the world to Latin American countries. It's silly.

Now about the most dangerous cities list... are you sure again that comparing places like Caracas to say Denver Colorado makes any sense at all? Let's just say that very very few of the laws matter much in some parts of the world, so gun control is more of a notion than an enforced law. Is NYC not able to enforce laws any better than San Pedro Sula? The truth is that gun owners support background checks BECAUSE they think they'll work. Americans generally believe laws are enforceable, because relatively speaking they are IN AMERICA. Not so much in third world and developing countries.

I understand food deserts! many parts of Flint Michigan are more than a 10 mins drive from a 7/11 and more than a 20 mins drive from a micro-grocery store/bodega. And sure don't even start me on lead paint. America is a wreck in many many ways.

but that isn't relevant to crime rates.

Unions are at the top of the list too. See how that works? I don't buy the bribery argument. Most of the time it is the politicians shaking the rest down.
Actually, that is most of America, and you just made it clear that you are not a liberal. You might be a progressive, but certainly not a liberal. I have nothing but disdain for the regressive left. We are not children and the State is not daddy.
two out of three are suicides. If there were no guns, they would simply be suicide by other means like other 18K suicides. I don't call that a progress.
No, Chicago and Baltimore is already there. The point is that, to use an analogy of criminologist James Wright in explaining why gun control doesn't work, you prevent malaria by destroying the mosquito's habitat. IOW, you drain the swamp.
Why do you find them nonsensical? We aren't Iceland, Australia, or Japan either, what's your point? Culturally, we have more in common with those countries than anywhere in Europe. If you use an economic indicator like Human Development Index, Latin America and places like Estonia come relevant.
If we are talking about Louisiana, NOLA is less than ten percent of the population but accounts for half of the murders. If you are talking murder rates, Mexico has a higher murder rate and the others aren't too far behind. If NOLA were to secede, Louisiana's per capita murder rate would be less than half of what it is now.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state
I don't know how that is relevant or the criteria used, but their murder rate is twice ours. Also, abortion is illegal there.
I explained the parallels. Please explain why it doesn't? Let's just say humans and dinosaurs were co existed, same difference.
Actually, anyone that seriously studies the issue doubts background checks work. To begin with, criminals don't go to gun shows or FFLs. Studies starting with the Wright Rossi study in the 1980s showed that. It also showed the Gun Control Act to be ineffective. BTW, background checks have been law for two decades.
http://www.amazon.com/Armed-Considered-Dangerous-New-Second/dp/0202362426/ref=pd_sim_14_1?ie=UTF8&dpID=51FRHakasLL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL320_SR214%2C320_&refRID=09XF7HD7HHDCV92QQQGQ

http://www.amazon.com/Under-Gun-Weapons-Violence-America/dp/0202303063

To be perfectly honest, what it sounds like to me is that you are less concerned about how people kill themselves and each other than actually saving lives. IOW, just another culture warrior. Your "daddy and car keys" analogy reminds me of another poster some time ago. That is illiberal and smacks of what Sam Harris calls "the regressive left".
One more thing
review_strongest_research_shows_no_link_between_gun_ownership_rates_and_higher_crime

I'm going to bed. I'll probably respond to this properly tomorrow but..

To your last point.

Saying I'm more concerned about the how underscores the reality of life and death in America. You're playing every card in the book to try and make it about anything BUT guns because you're a gun ideologue. It can't be guns in your book and nothing can convince you otherwise. Even though guns - and no other weapon - kills thousands of kids a year.

Americans + guns = 30k dead a year. That's the bottom line for me in the discussion of guns in America. America + guns. Not Norway + guns or China + guns or anywhere else + guns.

logical fallacies. Mine is based on facts, evidence, and reason backed up with decades of peer reviewed and verified criminology studies. You are simply repeating the standard talking points.. AS for ideologue, you are projecting.

"kids" is appeal to emotion, another logical fallacy. If you look up the suicide statistics, you will find that ropes kill thousands a year. If you look through the FBI UCR, you will find that knives do too. Oh, heroin kills even more. That is before we get to the other opiates and drugs like cocaine.

first I must warn that these will piss off people of both parties and different interest groups of both parties. You know what? I really don't give a shit because AFAIC, ideology is like organized religion, short on reason and long on dogma.

---First, end the drug war. Take away the money, take away the guns. Repeal the federal prohibition on at least pot. Addiction should be treated as a medical issue, not a criminal one.
---Change welfare rules that don't force fathers out of the house when times are bad. A hand up, not a hand out. While you are giving that hand up, you don't let go when the helpee is only half way up. IOW, remove disincentives to find a job or do something constructive like cutting food stamps when they go back to school.
---Get cities to repeal stupid zoning ordinances that make neighborhoods unwalkable. One thing I noticed living in Japan and Korea, local business mixed residences created a real community. Makes jobs close by and makes people less dependent on motor vehicles.
---Urban farming in greenhouses, if a farmer can do it for profit by selling in local markets year round, why not? Just look at all the empty lots in places like Detroit.
---Provide microloans available to create these small businesses. First priority should be the 20 worst.
---End incentives for companies to offshore manufacturing jobs and create new companies here in urban areas, not industrial parks at the edge of town.
---Fix education. I don't care about ideology, I care about results. School districts in places like Chicago spend a lot per student but half the graduates are functionally illiterate, something is wrong.
---Community policing. Most residents in these places want sub stations. I don't mean cops who live someplace else and drive around in their patrol cars. Yeah they can be there. I'm talking about men and women who live in the area and walk beats and ride horseback. One horse back cop told me in Tampa that he gets the best intelligence by riding a horse through the projects. Kids love horses and rat out the asshole uncle while petting the horse. Trust between the Man and the people in the area is a must.
---Deglamorize criminal misuse of guns. I want those kids to associate guns with the nerdy kid in Rifle Club, Harvard shooting team, and the ISSF World Cup, not using it to be King Bad Ass of the block.
---When local cops bust out of state traffickers, hand them over to the feds for violating the GCA, interstate gun sales without a license, instead of letting local DAs drop the gun crime charges like they usually do.
---Change the sentencing guidelines for straw buyers for known felons. If caught, they usually get probation.
---An EO that instructs US attorneys to accept and prosecute for felon in possession charges local police hand to them. I was disappointed that wasn't part of Obama's earlier EAs.
---Oh, end gun free zones. I agree with the then INTERPOL head after the mall attack in Nairobi.

---First, end the drug war. Take away the money, take away the guns. Repeal the federal prohibition on at least pot. Addiction should be treated as a medical issue, not a criminal one.

100% agree

---Change welfare rules that don't force fathers out of the house when times are bad. A hand up, not a hand out. While you are giving that hand up, you don't let go when the helpee is only half way up. IOW, remove disincentives to find a job or do something constructive like cutting food stamps when they go back to school.

Kind of agree. I see no point at all in massive bureaucracies. I am very much in favour of a guaranteed minimum income that is facilitated by employers and a centralised database system like we do with taxes. If you fall below a threshold you get topped up to meet the minimum to insure you can continue paying rent, paying bills and shopping. Sure, many economists see a world in which 30% unemployment is a norm in the coming decades... I see no benefit in pretending food stamps and massive government programs to means test the population on a weekly basis. I don't WANT that sort of unemployment by I do think it's inevitable and we better hope that Americans are a bit more generous to their fellow man than they were in the great depression.

---Get cities to repeal stupid zoning ordinances that make neighborhoods unwalkable. One thing I noticed living in Japan and Korea, local business mixed residences created a real community. Makes jobs close by and makes people less dependent on motor vehicles.

The same is true all over Europe. People walk everywhere. Europeans - as I'm sure you know - can't get their head around Americans driving EVERYWHERE. They're not wrong. So I 100% agree.

---Urban farming in greenhouses, if a farmer can do it for profit by selling in local markets year round, why not? Just look at all the empty lots in places like Detroit.

Agreed. And there are people all over the world looking into just that - even high rise farms.

---Provide microloans available to create these small businesses. First priority should be the 20 worst.

While this is good in theory, small businesses are finding it hard to compete in America, because of endless chains. I do support it but wonder what percentage of people it's actually a solution for, long term.

---End incentives for companies to offshore manufacturing jobs and create new companies here in urban areas, not industrial parks at the edge of town.

Well... many of the incentives aren't incentives given, but are incentives based on the disparity between wages from country to country. And of course, the main way US companies will compete in the future is with automation... which doesn't help workers an awful lot.

---Fix education. I don't care about ideology, I care about results. School districts in places like Chicago spend a lot per student but half the graduates are functionally illiterate, something is wrong.

The US education system is a total wreck; it's pathetic. Emulate systems that work. Of course part of the issue stems from the fact that ideology DOES drive education policy in America, on both sides of the aisle. Fix that and you'll get somewhere.

---Community policing. Most residents in these places want sub stations. I don't mean cops who live someplace else and drive around in their patrol cars. Yeah they can be there. I'm talking about men and women who live in the area and walk beats and ride horseback. One horse back cop told me in Tampa that he gets the best intelligence by riding a horse through the projects. Kids love horses and rat out the asshole uncle while petting the horse. Trust between the Man and the people in the area is a must.

Local cops in cars is one of the worst policing decision America ever made. It's an unfortunate necessity in a FEW places, but certainly not universally. In Ireland - and in Europe - cops are on the street... and the relationship is NOT antagonistic. Cops also don't have guns here. As an aside.

---Deglamorize criminal misuse of guns. I want those kids to associate guns with the nerdy kid in Rifle Club, Harvard shooting team, and the ISSF World Cup, not using it to be King Bad Ass of the block.

Meh. Sounds a bit like "Ozzy Osbourne made my son kill..." glamourising bazookas wouldn't mean an upsurge in bazooka violence either... because people can't get bazookas.

---When local cops bust out of state traffickers, hand them over to the feds for violating the GCA, interstate gun sales without a license, instead of letting local DAs drop the gun crime charges like they usually do.

Again, piecemeal gun control works about as well as piecemeal anti-organised crime laws.

---Change the sentencing guidelines for straw buyers for known felons. If caught, they usually get probation.

You know how I feel about this.

---An EO that instructs US attorneys to accept and prosecute for felon in possession charges local police hand to them. I was disappointed that wasn't part of Obama's earlier EAs.

See my last comment

---Oh, end gun free zones. I agree with the then INTERPOL head after the mall attack in Nairobi.

The preponderance of guns in America kills way more people than gun free zones. Saying that, it's just another tiny bit of meaningless gun control... nothing short of a complete ban will save a meaningful number of Americans lives.

it is more foot patrol, bicycle, and horseback. Out of the countries where cops don't carry guns, UK is the only one that doesn't have a medium to high gun ownership rate.

there is zero empirical evidence to support your claim. Ideology and dogma have no place in public policy any more than religion does.

I was trying to say I agree with you re community policing. Sorry for the confusion.

And there's plenty of empirical evidence that gun free zones don't kill people as much as a preponderance of guns. Europe as a whole is basically a gun free zone and guess what...very little gun violence. The same goes for Japan.

America has an absurd number of guns and an absurd amount of gun violence. Take away all the guns and the gun free zones will be safe.

There's no evidence at all - anywhere - that a lot of guns = safety. That's ideology. Practice what you preach.

Peer reviewed criminal science says otherwise.
Actually it isn't, and the murder rates were about the same when there was no gun control laws. Our culture, economics, demographics, the nature of our crime problems, other social issues make comparing us to Europe more absurd than what you think Latin America is.
Japan has something we don't. You think comparing us to Latin America is absurd, but you use Japan? Comparing a racially and ethnically diverse, individualistic, free country with a federal system with a collectivist, racist, no respect for individual rights, and not exactly diverse country with a unitary system like Japan?

it seems that gun prohibitionists cling to the same logical fallacies and unlike comparison.

If you are in Iceland, the cops don't carry guns but the private gun ownership rate is higher than Florida. Another thing, do the areas of Norway where gun ownership is pretty much required have a higher murder rate than the areas that don't?

Americans can't handle guns. It's Americans + guns.

Guns at the bottom of the ocean don't kill anyone but guns in the hands of Americans kill as many people as died on 9/11 every 5-6 weeks. If that was happening in Norway they should remove guns. But it's not. Comparing the two is also nonsensical because the areas where it's required are mostly isolated and rural. In cities gun ownership is rare. If America could do that I'd be ok with it. In fact I'd also be ok with all guns in America being replace with a single shot hunting rifle. If your just obsessed with having a gun, you can have that. It would cut down on gun violence overnight. In fact if that happened and all guns had biometric safeties.. And if owners could only legally own say 5 bullets at a time (and had to return casings to buy more) then grand. Feel free.

But until the point where gun violence drops by 75 - 80% I'm not ok with guns in America. And trying to use other countries - and their ability not to massacre each other - isn't a cogent argument when America obviously can't do that.

Last edited Mon May 30, 2016, 08:44 AM - Edit history (1)

are people who are not the problems. As I have provided arguments with fact, reason, backed up with peer reviewed science that you have not read any of the links, unless you are Evelyn Wood's best student.
BTW, you are assuming what the gun ownership rate is in urban Norway. I doubt anyone but their government has that. IOW, it is all about ideology and not solving problems. Because, it isn't about actually saving lives, it is about ideological and cultural dominance. That is true with most gun prohibitionists. Either that, or they have the critical thinking skills of young Earth creationists.

No it won't. Remember what I said about open bolt machine guns? What is your obsession about prohibition?
Seriously, there is a world wide ban on heroin, which kills more people than guns in the US, but somehow guns will magically disappear. As I pointed out using the links from Australian media, that isn't how it works. At this point, it doesn't seem that you are actually interested in an honest discussion based on facts, evidence and reason.
I do have to ask is, why would gun laws prevent criminals from getting them when laws against heroin or cocaine and strict regulation of other addictive drugs doesn't prevent 44K deaths a year? Heroin alone killed 14K last year.

Maybe you've lost interest.

Still love your sauce though.

I just didn't see it.

What evidence that one has anything to do with the other? Do you have any evidence that the lack of recidivism has anything to do with their system? Their crime was just as low, if not lower, when their prisons were complete shit holes.

Our system is more classist and sexist, in favor of women, than racist. For example, while a black male will get a stiffer sentence than a white male, the white guy will still get a stiffer sentence than a black female.

Actually, Sweden is the rape capital of the world. Either way, it has nothing to do with their prison system. While there is a valid argument that rehabilitation is better than warehousing, and I agree with that, but some people are just fucking evil. Then again, a lot of people are in for shit that shouldn't be crimes to begin with. Then again, there are people who should never see outside of razor wire again.

First, second, and third world is an outdated and meaningless distinction. If you think our prisons suck, check out Japanese and South Korean prisons.

There's been absolutely endless studies that show that their system does indeed lower recidivism.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/why-scandinavian-prisons-are-superior/279949/

Sweden is NOT the rape capital of the world. For someone that demands evidence of aims you certainly have no problem saying things without providing any.

https://m.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/36d3z8//

And no some people are not just "evil". That's not a thing. There's some seriously mentally ill people that do horrible horrible things but they aren't "evil". There are also people that should be incarcerated for the good of society, absolutely... But that's not the case with a huge percentage of people in the US prison system.

And while you may dislike the terms first second and third world the undying principle is still sound: comparing crime rates in Liberia and Monaco is mostly meaningless.

Finally while the Japanese prison system is hard it is also hard to end up in. The Japanese system is muchess likely to put people in prison relative to the US, and indeed Japan has a much lower crime rate.

Japanese prison itself is not nearly as dangerous (or drug infested) as US prison though. It is much closer to a military system.

http://japan.usembassy.gov/mobile//e/acs/tacs-7110g.html

South Korea also has much lower incarceration rates, much less drug use in its prisons and much lower incidence of prisoner on prisoner violence.

You can also see that the only rich country with numerous violent prisons is the US:

http://www.criminaljusticedegreehub.com/top-10-most-violent-prisons-in-the-world/

and it simply doesn't use evidence.
The Riddit link doesn't go anywhere. Besides, using a comment on Riddit is, well bullshit.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-19592372
Sweden also has a problem with political correctness like the UK and Germany.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28934963

I didn't say why Japanese prisons sucked, I just said they sucked. While "military like" treatment in Japan is much like the Canadian Forces military brig at CFB Edmonton, Edmonton and US prisons are more humane. Not only does the food suck, the guards tend to beat the shit out of you. Japan has a lower crime rate, but that has nothing to do with their prison system. For one thing, as a suspect, you have zero rights. OK, they exist on paper, but the reality is that you don't get an impartial jury trial, you might meet your lawyer a couple of days before trial, there is no exclusionary rule, forced confessions are admissible in court, you can be held up to a month without charges or anyone being informed, and "questioning" is very brutal by American standards.
Japan and South Korea also has a different definition of excessive force than we do.

Actually, Mexico is rich. The wealth just isn't distributed very well. We have a higher population than any of those countries, including France. Get back with me if you figure out per capita. Besides, I doubt it is and all inclusive list.

So we shouldn't trust the criminal justice system where incarceration is concerned, but we should trust it where gun rights are concerned?

You must be new here.

Right-wing posts are de rigueur in the Gungeon.

This is pretty extremely right-wing.

On How you define right wing.

I live in Europe which is much more progressive than the US and is much more into gun control.

And of course the loudest American anti-aging control advocates are all hardcore right-wingers.

But think what you want.

Hubert Humphrey was a strong supporter of 2A as well. I damned well don't prefer the center-right corporatist Hillary Clinton.

BTW, a lot of white folks have been permanently warehoused in prison, and died there; one of the latest of these recruits was given the key-less cell routine on Jacksonville, Fla for shooting a a car filld with unarmed black teens.

The NRA was taken over my radicals in 1977, well after JFK. So that's a red-herring.

As for the permanent warehousing thing... some are, but the original idea was EVERY VIOLENT OFFENDER for LIFE. That's 10s and 10s of Billions.... not counting the cost of building endless new prisons... it'll never happen... nor should it.

It wasn't a pro-gun poster who said this:

Or this:

Went even farther

I doubt very much that any pro-gun poster has EVER suggested shooting anti-gunners. Or breaking their arms.

That discussed the surge in crime in certain major cities (Chicago, DC, Baltimore, etc.) that stated that something like 70% of felons convicted of violent crimes commit additional crimes after being released from prison. I personally would ban violent felons from both owning firearms and being able to vote. Someone on this board recently expressed their support for allowing felons to vote while incarcerated - I don't think that rapists, murderers, white supremacists or gang members should have any say in who leads this country. And they certainly shouldn't be permitted to own weapons of any kind.