XPost: alt.lawyers, utexas.law, talk.politics.guns
XPost: alt.prisons, alt.current-events.usa, alt.politics.media
XPost: alt.law-enforcement, talk.politics.drugs
From: DEMI_GOD_@SHAW.CA
"Shitting Bitch" wrote
news:M1uhc.470248$B81.7904588@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "_ G O D _" wrote
> news:QHqhc.182008$Pk3.120135@pd7tw1no...
> > > a) I'm not a newbie.
> >
> > You may not consider yourself so, but next to every other member
> > on this forum, you're the nubie in full definition of the word....
>
> Um, you just misspelled the word you used to describe me.
One of the specific traits of nubies, is their showing own penis breath,
especially when they don't have a slightest idea about transliteration....
> > > b) Banishment doesn't protect the public from criminals, it only allows
> > > criminals to commit crimes elsewhere.
> >
> > But neither does so expensive and damaging to rights, incarceration....
>
> So, you argue before that Banishment IS a solution, but above admit that it
> doesn't protect the public from criminals. Thanks for admitting your lie.
There is not a trace of lie. Therefore there couldn't be an *admission*
to it.... You are insistently using your imbecility, Bitch, to deliberately
ignore the most important points about incarceration industry, which
is "being extremely expensive and damaging to the rights" of people.
The main point of banishment is to prevent from crime happen again
in the same community by the same individual. So, crime is addressed.
When individual is being incarcerated, there is even more chances that
one will commit a graver crime much sooner than later, whether during
one's incarceration, or after release from expensive custody - against
the same *victims*, again and again....
> > > c) Shuffling the criminals to a new deck is not a solution, only a
> > > transferrence of the problem to someone else's hands.
> >
> > You mean the offender is compelled to confront one's own problem?
>
> How are they compelled to confront any problem? They're just
> moved to a new place to start breaking the law all over again.
How do you / would you *know* they will be breaking the law?
(Especially in a "lawless environment?" Because there as are
such places still exist, and can be elected by the freed inmate)
> > > Now, if I'm mistaken in my assumption that banishment
> > > transfers the criminals to another place, go ahead and
> > > say so. Otherwise, I've proven my point quite well.
> >
> > What's *exactly* YOUR POINT, to see "being proven?"
>
> That banishment IS NOT a viable solution to the prison system.
> It doesn't protect the public, and doesn't deter crime in any way.
> Atleast the possibility of being locked away serves as deterrent
> for a small percentage of the criminal population.
Well, Shitting Bitch, banishment may not prevent crime from
happening again. But it will certainly prevent from the same
individual committing ANY crime in the same jurisdiction....
Between Shithead Jerkoff and COCKSUCKINGKID, they say
of recidivism as running from 65% to 75%, which is quite hefty...
That's a relief, in addition to the relief from over-taxation and
the uninvited violation of Human Rights by the prison industry....
It may also be a deterrent for both, those who haven't committed
any crimes, but because of the dread of banishment, won't do
it. And for those who have been convicted of their crimes and
were banished from a place they have cherished so much....
But most valuable part of banishment of course, is the
necessity for so needed reeducation (which as a rule
being turned down during imprisonment), and could be
obtained with availability of it (in most countries of the
world) together with learning a new language or job skills.
--
_____________________________________________________
I intend to last long enough to put out of business all COck-suckers
and other employees of all institutions of the incarceration industry.
----------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
-----
"The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive
Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or
high security, or a high budget. The army that can defeat terrorism
does battle quietly, clearing minefields and vaccinating children. It
undermines military dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts
sweatshops and special interests.Where people feel powerless, it
helps them organize for change, and where people are powerful, it
reminds them of their responsibility." ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~
___________________________________________________
--
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
