CDZ Should prisoners be released from jail and prison over the Chinese virus?

Status
Not open for further replies.

CowboyTed

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
8,091
Reaction score
1,699
Points
290
Location
Ireland
No...those criminals will be screwed....but we can isolate them in their already isolated prison cells.........rather than let them out to attack normal citizens....
Or we could have common sense gun control so they can't get guns so easily... naw, that would be silly.

Let's keep locking up millions of people in close quarters. Yeah, that makes sense.

We have common sense gun control....the problem is that the democrat party politicians, as above, judges and prosecutors keep letting violent, repeat gun offenders out of jail and prison...over and over again........

We don't have a gun problem, we don't have a normal people who own guns problem.....we have a problem with the democrat party letting violent, repeat gun offenders out of prison.......over and over again...they are the ones driving the gun crime and murder rate....
Please stop saying Americans are violent people... A set of thugs...

Have some respect... Your just Anti-American...

Shame on this guy trying to claim Americans are just a bunch of Animals that want to kill each other at over 4 times the rate of UK..

Anti-American bullshit
 

Montrovant

Fuzzy bears!
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
21,202
Reaction score
4,389
Points
290
Location
A Picturesque Apocalypse
Wow, so you were inconvenienced for a couple of days. Yes, that's totally a good reason to lock someone up for life at a cost of $90,000 a year.
What do you think should be the consequences for stealing or destroying someone else's property?
I know you're talking to JoeB, but I'm curious: do you think that is a question with a single answer? If someone steals or destroys another's pen, should the penalty be the same as if they steal or destroy another's car, in other words?
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,787
Reaction score
3,592
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
I know you're talking to JoeB, but I'm curious: do you think that is a question with a single answer? If someone steals or destroys another's pen, should the penalty be the same as if they steal or destroy another's car, in other words?
Obviously, stealing and vandalism cover a very wide range. I've asked that question, now three or four times of JoeB131 without receiving an answer. In asking it, I was responding to his apparent position that a specific crime that was committed against me is not worthy of the perpetrator going to jail. This is a crime that cost me several hundreds of dollars in losses, that I really couldn't have afforded to lose at that time, and seriously threatened my continued ability to make a living. Had most of my stolen tools not been recovered, I'd have been seriously screwed. I need those tools to make my living, and I would not have been able to replace them at that time. It was bad enough having to bear the costs of repairing the damage to my car, and replacing the tools that were not recovered, not to mention the lost wages from having to miss work to deal with all of this.

It's not just an attack on my property; it's an attack on my ability to put food on my table, keep a roof over my head, and otherwise to meet my survival needs along with those of my wife.

That same morning, several other cars in my apartment complex were also broken into, and in total, probably several thousands of dollars worth of property stolen from them, probably all by that same one subhuman piece of shit.

JoeB131 seems to think that someone who commits such a crime as that, which causes so much harm to another, and has the potential to cause so much more, doesn't merit throwing the subhuman piece of shit in prison who commits such a crime. I'm trying to get him to say what he thinks the consequences should be for committing such a crime.
 
Last edited:

Montrovant

Fuzzy bears!
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
21,202
Reaction score
4,389
Points
290
Location
A Picturesque Apocalypse
I know you're talking to JoeB, but I'm curious: do you think that is a question with a single answer? If someone steals or destroys another's pen, should the penalty be the same as if they steal or destroy another's car, in other words?
Obviously, stealing and vandalism cover a very wide range. I've asked that question, now three or four times of JoeB131 without receiving an answer. In asking it, I was responding to his apparent position that a specific crime that was committed against me is not worthy of the perpetrator going to jail. This is a crime that cost me several hundreds of dollars in losses, that I really couldn't have afforded to lose at that time, and seriously threatened my continued ability to make a living. Had most of my stolen tools not been recovered, I'd have been seriously screwed. I need those tools to make my living, and I would not have been able to replace them at that time. It was bad enough having to bear the costs of repairing the damage to my car, and replacing the tools that were not recovered, not to mention the lost wages from having to miss work to deal with all of this.

It's not just an attack on my property; it's an attack on my ability to put food on my table, keep a roof over my head, and otherwise to meet my survival needs along with those of my wife.

That same morning, several other cars in my apartment complex were also broken into, and in total, probably several thousands of dollars worth of property stolen from them, probably all by that same one subhuman piece of shit.

JoeB131 seems to think that someone who commits such a crime as that, which causes so much harm to another, and has the potential to cause so much more, doesn't merit throwing the subhuman piece of shit in prison who commits such a crime. I'm trying to get him to say what he thinks the consequences should be for committing such a crime.
I appreciate the reply.

I won't even attempt to speak for JoeB. I would like to point out, though, that you made comparisons to horse thieves and cattle rustlers, and said that there was good reason such crimes merited hanging. That at least gives an impression that you consider theft and property destruction to be potentially death penalty offenses. In addition, in responding to JimBowie's comment, you seemed to indicate that you think most criminals should be imprisoned for life, because few have the possibility of rehabilitation. Specifically, when asked if all criminals should be locked up for life, you replied, "Not necessarily all of them. Some may be salvageable." Those are somewhat vague statements, but at least IMO, they seem to indicate that you generally would consider it reasonable to have any crime punishable by a life sentence. That's a pretty extreme position. It may have to do with some of the responses you've gotten. It may not even be your actual position, I'm just explaining what the things you posted seem to say when I read them.

That said, I do agree that some property crimes can have a far greater impact than others. It can go well beyond mere inconvenience; under some circumstances, lives can be ruined. I know you didn't ask me, but I'll say that for me, I think such circumstances ought to be taken into account in sentencing. I don't think I would agree with you about how severe sentences ought to be, but I certainly understand where a harsher perspective comes from.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
121,187
Reaction score
10,866
Points
2,055
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Obviously, stealing and vandalism cover a very wide range. I've asked that question, now three or four times of @JoeB131 without receiving an answer. In asking it, I was responding to his apparent position that a specific crime that was committed against me is not worthy of the perpetrator going to jail. This is a crime that cost me several hundreds of dollars in losses, that I really couldn't have afforded to lose at that time, and seriously threatened my continued ability to make a living. Had most of my stolen tools not been recovered, I'd have been seriously screwed. I need those tools to make my living, and I would not have been able to replace them at that time. It was bad enough having to bear the costs of repairing the damage to my car, and replacing the tools that were not recovered, not to mention the lost wages from having to miss work to deal with all of this.
If you didn't have insurance, that's on you, buddy. No, we should not spend tens of thousands of dollars locking up a guy because you lost a few hundred. That's just daft. Force him to make restitution, have a fund to make up the rest of your loses. Done.

@JoeB131 seems to think that someone who commits such a crime as that, which causes so much harm to another, and has the potential to cause so much more, doesn't merit throwing the subhuman piece of shit in prison who commits such a crime. I'm trying to get him to say what he thinks the consequences should be for committing such a crime.
He should make monetary restitution, being garnished out of any future wages.

The real problem is our system would throw him in jail (Costing about $40,000 a year) because you lost a few hundred dollars in property damage and wages. Then we saddle that poor fool with a criminal conviction that follows him around for the rest of his life, rendering him largely unemployable, which means he's very likely to become a repeat offender.

Hey, funny thing, the Europeans don't have these kinds of issues, because they only lock people up when they commit serious crimes like rape and murder. We lock up 2 million people we have the worst crime statistics in the industrialized world. Japan locks up 69,000, Germany 78,000 and they have very low crime rates. Maybe we should look at what they are doing right.
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,787
Reaction score
3,592
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
If you didn't have insurance, that's on you, buddy.
So your response is that it is the responsibility of the potential victim of a crime to be able to absorb the cost of being victimized.

It is no surprise, of course, that ultimately, you blame the victim rather than the perpetrator.


Force him to make restitution, have a fund to make up the rest of your loses.
He should make monetary restitution, being garnished out of any future wages.
So, the piece of shit who commits a crime, if he gets caught, has to, in effect, give back what he stole. Otherwise, no consequences.

The real problem is our system would throw him in jail (Costing about $40,000 a year) because you lost a few hundred dollars in property damage and wages.
No, the problem is that for whatever reason, we have more than our fair share of subhuman piece of shit running around, who are willing to cause harm to others, for their own selfish purposes; and we do not impose nearly sufficient consequences on them for their crimes.

You probably would love California's 2014 Proposition 47. The LIbEral filth that infest our state government lied to the people to get this proposition voted into law. They promised that it would make us safer, by changing the way crimes were prioritized for enforcement.

The practical effect has been that certain broad classes of crimes, deemed “non-violent” do not get investigated or prosecuted at all. And the result has been a massive increase in the crimes so reclassified.

That's what happens when you allow pieces of subhuman shit to commit crimes with impunity, without any fear of being arrested or prosecuted or otherwise held accountable. They commit more crime, and there is nothing to stop them.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
121,187
Reaction score
10,866
Points
2,055
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
So your response is that it is the responsibility of the potential victim of a crime to be able to absorb the cost of being victimized.

It is no surprise, of course, that ultimately, you blame the victim rather than the perpetrator.
I'm a realist. I don't walk through the West Side of Chicago at 2 AM, I don't leave my valuables in my car, and I buy insurance on my vehicle and property... It's called being a responsible adult.

So, the piece of shit who commits a crime, if he gets caught, has to, in effect, give back what he stole. Otherwise, no consequences.
Works for me. What we are doing (Locking people up for years, rendering them unemployable, having a bloated Prison-Industrial Complex) isn't working.

No, the problem is that for whatever reason, we have more than our fair share of subhuman piece of shit running around, who are willing to cause harm to others, for their own selfish purposes; and we do not impose nearly sufficient consequences on them for their crimes.
You do realize this is the CDZ, right?

I don't know why that guy broke into your car. Maybe he was hungry. Maybe he was addicted to drugs and couldn't get into a program. Or maybe they were just some teenage kids showing very bad judgment.

Point is, no one died, no one was injured. You were angry, I get that, but at the end of the day, the total damages were only a few hundred. Certainly not worth the $40,000 to lock him up to teach him he did a bad thing.

You probably would love California's 2014 Proposition 47. The LIbEral filth that infest our state government lied to the people to get this proposition voted into law. They promised that it would make us safer, by changing the way crimes were prioritized for enforcement.

The practical effect has been that certain broad classes of crimes, deemed “non-violent” do not get investigated or prosecuted at all. And the result has been a massive increase in the crimes so reclassified.
Do you actually have links to this, or are you doing "Feels" again.

The reality, when my house was broken into back in 1989, (I was on maneuvers at the time with my unit) the cops didn't "investigate". They wrote out a report for me to submit to my insurance company, and that was it.

That's what happens when you allow pieces of subhuman shit to commit crimes with impunity, without any fear of being arrested or prosecuted or otherwise held accountable. They commit more crime, and there is nothing to stop them.
You work on the assumption the Prison-Industrial Complex is a real deterrent. In fact, it makes it worse. We lock people up for property or drug crimes, often with people who are career criminals, and then when they get out, they have no employment prospects so they go back to committing crimes.

1586169452979.png
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,787
Reaction score
3,592
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
Works for me. What we are doing (Locking people up for years, rendering them unemployable, having a bloated Prison-Industrial Complex) isn't working.
I don't know why that guy broke into your car. Maybe he was hungry. Maybe he was addicted to drugs and couldn't get into a program. Or maybe they were just some teenage kids showing very bad judgment.
It is very noticeable that you are quite eager to make excuses for criminals, to defend them, to take their side.

Criminal don't commit crimes because of any of the excuses you make. They don't commit crimes because their neighbor is a racist, or because society is unfair, or whatever.

They commit crimes because they are subhuman pieces of shit who, at best, do not care what harm they cause to others, in order to fulfill their own selfish desires. These are the vermin who will do tens of thousands of dollars to an HVAC system, just to steal few dollars worth of copper wire. Or hundreds of dollars of damage to a car to steal a few tools. They don't care.

It is also very noticeable, from your various postings, in various topics, that you posses the very same attitudes that criminals do. You don't care about good or evil. You don't care about truth or falsehood. You don't care how others are negatively impacted by the policies that you advocate.
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,787
Reaction score
3,592
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
You think this supports your point, that we should be allowing more criminal to go free?

I think that what it proves is that we are turning criminals loose, to prey again on society, that we ought to be permanently removing from free society, either by keeping them in prison for life, or else by putting them to death.

A century or so ago, most of these criminals would have served their sentences at the end of a rope. The recidivism rate was much, much lower, then, and the rest of us were safer.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
121,187
Reaction score
10,866
Points
2,055
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
It is very noticeable that you are quite eager to make excuses for criminals, to defend them, to take their side.

Criminal don't commit crimes because of any of the excuses you make. They don't commit crimes because their neighbor is a racist, or because society is unfair, or whatever.

They commit crimes because they are subhuman pieces of shit who, at best, do not care what harm they cause to others, in order to fulfill their own selfish desires. These are the vermin who will do tens of thousands of dollars to an HVAC system, just to steal few dollars worth of copper wire. Or hundreds of dollars of damage to a car to steal a few tools. They don't care.
Or they are just hungry or desperate, which you and I don't understand because we've never gone to bed hungry once in our lives.

It is also very noticeable, from your various postings, in various topics, that you posses the very same attitudes that criminals do. You don't care about good or evil. You don't care about truth or falsehood. You don't care how others are negatively impacted by the policies that you advocate.
Quite the contrary, I don't define "good and evil" the way you do, which is a racist, sexist and classist way of defining it. I recognize that as a white, straight male, I pretty much got an e-ticket in this country the moment I was born. What we are doing now in criminal justice, which is essentially creating a permanent underclass, at the cost of billions of dollars, really does negatively impact others.

I don't think a person is defined by the worst thing they ever did. None of us should be.

You think this supports your point, that we should be allowing more criminal to go free?

I think that what it proves is that we are turning criminals loose, to prey again on society, that we ought to be permanently removing from free society, either by keeping them in prison for life, or else by putting them to death.
So, wait, you want to murder people for property crimes, and you don't think you're an evil person. I mean, yeah, I get you're a Mormon and you guys believe some pretty messed up stuff, but DAMN. Then again, Blood Atonement is part of your creed, so there's that.

You missed the part where Jesus talked about forgiveness.

The chart proves, WHAT WE ARE DOING DOESN'T WORK. The ideal goal is that after we are through with them in the criminal justice system, they should come out, their debt to society paid as productive citizens. Instead, we don't reform them, we throw them back out on the street, and we act surprise when they commit more crimes.

A century or so ago, most of these criminals would have served their sentences at the end of a rope. The recidivism rate was much, much lower, then, and the rest of us were safer.
Wow, did you just advocate LYNCHING. Hey, buddy, maybe you need to look up the history of LYNCHING and get back to me.
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,787
Reaction score
3,592
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
The chart proves, WHAT WE ARE DOING DOESN'T WORK. The ideal goal is that after we are through with them in the criminal justice system, they should come out, their debt to society paid as productive citizens. Instead, we don't reform them, we throw them back out on the street, and we act surprise when they commit more crimes.
what we are doing is turning criminals loose, who ought not be turned loose. People who have proven themselves unwilling or unable to peaceably coexist with the rest of society, who, if given a chance, will continue to commit more crime, and victimize more innocent victims.

I'm all for rehabilitation,where it is workable, but the undeniable fact remains, that there are some people who simply have no conscience, no sense of right or wrong, and who do not care what harm they do to others or else actively wish to harm others. It makes no more sense to set such people loose in society, than it does to important dangerous wild animals and turn them loose in populated areas.


Wow, did you just advocate LYNCHING. Hey, buddy, maybe you need to look up the history of LYNCHING and get back to me.
So, wait, you want to murder people for property crimes, and you don't think you're an evil person.
No, I did not advocate murder, and I did not advocate lynching. Lynching is when vigilantes, lacking the proper legal authority, and without due process of law, kill someone that they think may have committed a crime. I don't advocate that. I am talking about proper legal punishments, imposed by the judicial process, after the defendant has been giving a fair trial by jury.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
121,187
Reaction score
10,866
Points
2,055
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
what we are doing is turning criminals loose, who ought not be turned loose. People who have proven themselves unwilling or unable to peaceably coexist with the rest of society, who, if given a chance, will continue to commit more crime, and victimize more innocent victims.
Except that we were talking about property crimes, not crimes against people. Do try to keep up, Mormon Bob. Locking someone up for stealing some wire, or a few tools, is just daft.

I'm all for rehabilitation,where it is workable, but the undeniable fact remains, that there are @some people who simply have no conscience, no sense of right or wrong, and who do not care what harm they do to others or else actively wish to harm others. It makes no more sense to set @such people loose in society, than it does to important dangerous wild animals and turn them loose in populated areas.
Wow, did you just imply that I engage in criminal activity? Doesn't your bible say something about "bearing false witness"?

Our system isn't designed for "rehabilitation", that's the problem. It's designed to create a slave labor class. The Europeans don't do this. The Japanese don't do this.

No, I did not advocate murder, and I did not advocate lynching. Lynching is when vigilantes, lacking the proper legal authority, and without due process of law, kill someone that they think may have committed a crime. I don't advocate that. I am talking about proper legal punishments, imposed by the judicial process, after the defendant has been giving a fair trial by jury.
When we start giving Rich White people the same brutal punishments we give poor people of color, then you can come back to me and talk about "Judicial Process".
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,787
Reaction score
3,592
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
I don't know why that guy broke into your car. Maybe he was hungry. Maybe he was addicted to drugs and couldn't get into a program. Or maybe they were just some teenage kids showing very bad judgment.

Point is, no one died, no one was injured. You were angry, I get that, but at the end of the day, the total damages were only a few hundred. Certainly not worth the $40,000 to lock him up to teach him he did a bad thing.
It doesn't matter why he broke into my car and stole my tools. It doesn't matter why he broke into several of my neighbor's cars, and stole from them.

What matters is that whoever he is, and whyever he did it, he's a subhuman of shit, who doesn't care what harm he causes to others, who doesn't care if his actions mean that someone else might not be able to earn an honest living, to keep a roof over his head or food on his table, because of his own selfish actions. Not willing to earn his own honest living, he's perfectly happy to deny others the ability to do so as well. He's a subhuman animal who needs to be removed from free society, if he will not respect the rights of others.


You probably would love California's 2014 Proposition 47. The LIbEral filth that infest our state government lied to the people to get this proposition voted into law. They promised that it would make us safer, by changing the way crimes were prioritized for enforcement.

The practical effect has been that certain broad classes of crimes, deemed “non-violent” do not get investigated or prosecuted at all. And the result has been a massive increase in the crimes so reclassified.
Do you actually have links to this, or are you doing "Feels" again.
Here are some links to discussions on this forum which mention Proposition 47 and its consequences. California is pretty much turning into your version of Paradise, where subhuman pieces of shit are free to commit certain classes of crimes with impunity, with no fear of any legal consequences.



Quite the contrary, I don't define "good and evil" the way you do, which is a racist, sexist and classist way of defining it. I recognize that as a white, straight male, I pretty much got an e-ticket in this country the moment I was born. What we are doing now in criminal justice, which is essentially creating a permanent underclass, at the cost of billions of dollars, really does negatively impact others.
When we start giving Rich White people the same brutal punishments we give poor people of color, then you can come back to me and talk about "Judicial Process".
Playing the “racism”, “sexism”, “classism” and other “bigotry” cards is what your kind do when you know that you are hopelessly losing an argument. In this case, your use of these cards is bullshit, and you know damn well that it's bullshit.

Making stupid excuses like this for criminals only shows us whose side you are on, and it is not the side of any law-abiding citizens.


Wow, did you just imply that I engage in criminal activity? Doesn't your bible say something about "bearing false witness"?
I don't know what you do or don't do. I only know what attitudes you openly express on this forum.

You certainly undeniably, are on the side of thieves and vandals and similar subhuman vermin. Why would you be on that side, unless you're one of them?

Be known by the company that you keep.


Except that we were talking about property crimes, not crimes against people. Do try to keep up, Mormon Bob. Locking someone up for stealing some wire, or a few tools, is just daft.
Crimes against property •ARE• crimes against people.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
121,187
Reaction score
10,866
Points
2,055
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
It doesn't matter why he broke into my car and stole my tools. It doesn't matter why he broke into several of my neighbor's cars, and stole from them.

What matters is that whoever he is, and whyever he did it, he's a subhuman of shit, who doesn't care what harm he causes to others, who doesn't care if his actions mean that someone else might not be able to earn an honest living, to keep a roof over his head or food on his table, because of his own selfish actions. Not willing to earn his own honest living, he's perfectly happy to deny others the ability to do so as well. He's a subhuman animal who needs to be removed from free society, if he will not respect the rights of others.
Again, that's nice and all, and I realize you are an angry guy, but you still haven't convinced me yet that I need to spend $40,000 a year because you lost a couple hundred dollars in property. This comes down to a cost benefit analysis, not your anger issues. I mean, we could execute jaywalkers, but that would be kind of nuts.

Here are some links to discussions on this forum which mention Proposition 47 and its consequences. California is pretty much turning into your version of Paradise, where subhuman pieces of shit are free to commit certain classes of crimes with impunity, with no fear of any legal consequences.
How about links to actual news articles, not your angry opinions about them?

Playing the “racism”, “sexism”, “classism” and other “bigotry” cards is what your kind do when you know that you are hopelessly losing an argument. In this case, your use of these cards is bullshit, and you know damn well that it's bullshit.
Not at all... The fact that we treat white people and black people differently for the same crimes shows we do have a problem. The poor black lady who lies about her address to get her daughter out of a dangerous school gets five years, and the ditzy actress who paid tens of thousands in bribes to get her daughter into a college she didn't qualify for got 11 days at a Club Fed...

In your opinion, I guess, they both should have went to jail for 5 years (but I wouldn't see you protesting that loudly about the white lady.) In my opinion, NEITHER of them should have gone to jail.

I don't know what you do or don't do. I only know what attitudes you openly express on this forum.

You certainly undeniably, are on the side of thieves and vandals and similar subhuman vermin. Why would you be on that side, unless you're one of them?
Maybe because I'm a decent human being who doesn't like the racism and cruelty of this society? But I'm sure that concept is lost on you, as you belong to a cult that believes some messed up stuff.

You see, when you rationalize the racism and the poverty in this society, and refuse to support a safety net for the poorest in our society, you really don't have much of a place to complain.

Once again- the Europeans and Japanese have nowhere near our crime levels. They don't let people live in grinding poverty and they don't let them have access to guns. They don't lock people up for something as petty as property crimes.

You want to whine about "good" and "evil", which are largely subjective. I want to look at what doesn't work and what does.

Crimes against property •ARE• crimes against people.
No, they are crimes against property. Property can be replaced. When that guy broke into my place in 1989, they stole my TV and VCR. Guess what, I got a check from the insurance company and bought new ones. The New ones I bought were even nicer than the ones I lost.
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,787
Reaction score
3,592
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
How about links to actual news articles, not your angry opinions about them?
The links I provided were to discussions on this forum,most of which I haven;t participated directly in. Those discussion contain links to the actual article about the crime waves that have resulted from Proposition 47.

Maybe because I'm a decent human being…
You are one of the most evil, depraved, sociopathic pieces of subhuman shit that I have ever encountered in any context. You have no grasp at all of what decency is, much less any claim to it.


Maybe because I'm a decent human being who doesn't like the racism and cruelty of this society? But I'm sure that concept is lost on you, as you belong to a cult that believes some messed up stuff.

You see, when you rationalize the racism and the poverty in this society, and refuse to support a safety net for the poorest in our society, you really don't have much of a place to complain.
For all your fondness for falsely accusing everyone and everything else of racism, you just cannot help yourself, when it comes to revealing yourself to be a far greater racist and a far greater bigot than any of your false accusations are ever able to paint anyone else as being.

And ultimately, you cannot help, either, revealing yourself to be on the side of thieves and parasites who are unwilling to even try to honestly earn their own living, and who will only live by taking what other people have worked hard to earn; while equally being against the side of decent, honest, hard-working law-abiding citizens.

It is no wonder that you support this or any other excuse to turn dangerous criminals loose, to increasingly prey on law-abiding citizens. And really, no need to wonder about your own ethical character. Again, be known by the company that you choose to keep.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
121,187
Reaction score
10,866
Points
2,055
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
The links I provided were to discussions on this forum,most of which I haven;t participated directly in. Those discussion contain links to the actual article about the crime waves that have resulted from Proposition 47.
Same problem.. How about some documented facts instead of angry opinions.

Some of those threads weren't even about Prop 47, and I really don't have the time or patience to wade through them all.

You are one of the most evil, depraved, sociopathic pieces of subhuman shit that I have ever encountered in any context. You have no grasp at all of what decency is, much less any claim to it.
Again, coming from a Mormon (A perverted cult started by a pedophile con-man), I could almost take that as a compliment. Yes, I know, it's hard for you to grasp other people have views that aren't yours. This is what happens when you grow up in a cult.

And ultimately, you cannot help, either, revealing yourself to be on the side of thieves and parasites who are unwilling to even try to honestly earn their own living, and who will only live by taking what other people have worked hard to earn; while equally being against the side of decent, honest, hard-working law-abiding citizens.
As I'm fond of saying..
Then the poor steal it's called "Crime".
When the rich steal it's called profits.

I've lost a lot more to the theft by the rich than I've ever lost to theft by the poor.

It is no wonder that you support this or any other excuse to turn dangerous criminals loose, to increasingly prey on law-abiding citizens. And really, no need to wonder about your own ethical character. Again, be known by the company that you choose to keep.
As opposed to being a stooge for the biggest crooks of them all, the One Percent. Look, guy, tried to have a useful conversation with you about crime and punishment in this country, but you seem quite incapable of getting past the lizard part of your brain.
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,787
Reaction score
3,592
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
Some of those threads weren't even about Prop 47, and I really don't have the time or patience to wade through them all.
What do you think the result would be, of greatly reducing, or entirely removing, the legal consequences of committing broad categories of crime, if not to result in higher rates of those crimes being committed, and greater harm to the law-abiding as a result of the increased crime rate? Good news, if you're a criminal, or someone who openly sides with criminals, but bad news if you're a law-abiding citizen.

  • THE NEW CALIFORNIA CRIME WAVE
    The tangible results of Prop 47 were both immediate and breathtaking. Within a year, there were some 14,000 fewer inmates in California’s state prisons and local jails, just as the Proposition’s backers had promised.

    But the other half of their promise—improved public safety—somehow failed to materialize. In 2015:
    • Violent crime increased (above 2014 levels) in every one of California’s 10 largest cities, while property crime increased in 9 of the 10.
    • Of 66 California cities whose crime trends were analyzed in depth, 49 saw their violent crime rates increase—usually by at least 10 percent.
    • Forty-eight of those same 66 California cities saw their property crime rates rise—and in half of those cases, the increase was 10 percent or greater. A typical case was San Francisco, where theft of merchandise from automobiles increased by 47 percent, auto theft rose by 17 percent, and robberies were up 23 percent.
    • The property crime rates for California cities as a whole increased, on average, by 116.9 offenses per 100,000 residents. By contrast, in states that hadn’t passed Prop 47 or anything like it, the corresponding rates _d_ecreased by 29.6 offenses per 100,000 residents.

    These statistics are stunning.

    California criminals, meanwhile, ingeniously adapted their tactics to the new law, so as to maximize their gains and minimize their risks. The Los Angeles Times, for instance, profiled Semisi Sina, a practiced criminal who “rejoiced when he first heard about Proposition 47”—particularly its provision reducing to misdemeanor status the theft of any merchandise whose value was below $950. Semisi interpreted this as a green light for him to begin stealing, among other things, some higher-end bicycles—an offense that previously would have been classified as a felony. “Proposition 47, it’s cool,” Semisi chirps. “Like for me, I can go do a burglary and know that if it’s not over $900, they’ll just give me a ticket and let me go.”

  • California Just Proved Once Again That Going Easy On Criminals Results In More Crime
    Since Prop 47 went into effect, arrests are down 30% while violent crime in Los Angeles is up a devastating 40%. And it’s not just L.A. — Southern California as a whole is feeling the deleterious effects of the law’s “lighter” touch.

    A major reason for the stunning increase in violent crime is the reckless way Prop 47 downgraded some offenses, including theft of a firearm, which used to be a felony but which is now treated as a misdemeanor, along with several other serious property theft offenses. The overall effect of downgrading so many offenses, along with the increasingly hostile attitude among many communities toward police officers (the “Ferguson Effect”), has resulted in officers deciding it’s simply not worth it to go after criminals for the “minor” things — many of which lead to worse crimes.

    “Without any real consequences, criminals were given a green light to steal more weapons and therefore commit more crimes,” contends FOX 11 Los Angeles’ VP Bob Cook in a recent op-ed. “With so many crimes downgraded from felonies to misdemeanors, police officers in many instances felt it was not worth it to make arrests for these offenses. This has become especially true at a time when police conduct has come under increased scrutiny at every turn. Officers don’t want to be the next media case over a misdemeanor.”

  • Shoplifting In California Sky Rockets After New Law Goes Into Effect
    San Francisco has become a haven for thieves and shoplifters. These acts of theft are now a common occurrence in San Francisco after a proposition that was passed 5 years ago essentially gave people permission to steal.

    Organized crime rings have turned shoplifting into a well-organized racket where willing thieves are out stealing items and reselling them on the black market to earn a quick buck.

    Proposition 47 is a referendum that downgrades theft for merchandise and drugs with a value under $950 to a misdemeanor. In the eyes shoplifters, this has all but given them the go-ahead to take what they please under that amount. What makes the situation worse and so easy for people to steal things now is that police won’t even respond to these misdemeanor complaints because they need to focus on the more important crimes being committed in the city.

As I'm fond of saying..
Then the poor steal it's called "Crime".
When the rich steal it's called profits.

I've lost a lot more to the theft by the rich than I've ever lost to theft by the poor.
That's just your usual absurd shtick about how you've been victimized so many times, by so many different groups, one of your usual being “the rich”; the same group that makes opportunities available for honest folks to earn our livings honestly.

For my part, nearly all that I have, materially, I have as a result of wealthier people than myself, starting and running businesses which gave me the opportunity to be employed, to earn the wealth that allowed me to meet my basic survival needs, and to have some luxuries beyond that. The same is true of nearly all honest, productive, law-abiding citizens.

What does it tell us about you, that you don't think this is true of you? Combined with other expressions of your overall attitude, nothing good.
 
Last edited:

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
121,187
Reaction score
10,866
Points
2,055
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
What do you think the result would be, of greatly reducing, or entirely removing, the legal consequences of committing broad categories of crime, if not to result in higher rates of those crimes being committed, and greater harm to the law-abiding as a result of the increased crime rate? Good news, if you're a @criminal, or someone who openly sides with criminals, but bad news if you're a law-abiding citizen.
Except most of those "Crimes" really didn't have consequences to start with if you were white. That was kind of the thing. White folks get probation, people of color got jail.

So do you have any links to CREDIBLE news sites about Prop 47? Because really, posting far right websites kind of defeats your point. They make money scaring white people into thinking there's a mob of angry darkies out to get them.

That's just your usual absurd shtick about how you've been victimized so many times, by so many different groups, one of your usual being “the rich”; the same group that makes opportunities available for honest folks to earn our livings honestly.
The rich do nothing of the sort. CONSUMER DEMAND creates jobs, not "the rich".

In the 2008 Crash, I lost $60,000 on the value of my home and $10,000 in the value of my 401K. The rich got a big old bailout from the government, I had to work three jobs for a time to make ends meet.

That time that the local youth broke into my house and stole my VCR and TV, cost me about $250.00 after insurance paid me back.

For my part, nearly all that I have, materially, I have as a result of wealthier people than myself, starting and running businesses which gave me the opportunity to be employed, to earn the wealth that allowed me to meet my basic survival needs, and to have some luxuries beyond that. The same is true of nearly all honest, productive, law-abiding citizens.
Okay, guy, then why are you so angry all the time if your life is so good? People who actually have good lives don't want to murder people for merely being here illegally or committing petty crimes, which is what you want to do.

What does it tell us about you, that you don't think this is true of you? Combined with other expressions of your overall attitude, nothing good.
Well, yeah, I'm not a member of a brainwashed cult, so there's that. I recognize that the biggest problem in this society IS wealth disparity. When we get hit by the full effects of the Trump recession, watch for crime to spike some more. You know, when all those folks who were making "honest livings" can't anymore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top