Solution to Crime! NEED INPUT

[sajnaj]

public execution

 

[cbseniour]

1. Crime is no neglegience but usually planned.
2. If everyone carried openly there would be little crime because the outcome would be predetermined and swift.
3. You can't appeal a 45

 

[bassplayrguy]

start executing all murderers, child molesters, rapist (im sure im forgetting some but you get the idea). surgically cut a "T" for thief on thieves foreheads. also hold politicians, judges, prosecutors, police, firemen, etc, to the same judicial standards or I should say > enforce them. no special treatment for congresscritters, or state critters either. and make prisons a living hell for inmates instead of better than club med!

these are just opinions, but what it boils down too, is holding people accountable and making them truly FEAR being incarcerated.
good luck with your paper.

Great post! But I think if you do #1 and 2, you won't need to worry much about #3.

 

[bassplayrguy]

Hell I can't count I guess. Prisons would be near empty if you executed those people and had legitamite congress and state critters is what I meant.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

Sociology has shown us that the chance of being caught is a bigger factor in the mind of a criminal than the punishment. To truly deter crime, people must believe they will be caught.

Start by legalizing recreational drug use. It costs too much, and leads people to believe they can get away with being criminals. The chance of a drug user being caught is slim, and it leads to people believing they can get away with crimes.

Spend the money we currently sink into the war on drugs, on investigating every violent crime / rape to extensive lengths. Create the impression that committing a crime WILL lead to your punishment.

Speed up the court trial and appeal process. After their due appeals, execute violent offenders. Rehabilitation does not exist in our society, and repeat offenders cause a large portion of the violent crimes and rapes.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I seldom find myself agreeing with KirkFreeman, but this time I do. Get rid of about 80% of the laws in this country. Reduce the remainder to crimes against persons or property.

Make the killing of a politician a crime only if it cannot be proven that he/she introduced laws that would contravene the Constitution of the US and the various States, as applicable. (OK, maybe a misdemeanor for discharging a firearm in the city limits, or something )

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I seldom find myself agreeing with KirkFreeman

Are you an ex-girlfriend? Jill? Nancy? Karen?

As far as political reform, we just need to tack on Heinlein's House of Repeal to Congress and the General Assembly.

 

[jblomenberg16]

I thought about that and I always come back to one glaring issue: it's impossible to FORCE people to behave a certain way AND maintain the integrity of personal liberty. If we could solve that, we wouldn't even be having this conversation because crime wouldn't exist. Society's sole remedy is reactive.

You are absolutely correct. There always have been bad people that have done bad things, and no matter how much we try to cram morals into them, they aren't going to change.


However, I'm not talking about forcing people to behave a certain way...I'm talking about influencing them to behave in a socially acceptable way. As the OP is implying, our current plan isn't working...our prisons just keep getting fuller and fuller, and crimes appear to be increasingly more violent and bold.

One thing that has change within the last 100 years (really within the last 50 years) is the continued efforts by many groups to remove any and all moral guidance from our lives.

I think we'd universally agree that murdering (notice I didn't say killing-there is a difference) another human being is wrong. But how do we know that it is wrong? Is it hard coded into our brains? Or, at some point in our lives are we taught that it is wrong?

Personally, I was taught at a very early age "Thou shalt not kill" as part of being born into a Christian family. But there are lots of non Christians out there that know that murdering is wrong...so how did they learn? My guess is that a parent, teacher, older sibling, or other adults told them it was wrong. Perhaps their religion also teaches that murder is wrong. At any rate, people LEARN that murder is wrong...it isn't something we're just born with. If we were hard coded that way, why is murder such a problem then?


Take a look at what is prevalent in today's society:

1. Single or no parent homes. Immediately there is the opportunity that a young child will not be taught basic right and wrong due to the simple fact there is 1 (or 2) less people in their lives to tell them that. I don't mean to imply that kids from single parent homes automatically run amok...I just mean that those kids will have less opportunities to be taught life's basic rules.
2. In homes with both parents present, family time is greatly reduced due to the trend for both parents to work in order to support a decent living. Nothing wrong with that, but it means that children again have less opportunities to be taught right from wrong by mom and dad.
3. Combine the first two points and children now spend more time either on their own, or under group supervision. Less time for 1:1 instruction on life's basics from good role models.
4. As a result of #3, children rely more and more on media such as TV, music, internet, and video games to pass the time, and also for learning about life in general.
5. As a result of #4, children and adults alike are being fed a steady diet of violence, drug use, sexual immorality, and lack of respect for others. I'm the first to admit, I love to play first person shooter video games, watch violent movies, and really love 70's rock, and 80's Hair Bands (not exactly a beacon of high morals...). But I don't consider any of them to be good examples of how I should live my life, and a conciously chose not to follow their example.
6. Religious persecution of all religions (not just Christianity) is a reality in today's society. Under the assumed protection of the first ammendment, countless groups continue to fight to push religion farther and father out of the public eye and into the privacy of the home.
7. We celebrate failure in this country. Tabloids are at every major grocery store, news stand, etc. We can get the latest gossip on all of the latest scandal affecting a well known celebrity. When was the last time you saw the "SUN" talking about how good of a father such and such professional athelete is, or how a well-known actor has been married to the same person for 50 years? It rarely, if ever, makes the mainstream news, and almost never shows up in the tabloids unless there is a scandal that may disprove it.

I'm on my soap box again, but I ask this simple question...can teaching basic morals in schools (even if they have to be completely separated from religion) make things any worse? Can stricter review and ratings (not censorship) of music, movies, and videos games make things worse?

 

[jblomenberg16]

public execution

Sounds a lot like Sharia Law...and I thought that was something a lot of people don't want...

Sharia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Islamic criminal jurisprudence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Qisas is the Islamic principle of an eye for an eye. This category includes the crimes of murder and battery.
Punishment is either exact retribution or compensation (Diyya).
The issue of qisas gained considerable attention in the Western media in 2009 when Ameneh Bahrami, an Iranian woman blinded in an acid attack, demanded that her attacker be blinded as well.[8][9]

And from:

Afghan lawmaker calls for public execution of converts from Islam Creeping Sharia

“Those Afghans that appeared in this video film should be executed in public, the house should order the attorney general and the NDS (intelligence agency) to arrest these Afghans and execute them.”

 

[88GT]

You are absolutely correct. There always have been bad people that have done bad things, and no matter how much we try to cram morals into them, they aren't going to change.


However, I'm not talking about forcing people to behave a certain way...I'm talking about influencing them to behave in a socially acceptable way. As the OP is implying, our current plan isn't working...our prisons just keep getting fuller and fuller, and crimes appear to be increasingly more violent and bold.

One thing that has change within the last 100 years (really within the last 50 years) is the continued efforts by many groups to remove any and all moral guidance from our lives.

I think we'd universally agree that murdering (notice I didn't say killing-there is a difference) another human being is wrong. But how do we know that it is wrong? Is it hard coded into our brains? Or, at some point in our lives are we taught that it is wrong?

**snipped for space**

Murder is wrong in our country because it violates the right to life. While that happens to coincide with the Judeo-Christian history and prevailing morality of this nation, it does not make it the reason the prohibition on murder is justified.

One day the prevailing morality could easily be changed, and I would hate to see where we would be when that because the basis for many of this nation's laws.

I think to avoid the personal morality discrepancy, we need to consider that freedom has its own moral code, absolute, and independent of all others, and operate solely from that aspect in the passage of our laws. So that regardless of the personal morality a person holds, the sovereignty of the individual is still protected.

I get what you're saying and I agree to some extent. But it must be kept in mind that the morality you wish to return to is complimentary to the morality of freedom and that's the only reason why it works.

 

[rambone]

1) Eliminate "Plea Barganing",diversion programs,alternative sentencing, house arrest and such.
2) Eliminate youth facilities. If you do an adult crime, you do adult time.
3) Utilize tent cities and chain gangs. The inmates shall work to pay for their food, care and housing. Remove all recreational/comfort items. Eliminate contact/conjugal visits. Make a prison a prison, not the holiday inn express.
4) Mandatory minimum sentencing, for Violent crimes, sex crimes, drug dealers, all start with a twenty five year sentence.
5) If during the commision of any crime a life is taken, then all criminals involved shall forfiet their life/lives.

Red = police state shenanigans.

As an engineer, I am often tasked with fixing systemic issues with the product I work on. Part of the problem solving method we use is often refered to as the 7 step process that is very well known throughout industry. There are a few keys to this process as summarized by each step;

1) Define the problem with data and facts
2) Develop a preliminary list of potential causes of the problem
3) Implement an immediate countermeasure if possible based on #2
4) Continue to develop other corrective actions for the problem and test them for effectiveness.
5) Select a long term corrective action that corrects the problem, and put it through validation testing
6) After successful validation of the corrective action, implement it quickly and as widely as necessary to prevent further problems. Determine if fix needs to be implemented on existing products already in the field.
7) Implement controls to prevent the problem and those similar to it from happening again.

About these controls... perhaps you should expound. I presume these to be what we refer to as "Nanny State" laws; where things are illegal just because it feels good, and nobody is necessarily harmed by a given action, such as seatbelt laws or gun free zone violations. The justice system should be used for retribution, not prevention.

Laws can't prevent crime, and government shouldn't be used as a omnipotent social controller.

One thing that has change within the last 100 years (really within the last 50 years) is the continued efforts by many groups to remove any and all moral guidance from our lives.

...

I'm on my soap box again, but I ask this simple question...can teaching basic morals in schools (even if they have to be completely separated from religion) make things any worse? Can stricter review and ratings (not censorship) of music, movies, and videos games make things worse?

I think the last 50 years have gotten drastically more controlling... and the more controlling that government becomes, the worse off society has become. MORE censors, MORE controls? I'm in favor of less.

Promoting morals is great, as a free citizen. As far as government goes, I want them to focus on protecting rights, not shaping society and pushing their version of morality.

 

[Anonymous]

.... Part of the problem solving method we use is often refered to as the 7 step process that is very well known throughout industry. There are a few keys to this process as summarized by each step;

1) Define the problem with data and facts
2) Develop a preliminary list of potential causes of the problem
3) Implement an immediate countermeasure if possible based on #2
4) Continue to develop other corrective actions for the problem and test them for effectiveness.
5) Select a long term corrective action that corrects the problem, and put it through validation testing
6) After successful validation of the corrective action, implement it quickly and as widely as necessary to prevent further problems. Determine if fix needs to be implemented on existing products already in the field.
7) Implement controls to prevent the problem and those similar to it from happening again.

You got me!
Am I the only one that thought step seven would read:
7) Put some Duct Tape on it?

Also, great ideas/thoughts in this post!

 

[Cherryspringer]

I think part of the problem comes from the fact that criminals are often not punished at all. Our judicial system is full of bureaucracy and loopholes. One person does something major and everyone knows he is guilty but they can't be convicted because of some minor error in the whole process which means he can't be punished at all. And then someone else is punished in excess because he doesn't know how to play the game. The judges and lawyers have so much power over the lives of people on the outside of this system. It's scary because if you have enough money you can get away with about anything. Everyone knows this but it still happens everyday. I think at the very least the truth should always prevail over admissibility.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

After a bit more thought, I have come to the only conclusion that seems rational in deterring all crime.

Repealing all law.

 

[Bill of Rights]

...I'm on my soap box again, but I ask this simple question...can teaching basic morals in schools (even if they have to be completely separated from religion) make things any worse? Can stricter review and ratings (not censorship) of music, movies, and videos games make things worse?

With all due respect, we don't teach English, math, or science in houses of worship. IMHO, we should not be teaching morals and ethics in schools. There is a time and a place for everything, and schools are neither the time nor the place to address that issue.

Years ago, I first saw the bumper sticker that had books and an apple and the words, "Kids need to pray". I mentally added the two words, "...at home".

Suppose we do as you suggest. Suppose we say that the teachers will educate our children in morals and ethics and lead a daily prayer (or several.) Several people are thinking, "That'd be fine! That's what we need!"

Your second grader is in Abdul bin Mohammed's class and your fourth grader's teacher has a topknot, wears orange robes, and hands out flowers at the airport in his spare time. Still OK with that whole prayer in school thing?

I'm of the belief that a person's religion, if any, should guide his/her behavior, but should not dominate his/her life. I don't pray walking through the grocery store. When I'm in a worship service, I don't discuss those subjects mentioned above, nor politics, nor anything but participate in that worship service. This is NOT going to derail this discussion to one of religion, but rather was brought up solely to illustrate that IMO, we as a society need to stop abdicating the responsibility we have as parents to teach our children morals to the schools or to anyone. No one ever said parenting was easy... well, no one who's done it, anyway.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Kirk Freeman]

With all due respect, we don't teach English, math, or science in houses of worship.

Funny, my church does.

IMHO, we should not be teaching morals and ethics in schools.

We've had it this way for four decades now. How's that not teaching morals and ethics in schools working out for ya?

 

[jblomenberg16]

Red = police state shenanigans.




About these controls... perhaps you should expound. I presume these to be what we refer to as "Nanny State" laws; where things are illegal just because it feels good, and nobody is necessarily harmed by a given action, such as seatbelt laws or gun free zone violations. The justice system should be used for retribution, not prevention.

Laws can't prevent crime, and government shouldn't be used as a omnipotent social controller.




I think the last 50 years have gotten drastically more controlling... and the more controlling that government becomes, the worse off society has become. MORE censors, MORE controls? I'm in favor of less.

Promoting morals is great, as a free citizen. As far as government goes, I want them to focus on protecting rights, not shaping society and pushing their version of morality.

Actually, from a controls standpoint, I mean 100% opposite of the nanny state laws. Like you, laws, censors, etc. are very poor controls, and agree that the more "control" we try to put into place, the worse things get.

Perhaps the word control is not the right word given how it is often defined in our country today. By control, I mean more of putting in place processes to prevent things like laws, censors, etc. from having to be the mechanisms that correct behavior.

Control in my definition is fundamental programs and processes (which don't have to be federal government funded by the way) that help make sure that the problem doesn't come back, by addressing the fundamental issues that led to the problem in the first place.

A +1 to your post, as we are in agreement.

 

[jblomenberg16]

IMHO, we should not be teaching morals and ethics in schools.

We've had it this way for four decades now. How's that not teaching morals and ethics in schools working out for ya?

Ding ding ding...we have a winner!

Bill, if "we should not be teaching morals and ethics in schools" I ask: where should those be taught? And if you mention "In the home (which I agree with by the way)" how do we do that?

 

[jblomenberg16]

With all due respect, we don't teach English, math, or science in houses of worship. IMHO, we should not be teaching morals and ethics in schools. There is a time and a place for everything, and schools are neither the time nor the place to address that issue.

Years ago, I first saw the bumper sticker that had books and an apple and the words, "Kids need to pray". I mentally added the two words, "...at home".

Suppose we do as you suggest. Suppose we say that the teachers will educate our children in morals and ethics and lead a daily prayer (or several.) Several people are thinking, "That'd be fine! That's what we need!"

Your second grader is in Abdul bin Mohammed's class and your fourth grader's teacher has a topknot, wears orange robes, and hands out flowers at the airport in his spare time. Still OK with that whole prayer in school thing?

I'm of the belief that a person's religion, if any, should guide his/her behavior, but should not dominate his/her life. I don't pray walking through the grocery store. When I'm in a worship service, I don't discuss those subjects mentioned above, nor politics, nor anything but participate in that worship service. This is NOT going to derail this discussion to one of religion, but rather was brought up solely to illustrate that IMO, we as a society need to stop abdicating the responsibility we have as parents to teach our children morals to the schools or to anyone. No one ever said parenting was easy... well, no one who's done it, anyway.

Blessings,
Bill

Please note that I've been very intentional (despite my own Christian beliefs) to separate my discussion about morals from organized religion. I get back to the example that religious or not, a basic human moral is that murder is bad. We don't need religion to tell us that, although religion is certainly a vehicle to help reinforce that point and teach it when applicable.

I have not once mentioned that my suggestion is to mandate prayer in schools as a vehicle to teach such morals....so please don't twist my words. I've been on INGO since the early days, and am trying very hard to reflect the MOD's wishes to keep religion at bay, so please help me by doing the same.

 

[Fletch]

Control in my definition is fundamental programs and processes (which don't have to be federal government funded by the way) that help make sure that the problem doesn't come back, by addressing the fundamental issues that led to the problem in the first place.

We know that poverty is a strong indicator for crime, some have said it's the strongest. This is why my suggestions included strategies to make it easier for folks to escape poverty if they so choose, WITHOUT resorting to handouts. Of course, when all people want is to see people get killed, such suggestions tend to fall by the wayside.