Supreme Court may rule on the 2nd Amendment

[Business_Casual]

@Redmanfms

In short, your idealism, while certainly commendable, isn’t grounded in reality. Once you give any real study to criminology or penology you will quickly realize just how unrealistic pure libertarian views truly are.

Such a shame some people have been conditioned to think that way. It’s also a shame that all those people who lived healthy, happy lives for 50 centuries before you were born and all these laws were passed. Goodness, how those poor people ever got through the day without a pile of laws to protect them from their poor grasp on reality.

My opinion is that if a felon wants a gun, he should be able to get one. If he kills, robs or threatens others with it, then either the other people should shoot him or he should be arrested and put back in prison. Trying to prohibit the possesion of an object, whether it is drugs, guns or drink has never worked out well.

By the same token, I could say your faith in laws and the legal system is not grounded in reality. The results of the DC and NYC gun bans would seem to support my conclusion.

M_P

[Joseywales]

@nationwide

I disagree.

No free man or woman should be denied their right to arms.

If someone is such a threat, that they not be trusted with weapons, they should be incarcerated until they are no longer deemed a threat, or executed.

AMEN!

[Joseywales]

@Redmanfms

I used to believe that, but it simply cannot be reconciled with reality. So far no society has found a way to successfully prevent recidivism to any meaningful degree.

Execution prevents it. Life in prison makes it a mute point.

Many state that America’s problem with recidivism has to do with labelling theory, that a felon is basically sentenced to a life of failure as they cannot vote, hold business licenses, or be employed by government. This theory is congruous with the experiments that have been done on labelling theory and how it affects the labelled individual. Where it falls flat is in an examination of nations that engage in full-restoration upon release, like Japan. Japan has very similar recidivism rates to the United States.

Likewise nations that engage in indeterminate sentencing (like you are suggesting) don’t have huge differences in recidivism. Indeterminate sentencing is basically a committment, the offender is incarcerated and placed in a rehabiliation program engineered to “treat” the specific crime the offender committed. There are certain criteria that the offender must meet and then a reviewer (or board) makes a ruling on his case. It seems like a very clever concept, but it isn’t really very effective in practice.

Since the United States has a multi-leveled judicial system, there is little to no commonality between the seperate systems; however, warehousing is the rule of the day almost everywhere. Sentences have become longer, parole and work release programs are being cut back or canceled in favor of “truth in sentencing” and the result is a nation that has more people incarcerated for significantly longer average sentences than almost every other developed nation. This method doesn’t work very well, as we’ve seen lately. Our crime rate is basically flat, being tied more to the economy (ironically) than anything else.

Your supposition also doesn’t take into account the mentally ill. It’s not really fair to lock them up perpetually when medical treatment does work. But one must recognize that they may forget their meds, or have a reaction.

It is COMPLETELY fair to lock them up. You sound like a bed-wetting liberal. Some college professor has neutered you and painted flowers on your man card.

If they do not possess a weapon it will be far more unlikely that they will be able to gain access to one should the SHTF (psychologically speaking).

Please don’t be that gullible.

In short, your idealism, while certainly commendable, isn’t grounded in reality.

It can be reality with the passage of law. It once was the law of the land AND IT WORKED!

Once you give any real study to criminology or penology you will quickly realize just how unrealistic pure libertarian views truly are. I desperately wanted to believe them myself, but like the “as good as” Bushmaster owner, I finally had to give up and acquiesce to realism.

To bad for you. A little bit of education has caused you to become close minded and ignore the real reality around you. 85% of all criminals end up being released from prison. This is because of our drastic changes to the criminal justice system due to liberal judges and politicians since the 60’s. We used to lock up and execute prisoners. We used to lock away the crazy. Now people like you are making this nation a prison and damning us all because you refuse to admit that execution and incarceration works.

[hatt]

@nationwide

No free man or woman should be denied their right to arms.

No free man or woman IS being denied their right to arms since no free people exist. If you know a free person tell me about them.

[nationwide]

@hatt

No free man or woman IS being denied their right to arms since no free people exist. If you know a free person tell me about them.

Paroled felons, persons covicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, persons who use federally criminalized recreational narcotics…

If they are a “real” threat to society, they should continue to be in jail, or executed…

[Redmanfms]

Execution prevents it. Life in prison makes it a mute point

Do you mean “moot?” Execution does not deter criminals (except for the one being executed obviously). Should we execute those who are violent but have not committed murder? Should we make our already severely taxed prison system adjust to imprison every person convicted of any violence for life?

Have you given any thought to the implications of your ideas at all???

It is COMPLETELY fair to lock them up. You sound like a bed-wetting liberal. Some college professor has neutered you and painted flowers on your man card.

:rolleyes:

Cute. When a logical, knowledge-based answer escapes you resort to name-calling.

If you knew me AT ALL, or even read ANYTHING else that I’ve posted on other forums (I use the same username everywhere) you’d know that I’m far from being a neutured liberal, in fact, based purely on this thread, I’m more libertarian than are you, by a WIDE margin.

At what point does the “lock’em all up” reasoning end fella? Well? Do you even have the slightest INKLING of the slippery slope you are approaching?

Please don’t be that gullible.

:o

Why don’t you explain how that statement makes me gullible? Better yet, why don’t you explain how exactly you intend to lock away every person who may be mentally ill, and how you intend to pay for it…

It can be reality with the passage of law. It once was the law of the land AND IT WORKED!

Show me the data!!! Prove your supposition. This is no time for unsubstantiated bloviation. Put the data on the table or sit down and shut up.

You also might want to explain your theory clearly, because you haven’t intimated what exactly it is that you believe. It’s pretty obvious you don’t believe in anything remotely libertarian.

@Joseywales

To bad for you. A little bit of education has caused you to become close minded and ignore the real reality around you. 85% of all criminals end up being released from prison. This is because of our drastic changes to the criminal justice system due to liberal judges and politicians since the 60’s. We used to lock up and execute prisoners. We used to lock away the crazy. Now people like you are making this nation a prison and damning us all because you refuse to admit that execution and incarceration works.

:rolleyes:

Ok. You can continue living in a fairy tale world if you so desire, a world based solely on your political inclinations and a fantasy of a past that NEVER existed.

I can see that knowledge and reason is wasted, my comment on the Bushmaster owner stands. You argue from the position of emotion and political rhetoric and become abusive and frantic if somebody challenges you.

[Redmanfms]

@nationwide

Paroled felons, persons covicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, persons who use federally criminalized recreational narcotics…

If they are a “real” threat to society, they should continue to be in jail, or executed…

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/rpr94.htm

Should we keep every person who may recidivate locked up indeterminately?

If so, how do you reconcile that with your views?

How do you determine when/if a person is no longer a threat to society?

[KintlaLake]

@Redmanfms

How do you determine when/if a person is no longer a threat to society?

He did propose execution. :rolleyes:

[Business_Casual]

So we all know that having the Government involved does not improve:

1. Education
2. Transportation
3. Health Care
4. Energy

So the Government can do a good job with rehabilitation?

I don’t buy it. Well, actually I do buy it. Because I pay taxes. Because if I don’t pay my taxes, men with guns will show up and put me in prison for tax evasion. So there is one thing the Government does well. Extortion.

M_P

[9x19]

A couple of posters are treading on very thin ice. There is no reason to resort to name calling just because you disagree with what someone has posted. Get this back to a civil level or I will lock it.

[nationwide]

@Redmanfms

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/rpr94.htm

Should we keep every person who may recidivate locked up indeterminately?

If so, how do you reconcile that with your views?

How do you determine when/if a person is no longer a threat to society?

First of all, you have to understand there are two predominate views on incarceration.

The first view, is that it is a punishment. The second view, is that it is an opportunity for problem individuals to rehabilitate.

Now, if you think that it’s the first, then hasn’t the “debt to society” been paid upon release???

If you think it’s the second, then shouldn’t release from prison indicate successful rehabilitation??

You determine a persons “threat level” by their conduct. You can’t predict who will commit a crime… hence the “first time offender” who most experienced cops will say have commited up to 8 offenses before being caught…

[supertac]

This nation is, and has been, in huge trouble.

[f.2]

[WS6]

@nationwide

Paroled felons, persons covicted of misdemeanor domestic violence, persons who use federally criminalized recreational narcotics…

If they are a “real” threat to society, they should continue to be in jail, or executed…

…at the cost of an average of 20K a year per incarceration? Because they will be rehabilitated? Seriously, keeping them in prison does nothing but cost money and keep them of the streets.

keeping them off the street IS GOOD.

There are downsides to it too though, as stated above. Take your pick. I personally think releasing them (some of them, not all of course) and reducing their rights is as good a compromise as exists.

When it comes to crime, there is no black and white, we only wish there were. Sure there is right and wrong, but thats about as far as it goes…and WHAT is right and wrong? That has yet to be defined, hence why we still have a court system and not a sheet of paper detailing actions and their repercussions.

Execution.

Execution is state sanctioned murder. The death certificate reads: Homocide. When the coroner writes it out in the case of a successfully carried out death penalty.

Now…I support the death penalty, BUT! It takes a lot of time and a LOT of money to kill someone legally in front of an audience. Are you going to take the time and money to do it just to “keep them off the streets”? Or would not life in prison be cheaper? I don’t know the answer to that one.

Another thing you have to look at is sometimes lesser criminals help the good guys catch the REALLY bad guys. I personally know of many instances where local cops have said “what pot/joint?” and let the smoker go on his way in exchange for something worthwhile. How is a joint hurting more people than the armed robbery trend in a neighborhood?

If you want that pothead as a witness…DONT CONVICT HIM OF BEING A POTHEAD! It really de-values him as a witness.

[nationwide]

@WS6

…at the cost of an average of 20K a year per incarceration? Because they will be rehabilitated? Seriously, keeping them in prison does nothing but cost money and keep them of the streets.

keeping them off the street IS GOOD.

There are downsides to it too though, as stated above. Take your pick. I personally think releasing them (some of them, not all of course) and reducing their rights is as good a compromise as exists.

When it comes to crime, there is no black and white, we only wish there were. Sure there is right and wrong, but thats about as far as it goes…and WHAT is right and wrong? That has yet to be defined, hence why we still have a court system and not a sheet of paper detailing actions and their repercussions.

Execution.

Execution is state sanctioned murder. The death certificate reads: Homocide. When the coroner writes it out in the case of a successfully carried out death penalty.

Now…I support the death penalty, BUT! It takes a lot of time and a LOT of money to kill someone legally in front of an audience. Are you going to take the time and money to do it just to “keep them off the streets”? Or would not life in prison be cheaper? I don’t know the answer to that one.

Another thing you have to look at is sometimes lesser criminals help the good guys catch the REALLY bad guys. I personally know of many instances where local cops have said “what pot/joint?” and let the smoker go on his way in exchange for something worthwhile. How is a joint hurting more people than the armed robbery trend in a neighborhood?

If you want that pothead as a witness…DONT CONVICT HIM OF BEING A POTHEAD! It really de-values him as a witness.

How much does it really cost to string someone up in the middle of the town square in front of the public?

Much of the added “required” costs are nothing more than pork barrel spending at the State level.

No, crime and punishment are as much a game today as they were in the Roman times…

[WS6]

@nationwide

How much does it really cost to string someone up in the middle of the town square in front of the public?

Much of the added “required” costs are nothing more than pork barrel spending at the State level.

No, crime and punishment are as much a game today as they were in the Roman times…

Those “added costs” are court, lawyer, and time cost caused by the rights of the individual granted in the constitution as well as later rulings by the supreme court. You cannot just “string 'em up!” in this day in age. An execution sanctioned by state is one of the most precise operations in the medical field. Can you imagine the lawsuits if it were not?

Crime and punishment is indeed the same…only in title. The individual has a lot more right now, for better or worse.

[chadbag]

@WS6

.
Execution.

Execution is state sanctioned murder. The death certificate reads: Homocide. When the coroner writes it out in the case of a successfully carried out death penalty.

Execution is not state sanctioned murder. It may be Homicide, but that only means “a slaying” and does not usually refer to legal or illegal, innocent or guilty life being taken, etc.

Self-defense killing is also “Homicide.”

[Nathan_Bell]

Wow, talk about thread drift.

The SCOTUS will not end up hearing this case. As a previous poster stated they react to political and idealogical preasures. The court will tap dance around and avoid any truly landmark cases that would reaffirm that the government is secondary to the citizenry. The originlists on the court would not want to hear them, now, because they do not have a guaranteed win and do not want to weaken the citizenry more. The living document segment would not want them, now, because they do not have a guaranteed win and would not want the status quo upset.

[nationwide]

@WS6

Those “added costs” are court, lawyer, and time cost caused by the rights of the individual granted in the constitution as well as later rulings by the supreme court. You cannot just “string 'em up!” in this day in age. An execution sanctioned by state is one of the most precise operations in the medical field. Can you imagine the lawsuits if it were not?

Crime and punishment is indeed the same…only in title. The individual has a lot more right now, for better or worse.

“In this day and age” haha

That’s the same argument those who want to destroy our civil rights use!

[stuffed shirt crooked politco]Uh… in this day and age, there is NO need for private arms, our thugs, er, state security will protect them! [/no applause, just votes and money please!]

[WS6]

@nationwide

“In this day and age” haha

That’s the same argument those who want to destroy our civil rights use!

[stuffed shirt crooked politco]Uh… in this day and age, there is NO need for private arms, our thugs, er, state security will protect them! [/no applause, just votes and money please!]

If it were you accused of something worthy of death (lets overlook the fact that you may or may not have done it) would YOU want a totalitarian kangaroo court? Or would you like due process as detailed by the constitution? IMHO the constitution and the Bible have something in common. You take away any part of them and the rest is quickly devalued as well.