I'd have to see the menu to pass verdict on their possible pretensions.Jaekus wrote:
It's at least a choice. But obviously it would exacerbate them to a whole new level.Kmar wrote:
And I wonder what intentionally and completely starving your body does to impact those things.Jaekus wrote:
Food also affects mood, mental health, sleeping patterns etc.
I think adequate nutrition is a must for a first world country.
Oh well if you don't think 10-36% is a pretty wide margin, then we will agree to disagree and just go with less 64%-90% fail rehab..that better? Now, tell me, how are those numbers worthy of calling rehab a success when you would not bet on those odds in anything else in your life?Jaekus wrote:
Yes, change the stats to suit your argument. Didn't expect much better from you.lowing wrote:
nope but drunk driving is a crime.Jaekus wrote:
Last I checked being an alcoholic wasn't a crime.
Also, your maths is way off.
My math is off, since when does a 10% success rate, NOT mean a 90% failure rate? My thinking is, 10%-36% is a pretty wide margin for results. You might as well say none to half success rate. It is stupid. What is the success rate? So i went with 10% to 25%.
LOLlowing wrote:
Oh well if you don't think 10-36% is a pretty wide margin, then we will agree to disagree and just go with less 64%-90% fail rehab..that better? Now, tell me, how are those numbers worthy of calling rehab a success when you would not bet on those odds in anything else in your life?Jaekus wrote:
Yes, change the stats to suit your argument. Didn't expect much better from you.lowing wrote:
nope but drunk driving is a crime.
My math is off, since when does a 10% success rate, NOT mean a 90% failure rate? My thinking is, 10%-36% is a pretty wide margin for results. You might as well say none to half success rate. It is stupid. What is the success rate? So i went with 10% to 25%.
You can call that a 14-50% failure rate if it makes you feel better.In North America, the United States Congress commissioned a major report on the effectiveness of crime prevention programs and practices, including a review by Doris Layton MacKenzie of rehabilitation outcome studies. MacKenzie concluded that “the proportion of studies reporting positive evidence of treatment effectiveness varied from near 50% to 86%... and that rehabilitation is effective in reducing the criminal behaviour of at least some offenders
Yes, I am morally superior to drug addicts, rapists, murderers white collar thieves, child molesters, and abusers, drunk drivers etc....aren't you?Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
So you think that raising the stakes will not lead to an escalation of violence?lowing wrote:
Ahh so we are back to....better not piss off the criminal, no tellin' what they might do...Gotta disagree. I would prefer, better not commit a crime because prison is a mother fucker. I want them more afraid of getting caught than we are of them.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
The problem with this is you would have a much higher proportion of shoot outs when you try to arrest people as they essentially have nothing to lose, if they're going to die anyway they're not going to go quietly.
Its easy to sit on the moral high ground and cast down fire and brimstone on all those below you. Doesn't improve the situation though does it? Im sure everybody agrees that punishing criminals is good, however making sentences harsher and thus filling the prisons up simply does not work. From first hand knowledge, people end up in prison for a number of years over something retarded like minor possession or fraud and end up making friends with all the native murderers, rapists, armed thieves etc. They then come out of prison with a much better knowledge of how to exploit the system and a huge underworld contact list.
How does that improve society?
It doesn't. While it is politically popular and an easy vote winner to be "tough on crime" its a load of crap and does more harm than good.
"positive evidence of treatment"? What does that mean? Either it is a success or it is not. Going from murder to rape is "positive evidence of treatment", or rape to mere armed robbery is positive evidence of treatment. Sounds an awful like word play to make numbers more attractive than they are.Jaekus wrote:
LOLlowing wrote:
Oh well if you don't think 10-36% is a pretty wide margin, then we will agree to disagree and just go with less 64%-90% fail rehab..that better? Now, tell me, how are those numbers worthy of calling rehab a success when you would not bet on those odds in anything else in your life?Jaekus wrote:
Yes, change the stats to suit your argument. Didn't expect much better from you.
Yes, very convenient for you to gloss over the stats IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY.You can call that a 14-50% failure rate if it makes you feel better.In North America, the United States Congress commissioned a major report on the effectiveness of crime prevention programs and practices, including a review by Doris Layton MacKenzie of rehabilitation outcome studies. MacKenzie concluded that “the proportion of studies reporting positive evidence of treatment effectiveness varied from near 50% to 86%... and that rehabilitation is effective in reducing the criminal behaviour of at least some offenders
Already told you, dig me up some stats on success or failure, and drift away from your, "positive evidence of treatment" BULLSHIT.Jaekus wrote:
Ok, which unrelated stats did you want me to dig up? Just returning the favour to your unrelated stats you see...
Seems to me you highlighted what you wanted to point out. and if "positive evidence of treatment" wasn't the best you had, you wouldn't have highlighted that specifically.Jaekus wrote:
You could read the article I linked for yourself...
I was busy getting ready to go to work, it's the best I could do on short notice of like 3 minutes.lowing wrote:
Seems to me you highlighted what you wanted to point out. and if "positive evidence of treatment" wasn't the best you had, you wouldn't have highlighted that specifically.Jaekus wrote:
You could read the article I linked for yourself...
Jaekus wrote:
You could read the article I linked for yourself...
I notice you are not arguing your "positive evidence of treatment", position. but ok let me go read some more gems form your link.Jaekus wrote:
I was busy getting ready to go to work, it's the best I could do on short notice of like 3 minutes.lowing wrote:
Seems to me you highlighted what you wanted to point out. and if "positive evidence of treatment" wasn't the best you had, you wouldn't have highlighted that specifically.Jaekus wrote:
You could read the article I linked for yourself...
Also,Jaekus wrote:
You could read the article I linked for yourself...
I doubt we had a prison problem in Medieval Britain but that doesn't particularly sound like progress to me.lowing wrote:
Yes, I am morally superior to drug addicts, rapists, murderers white collar thieves, child molesters, and abusers, drunk drivers etc....aren't you?Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
So you think that raising the stakes will not lead to an escalation of violence?lowing wrote:
Ahh so we are back to....better not piss off the criminal, no tellin' what they might do...Gotta disagree. I would prefer, better not commit a crime because prison is a mother fucker. I want them more afraid of getting caught than we are of them.
Its easy to sit on the moral high ground and cast down fire and brimstone on all those below you. Doesn't improve the situation though does it? Im sure everybody agrees that punishing criminals is good, however making sentences harsher and thus filling the prisons up simply does not work. From first hand knowledge, people end up in prison for a number of years over something retarded like minor possession or fraud and end up making friends with all the native murderers, rapists, armed thieves etc. They then come out of prison with a much better knowledge of how to exploit the system and a huge underworld contact list.
How does that improve society?
It doesn't. While it is politically popular and an easy vote winner to be "tough on crime" its a load of crap and does more harm than good.
and if you want to call punishment for what you do to others, fire and "brimstone", I like that as well. I have no problem legalizing drugs, I wish they would quite frankly, but the OP talks about prisoners in maximum security prisons, and someone caught with a dime bag does not go there.
Since it has already been shown rehab is a colossal failure, what is it you suggest? Like I said before, I don't think Saudi or Turkey has a prison population problem.
Hell no I haven't, if 25% of the prison population are capital offenders, lets get on with it.Jaekus wrote:
I noticed you've stopped arguing your "let's execute 25% of the prison populatio" position.
So an 8 per cent reduction overall, or a relative reduction of 30%.A recent meta-analysis of treatment studies for sexual offenders reported that sexual recidivism for treated offenders was 19 per cent, compared to 27 per cent for untreated offenders (Hall 1995).
Last edited by Jaekus (2011-07-11 05:07:19)
Canadian researchers have presented evidence suggesting that appropriately designed services (according to their criteria) produce an average reduction in recidivism of over 50 per cent, compared with
More of the same would be hand holding, "prisoner rights" etc... THAT is more of the same. What I want is a prison system that says, Don't go to prison in the US. I want our prison system to give a message that, prison in America is tough hard time and you really don't wanna get caught, like the reputations of other countries have for their prisons.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
I doubt we had a prison problem in Medieval Britain but that doesn't particularly sound like progress to me.lowing wrote:
Yes, I am morally superior to drug addicts, rapists, murderers white collar thieves, child molesters, and abusers, drunk drivers etc....aren't you?Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
So you think that raising the stakes will not lead to an escalation of violence?
Its easy to sit on the moral high ground and cast down fire and brimstone on all those below you. Doesn't improve the situation though does it? Im sure everybody agrees that punishing criminals is good, however making sentences harsher and thus filling the prisons up simply does not work. From first hand knowledge, people end up in prison for a number of years over something retarded like minor possession or fraud and end up making friends with all the native murderers, rapists, armed thieves etc. They then come out of prison with a much better knowledge of how to exploit the system and a huge underworld contact list.
How does that improve society?
It doesn't. While it is politically popular and an easy vote winner to be "tough on crime" its a load of crap and does more harm than good.
and if you want to call punishment for what you do to others, fire and "brimstone", I like that as well. I have no problem legalizing drugs, I wish they would quite frankly, but the OP talks about prisoners in maximum security prisons, and someone caught with a dime bag does not go there.
Since it has already been shown rehab is a colossal failure, what is it you suggest? Like I said before, I don't think Saudi or Turkey has a prison population problem.
I am afraid I do not have the answer to solve the nations prison problem but I can see that "more of the same" is not going to solve it anytime soon.
Morally superior to offenders? I think you misunderstood me, you are taking the popular moral ground over those of us pointing out that increasing prison sentences is not reducing crime while costing the tax payer an absolute fortune.
Rehab has not been shown as a colossal failure. It depends entirely on the crime, for instance for minor speeding / driving offenses you are now offered an awareness course instead of points on your license. Contrastingly we could hand out a 6 month jail term for the same offense but I doubt it would reduce offender numbers significantly and would create associations between those performing very minor crimes and those who live a life of crime.
Ideally we want to send as few people to prison as possible because prison makes people more likely to re offend. Some people need to be taken out of society however by sending everybody to jail you might as well send nobody. At the moment the balance is wrong, we send too many people to jail.
Last edited by lowing (2011-07-11 06:06:12)
I didn't include sex offender stats because they are to ambiguous. When a sex offender could be a 18 year old having sex with his 16 year old girl friend.Jaekus wrote:
I know.So an 8 per cent reduction overall, or a relative reduction of 30%.A recent meta-analysis of treatment studies for sexual offenders reported that sexual recidivism for treated offenders was 19 per cent, compared to 27 per cent for untreated offenders (Hall 1995).
Last edited by Jaekus (2011-07-11 05:11:01)
"You really dont wanna get caught" as I pointed out in my first post this will lead to escalated confrontation. I thought you already had a big enough problem in the US with trigger happy SWAT teams shooting first and thinking later? But hey lets up the stakes and give everybody bigger guns / more incentive to use them.lowing wrote:
More of the same would be hand holding, "prisoner rights" etc... THAT is more of the same. What I want is a prison system that says, Don't go to prison in the US. I want our prison system to give a message that, prison in America is tough hard time and you really don't wanna get caught, like the reputations of other countries have for their prisons.
Yes I am the one with the misunderstanding, hence why you gave the speech about being a better person than a rapist.I have no moral high ground over some with a different opinion, if there is a mis-understanding on this point, it is yours.
Actually no that has yet to be agreed upon.Actually yes, rehab has been shown to be a colossal failure unless you consider 95-100% failure rate as a success.
I would bet a very large sum of money that prisons would overflow before people stopped speeding.I would be willing to bet if a speeder knew he was going to jail for his offense rather than a mere speeding ticket, he would slow the hell down. I know I would.
If it was a different approach then you wouldn't have a prison population problem. As I said before, the balance is wrong. Too many people are being sent to jail and come out as a worse member of society than when they went in.Legalize drugs and let the addicts drown in their own puke in the ditch is fine with me. I have no problem with drug offenders not going to jail if drug use is not a crime. Also, execute the capital offenders and do it smartly. Those things with a reputation of prison being hell on earth is a different approach, and not "more of the same"
This is exactly the reason we need jails and a secret service.The US Secret Service has raided the home of an artist who collected images from webcams in a New York Apple store
Kyle McDonald is said to have installed software that photographed people looking at laptops then uploaded the pictures to a website.
Offences covered by the legislation carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.
The number of illegally downloaded films in the UK has gone up nearly 30% in five years, new figures suggest.
...
"We have a generation online now who aren't really bothered about downloading things illegally."
Last edited by Cheeky_Ninja06 (2011-07-11 07:22:29)
So you want a system that sends the message, it doesn't matter if you get caught, you will get "rehabbed" and sent back out? No thanks.Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
"You really dont wanna get caught" as I pointed out in my first post this will lead to escalated confrontation. I thought you already had a big enough problem in the US with trigger happy SWAT teams shooting first and thinking later? But hey lets up the stakes and give everybody bigger guns / more incentive to use them.lowing wrote:
More of the same would be hand holding, "prisoner rights" etc... THAT is more of the same. What I want is a prison system that says, Don't go to prison in the US. I want our prison system to give a message that, prison in America is tough hard time and you really don't wanna get caught, like the reputations of other countries have for their prisons.
Which countries jail system are you idealizing exactly?Yes I am the one with the misunderstanding, hence why you gave the speech about being a better person than a rapist.I have no moral high ground over some with a different opinion, if there is a mis-understanding on this point, it is yours.Actually no that has yet to be agreed upon.Actually yes, rehab has been shown to be a colossal failure unless you consider 95-100% failure rate as a success.I would bet a very large sum of money that prisons would overflow before people stopped speeding.I would be willing to bet if a speeder knew he was going to jail for his offense rather than a mere speeding ticket, he would slow the hell down. I know I would.If it was a different approach then you wouldn't have a prison population problem. As I said before, the balance is wrong. Too many people are being sent to jail and come out as a worse member of society than when they went in.Legalize drugs and let the addicts drown in their own puke in the ditch is fine with me. I have no problem with drug offenders not going to jail if drug use is not a crime. Also, execute the capital offenders and do it smartly. Those things with a reputation of prison being hell on earth is a different approach, and not "more of the same"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14080438This is exactly the reason we need jails and a secret service.The US Secret Service has raided the home of an artist who collected images from webcams in a New York Apple store
Kyle McDonald is said to have installed software that photographed people looking at laptops then uploaded the pictures to a website.
Offences covered by the legislation carry a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.
Further evidence that the whole prison deterrent argument just doesn't work..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/14029865The number of illegally downloaded films in the UK has gone up nearly 30% in five years, new figures suggest.
"We have a generation online now who aren't really bothered about downloading things illegally."
The point is that you started off with a drug user, spent a whole load of money and timing or arresting, processing, sentencing and housing them and because of your decision to send them to jail, you have directly caused somebody to get raped. If you had done nothing society would arguably have been better off.Well if people are drug addicts, then go to jail to be rapists, fuck them anyway. Society does not need either one.
Last edited by Cheeky_Ninja06 (2011-07-11 17:06:01)
Same argument as you can either punish then teach a child what is the wrong thing and why, or beat them into submission so they never do it again, and all they learn is resentment and to treat other people the same way. I wonder which side lowing is on.AussieReaper wrote:
It depends if you want to just punish criminals or reform them also.