XPost: phl.media, pa.politics, alt.politics   
   From: Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header   
      
   On Sun, 19 Oct 2003, "mcs"  wrote:   
      
   >excuse me , I disagree. If your argument held true, there would be no   
   >punishment.I never said punishment , in of itself would stop crime. I said   
      
   Bullpucky!   
      
     "Put them in jail, no perks, for life, No computers no tv ,   
     no smokes and no contraband, and slab for  a bed and then we   
     might not let them die early from the death penalty and lets   
     see how that plays out!"   
      
   Up untill this point you've been spouting punishment as the cure-all for   
   crime. NOW you're salting in some other liberal mumbo jumbo when someone   
   points out that your notions are easily disproven.   
      
   >life everything is connected and sorry I didn't say torture by cutting off   
   >hands, I said put them in jail and show what a deterrent is really like   
   >without computers and tv and smokes and contraband and then lets see if   
      
   See what I mean... *sigh*   
      
   Your "bottom line" is basically abusive punishment. When everything else   
   fails, and it *will* fail on occasion, your misguided solution is to teach   
   a proverbial lesson. Like I said, and demonstrated, this does not work. It   
   never has, and it never will. Criminals commit crimes without much thought   
   to punishment beyond "If I'm going to get my ass kicked, I might as well do   
   it right". Your silly solution promotes more violent crimes rather than   
   deters them. If someone is going to do something that runs them the risk of   
   spending the rest of their life in a man made hell, why not go all the way?   
      
   You really need to think about your posiion some more...   
   >punishment and the whole enchilada  (early education) didn't matter.   
   > Incidentally you suggested there is no correlation between rigid punishment   
   >and decline of crime. In many societies in the Orient and Islamic cultures   
   >with very harsh punishment there is much less crime . So it all depends   
   >which study you want to look at.Now whether this is replaced by repression   
   >and terrorism , that's another story but  we desperately need MORE SANE   
   >DETERRENTS   
   >"Anonymous"  wrote in message   
   >news:2UFF7RVO37913.1643518519@anonymous...   
   >> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003, "mcs"  wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >I just disagree allot . We just don't emphasize the punishment angle .   
   >The   
   >>   
   >>     
   >>   
   >> You appear to have no grasp of reality, nor history. Examine any period of   
   >> time in any society where criminals were dealt with in horrific ways and   
   >> you'll be staring directly at one of the most bloody, crime riddled eras   
   >of   
   >> that civilization. Take for example medieval Europe, where you could loose   
   >> a hand for stealing a loaf of bread. More bread was stolen then than now.   
   >> Why? Because crime levels rise and fall on factors other than punishment.   
   >> This has been time tested and proven since history has been recorded, yet   
   >> many people still seem to be unable to grasp the simple, logical truth.   
   >And   
   >> THAT, my friend is one of the problems of modern society that causes crime   
   >> rates to rise.   
   >>   
   >> You are part of the problem, not the solution. Sorry.   
   >> -=-   
   >> This message was posted via two or more anonymous remailing services.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Put them in jail, no perks, for life, No computers no tv , no smokes and   
   >no contraband, and slab for  a bed and then we might not let them die early   
   >from the death penalty and lets see how that plays out!   
      
   -=-   
   This message was posted via two or more anonymous remailing services.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)