1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar




Dealing with criminals

Home Forums Research Law and Politics Dealing with criminals

This topic contains 67 replies, has 26 voices, and was last updated by Avatar of xiagos xiagos 4 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 8 posts - 61 through 68 (of 68 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #6958
    Avatar of Melllvar
    Melllvar
    Participant

    Statisticaly, most criminals are lazy. You may be afraid of the people you meet in martial arts, but that is a datum, not a proof. Here’s one of mine: I can go to the more or less legal shooting areas in the mountains around Los Angeles, and see who the criminal types are – the ones shooting gangsta style (holding the weapon sideways, which means they can’t aim at all), who spray and pray, and basically don’t hit the target.

    On the contrary, I never see any actually taking care to hit the targets, nor do I see any at established ranges practicing. There is also a wealth of data of criminologists interviewiing convicts about their habits.

    My point was that there are plenty of people who have weapons or training who have no interest in coexisting peacefully with the less well trained/armed individuals. I can think of gun nuts, good shots, who have commited armed robberies just like I can think of MA guys who have sent people to operating tables in bar fights. Your argument is relying on the chance that people with some sense of respect for their fellow man will always be better trained and more numerous than the types of people I’m mentioning. Even if that’s true statistically (which I’m not agreeing to), what about the people who can’t defend themselves for some reason (sickness, paralysis, handicaps), or the people who don’t have well armed/trained friends/family for whatever reason? It also leaves the definition of law up to the masses, and effectively takes the power of determining who’s a criminal and who isn’t away from the state (which some might say is a good thing, but it kind of defeats the purpose of having any government at all) and gives it to the group with the most power at the time; as others have been saying, might makes right.

    On a side note, do you think that if you’re at the range and see someone doing serious target practice that you would know they were actually a criminal? More likely you would just think they were some guy out at the range, not a criminal who’s a good shot.

    I agree with you about the quality of most police – also most others in the criminal justice system. I am not willing to expend any more of societies resources (which are the proceeds of theft from me via involuntary taxes) to establish or maintain such a force for the state. Such organizations too can become corrupt (look, e.g. at whats happened in Chicago,. or look up the “Battle of Athens, Tn”). Just because the state does something doesn’t make it right. All those ‘democratic republics’ in Africa (and now, Venezuela) are an example of one man, one vote, one time.

    I think we mostly agree here, but where we differ is that I don’t think leaving it up to well armed citizens to enforce law and order would leave us any better off. Honestly, police forces are basically just a state-sanctioned gang of armed citizens. Leave it up to armed citizens and I think you’ll end up with largely the same types of police problems that exist now, primarily brutality, corruption and incompetence. I’d rather drastically reform the law enforcement systems to require more professional conduct from these people, with serious consequences for police brutality and corruption. The idea behind law enforcement sounds great, but in implementation its a complete joke.

    Why should I be forced to support people who are unwilling to understand that they can earn a good life for themselves? More education? More jobs? They expect to get a good job with no skills or experience, while looking and acting anti-social. Hit them with a clue bat, get cleaned up, get a crappy job and show up every day on time, and pretty soon you can get a better job – more money and status. Repeat as needed, until you’re living the American Dream ™. I’ve done some horrible jobs in my day, which convinced me that gettting better jobs and an education was a very good idea. I didn’t need any societal program to make it easy for me aside from a public school education, and I have done fairly well following that program.

    By suggesting improved education and decreased poverty, my idea was that you’re paying for people to understand that they can earn a good life for themselves, so that you don’t have to support them. Then they can get a good job with skills and experience. At the risk of perpetuating class stereotypes, our society promotes certain types of crimes by fostering communities of uneducated poor people. Its conducive to certain types of crimes (i.e. they need money, they grew up around it, it pays better for less work than a “horrible job,” its glorified by certain types, it makes them feel big, you need a degree you can’t afford or aren’t smart enough for to get a good job, criminal acts are more readily available). I’m certainly not recommending welfare handouts or anything like that, but that it would be better to target the things that make people become criminals rather than jailing them once they’ve entered that lifestyle. You don’t meet a lot of people with higher degrees that robbed a store to get money, even if they’re having financial problems. At the same time, you don’t meet many people from poor families with uneducated parents who decided to become software engineers or biochemists or whatever.

    This is all part of my larger theory that half of society’s problems could be solved by a drastically improved educational system (e.g. crime, poverty, racism, republicanism (joking)), but I’ll save that for another thread.

    #6961
    Avatar of libertariandoc
    libertariandoc
    Participant

    I don’t know where you’ve been meeting your gun nuts, I am one (5 gun safes (big ones), life member of the NRA and everything) but all of the ones I’ve ever met were pretty decent folks. Don’t buy into the northeastern US / Hollywood liberal bullcrap about them that you seem to have been steeped in.

    Right now, the justice system is just a well-armed gang of thugs sanctioned by society. Changing that, using my method, has the advantage of working historically, especially in smaller and isolated communities, and maintaining the status quo has the disadvantage of all the existing problems. Since you don’t like my suggestion and yours isn’t changing anything, what are we to do?

    You suggest improving education. GREAT idea, one that I support wholeheartedly. First of all, lets decertify ALL the teachers unions (why are there no KIDS unions to fight for them?) and require that teachers teach, that parents discipline, and that students who disrupt classrooms are tossed out so that one troubled spoiled brat can’t keep 30 enthused kids from learning. Teach using proven (not theoretical) methods and require testing to make certain that the students are learning and the teachers are teaching. No politics in the classroom, real subjects (english, literature, mathematics, the hard basic sciences that are the framework for everyting else in science), history written by almost anyone but Howard Zinn. For students that aren’t fluent in english, immersion english classes for a semester until they are, then back into regular classes – no bilingual classes which achieves nothing but poorly educated and functionally illiterate students in two languages. Finally, not every student is cut out for college, not every profession or job requires a college degree (especially today), and there is nothing at all wrong or less credible than learning a trade like plumbing or auto repair (btw, I pay my mechanic more to fix my car than I make an hour as a physician – for modern US made cars).

    As far as decreasing povery, a hundred years of experience shows that giving people money, homes and food doesn’t fix their poverty – it just makes poverty a generational problem. I don’t advocate that people should starve, especially those who have legitimate problems, but giving people foodstamps so they can buy crap food (for generations, they don’t know any better and we don’t teach them) doesn’t work either.

    Since President Johnson got the ‘war on poverty’ passed, the US has wasted literally TENS OF TRILLIONS of dollars on fixing it. We still have it, like all government bureaucracies the only real goal it has is to ensure the survival of the bureaucracy, and to hell with the goals. Think of what that money could have done in private hands (creating more jobs), or in pure research (spaceflight, energy research, etc). Might even have done enough to encourage people to get jobs. When Clinton signed (after vetoing 3 times, and in realization that he would be overridden) the welfare reform bill, welfare actually decreased. The bureaucracy regrouped, and now is bigger than ever.

    Teaching people not to be welfare slackards is a good idea – not enabling them is the way to do it, as proven in the 1990s. Same with antisocial types who want to prey on the successful: Letting society take care of the problem first hand (by allowing those who wish to be able to defend themselves the means to do it) is the way to fix that. There is also evidence that arming people reduces crime, after Florida passed the shall-issue CCW policy the number of floridians who were robbed dropped precipitously. The number of people who were visiting (identifiable by the unique type of license plate on rental cars) increased precipitously (there was a very good chance that they would be unarmed, and vulnerable). The state changed the policy requiring identifiable license plates, and the rate of tourist victim crime dropped to the state average.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I won’t be wronged. I won’t be insulted. I won’t be laid a-hand on. I don’t do these things to other people, and I require the same from them.

    #6962
    Avatar of Melllvar
    Melllvar
    Participant

    I don’t know where you’ve been meeting your gun nuts, I am one (5 gun safes (big ones), life member of the NRA and everything) but all of the ones I’ve ever met were pretty decent folks. Don’t buy into the northeastern US / Hollywood liberal bullcrap about them that you seem to have been steeped in.

    Right now, the justice system is just a well-armed gang of thugs sanctioned by society. Changing that, using my method, has the advantage of working historically, especially in smaller and isolated communities, and maintaining the status quo has the disadvantage of all the existing problems. Since you don’t like my suggestion and yours isn’t changing anything, what are we to do?

    I’ve met ones who weren’t, in my opinion. I don’t mean to argue against 2nd amendment rights, I’m all for a well armed populace, I’m just arguing that to portray all armed citizens as responsible people who can be expected not to abuse their power is pretty much a fantasy. My anecdotal evidence comes from people I actually know, although quite frankly I’d rather not. If nothing else, I want my right to own guns to protect myself from psychos like them. I don’t want them to have more power to bully me around by the absence of the state-sanctioned gang.

    Correct, I don’t like your suggestion, mine would be to change things by requiring better conduct from our police forces. In my perfect little fantasy world, the abusive bully types that become cops now would not be allowed to have the job, and their treatement of citizens would be under scrutiny to ensure that abuse of power incidents were few and far between. I realize that improving things like the police force or educational system requires spending lots more money (and hence bigger taxes), but the way I see it a small fraction of the US military budget could improve both things, while paying itself off (mainly on the educational side) by fewer prisons, fewer violent crimes, a more skilled workforce, lowered health care costs, etc.

    Maybe your system has worked historically, maybe it hasn’t. I’m pretty sure there have been many times and places when its failed, as shown by the history of organized crime. Was this because not enough people had guns and knew how to shoot them? I’m not really sure its a good idea to require all citizens of a society to be proficient in combat in order to maintain order (if nothing else, my own MA experience has taught me that some people will simply never be able to fight as well as others, so expecting everyone to go out to the range two days a week and be equally good as everyone else isn’t going to work out).

    I doubt I’ve convinced you, so on this point we’ll just have to agree to disagree. There’s not really much else I can say about it, my argument’s been made. Plus the whole organized police vs. vigilante justice argument has probably been covered millions of times already, even if one of us convinces the other its only a matter of time until someone else brings it up again.

    #6965
    Avatar of JLMadrigal
    JLMadrigal
    Participant

    I have devised a detailed, seven-step method for dealing with aggressions involving both insured and uninsured losses and damages in a civilized way, with little input required by the victim. Some elements would be eliminated for minor offenses.

    http://www.geocities.com/johnfkosanke/RTR.htm

    1. Preliminary Investigation

    2. Rights Transfer

    3. Debt Assignment

    4. Containment

    5. Payment Negotiation

    6. Supervision

    7. Final Settlement

    Although it will be rare for a habitual aggressor to be lucky enough to be sponsored by a leaseholder under the Master Lease (http://wiki.seasteading.org/index.php/ClubStead_Master_Lease), and that the leaseholder would be shortsighted enough to sponsor his visit (and his actions), dealing with such aggressions will be a simple matter on my seastead.

    #6967
    Avatar of thief
    thief
    Participant

    Woohoo, I’m coming to live with your Stead, Madrigal!

    Provided I have some say in the penalties enforced by the RTR (a seat on the Council would be nice ;) ).

    - Nick

    #6968
    Avatar of Carl-Pålsson
    Carl-Pålsson
    Participant

    The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.

    - Jeff Cooper

    #8919
    Avatar of greyraven_r
    greyraven_r
    Participant

    For violent “capital” crimes, I’d suggest “enthusiastic deportation” – cast them to the sea!

    for lesser offenses restitution, “house” arrest and community should best serve all involved.

    #10280
    Avatar of xiagos
    xiagos
    Participant

    Solution: Simple. Plank, short, 1 each….Walk, long, 1 each. Problem: Solved.

    That is cute, but it may not be far from the truth.

    Everyone should read The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein. The novel is about a ruff-and-tuff moon society made up of exiled criminals and their offspring who find it necessary to rebel againt the earth. In part of the story there is a glimpse at an interesting judicial process I think might work. Well respected citizens are hired to judge disputes. A feee is agreed to, which is paid by both parties who pledge to abide by the hired judge’s decision. The judge hears both sides, makes a finding, and sets the punishment (if required).

    I also recommend seasteaders read this book for other ideas about family and marriage, and its commentary on government, people, and society. Of course this is in addition to the story being interesting in itself.

Viewing 8 posts - 61 through 68 (of 68 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.



Posted on at

Categories:

Written by

Blog/Newsletter

Donate