NJ:
: Ah yes, the law, "the law which in its majestic equality frobids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." (Anatole France). : There are two kinds of crime, property crime and violent crime. Why do people commit property crimes? becaus ethey don't have property and otehrs do. Reduce the inequalities in income and you will reduce property crime. Social stratification is correlated with crime. inequality leads to alienation, which in turn leads to rpoperty crime.
MB:
I'd say let's put it more simply: Quoting a line from a Jane's Addiction tune: They "want something, but don't wanna pay for it." Or, it's the thrill of "getting away with it". Perhaps it could be out of pure meanness. You must never have had anything stolen from you, or so your posts make out. Back in the early 80's when I was 16, our suburban southwest Ft. Worth home was burglarized (or burgled, U.K. visitors) for the SECOND time. The Fr. Worth P.D. detective actually told my parents not to "waste the P.D.'s time". This matter wasn't considered worthy of 'em to come out. And of course they took their time to get there. A year earlier, many items were stolen from our garage. I have relatives whose daughter entered their home while burglars were in the process. Also last year, one of my parents' next door neighbors Jeep Grand Cherokee was broken into while he was on business in Irving, TX. The stereo and a cell phone were stolen. Calls were made on the cell phone, and could have been easily investigated by the Irving P.D., but the detectives at that dept. were too lazy to get involved. Another police dept. whose only interest is towing and writing tickets (A Irving policeman raced to my truck last year while I was on the shoulder changing a tire that went flat instantly. He obviously thought he had a prey (my truck) for the impound lot. His last words to me was "I guess I won't tow you!"). As for those "inequalities" you mentioned, again everyone should have equal opportunity to go as far as they are able, and go for the rewarding careers that will pay not just livable, but good salaries that will also provide for entertainment, and items of desire. Pay the bills, and then go to Blockbuster and rent a Cheech & Chong movie or maybe "Showgirls" or "Porky's" or "10". Or go buy that new Charger R/T that Daimler/Chrysler just might bring back (I hope they do!). We all have lusts and wants, anyone who says otherwise is bullshitting. "Equalizing everyone" as you suggest will not reduce property crime and shoplifting. I agree that prison or jail is harsh for petty theft, and even higher degrees of burglary/theft. But the criminal should not go unpunished. He should be made to accept responsibility for his willful actions that he CHOSE to do!! Nobody made him do it. This notion that its "everyone else's fault and not his" is bullshit!!! A good idea is for the thieving motherfucker to make restitution to the burglary victims' insurance company. Perhaps about 5 years of cleaning toilets in one of the office buildings, and doing other janitorial work for free. It ain't slavery. It's punishment for willful bad act. I know one thing. My dad, and others close to me who have been victims of burglary, won't buy this liberal "It's never the criminal's fault - the answer is to equalize everyone" shit. Final thought on theft: People from affluent families have also been known to shoplift and commit burglary. And I've read many success stories of people from poor sections of town who pulled themselves up and are now affluent, even millionaires/billionaires, ...without the Government's help.
NJ:
: Violent crime is mroe complex. Some crimes are idneed committed by strange people who are iredeemably evil. But otehrs are committed by people who got some bad breaks in life. I think we need to intergaarte them iunto society,m not lock them up and throw away teh key. I would reserve the death penatly only for 1) war criminals, 2) possibly serial killers, and 3) crimes of murder against teh State, e.g. Tim McVeigh.
MB:
Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth! If you willfully kill someone without proper cause, which murder is, then you deserve the chair, the chamber, or the reaper's syringe. Think about what it would be like to walk in the shoes of Amber Haggerman's family, or the families of other murder victims. True it may not bring their slain relatives back, but at least justice will be served. I've heard that homemade bombs are becoming the choice of gang members recruited to execute contract hits on people. In TV interviews they smiled and clearly stated that they don't give a flying fuck if they bomb the wrong household or kill innocent people who are in the wrong place at the wrong time. They know right from wrong. They know the pain they are causing. They say they get a rush out of doing it, that "it's fun!" As for other violent crimes, ask a rape or robbery victim if he/she cares what "bad breaks in life" that bastard thug might have had. Not everyone from bad households turns out to be a robber, murderer, or rapist. So that "bad breaks in life" line is just a lame cop-out.
NJ:
: EVERYONE deserves welfare, whether you work or not. What right do you ro I have to tell someone how to ;live his life? We can advise him to work, ask him to work, buyt we cannot cit off his welafre to mnake him work. Even if he chooses not to do a lick of work, we must not cut off his welafre., He deserves it merely by the virtue of beoing human.
MB:
Uh, as a working taxpayer myself, I take exception to that, NJ. I have no problem with helping someone who is making every effort to pull him/herself up for as long as he/she needs help. But the person who chooses to sit on his butt, in my opinion, forfeits the priviledge. True, he has the right to sit on his butt, however, not on OUR money, not on MY money!!! And I have relatives who draw SSI, simply because they are lazy!! Technically, I'm supporting them, along with the other taxpayers. Each state has only so much revenue budgeted for public assistance. You get enough moochers on the system, and there won't be enough funds for the people who really DO need help. And most taxpayers won't stand for repeated tax increases. Unemployment insurance has a qualification: You must be actively seeking a job. So should public assistance: To qualify, you should be required to actively make an effort to get yourself "out of the hole". And I see "help wanted" signs just about everywhere these days. Many of these service positions might not pay much. But they are a start. As for the bum whose assistance is terminated, look at it this way: WE didn't cut off his benefits - the bum moocher cut them himself. By choosing to FART AROUND!!!!
NJ:
: So many victims of teh three strikes policy ahve been thrown in prison for life for merely stealing food, eytc, that I can never support such a vicious law.
MB:
I agree that's harsh. Not to mention that it contributes to prison overcrowding, and again the taxpayers are going to have a problem with having more of their money taken from them to fund more prison construction. But again that's not to say they shouldn't be made to face consequences of their willful actions. In Ft. Worth, and other DFW communities, shoplifters are issued citations by the police on the spot for their first offence, instead of being taken into custody. A nice fine of $80-plus should serve as a good reminder not to pull another stunt like that again.
NJ:
: How woudl you feel if you were starving, you stole a piece of bread, got intoa fsitfight with teh cashgier,ma nd taht pout you in jail fro life?
MB:
I remember one "People's Court" episode last year, where the subject had taken a turn towards a defendant's prior theft conviction (which helped the suing plaintiff's case). Former Mayor Ed Koch, who is now the Judge on that show [He declared himself to be an "FDR" Democrat in an article he wrote for Playboy Magazine 12 years ago.], told the defendant point-blankly, that there is now no longer ANY excuse for stealing. That there are shelters and other places run by organizations such as the Salvation Army and churches where he could have gotten a good meal without cost. If the thief harmed the cashier then yes he should do time for that. But suppose the cashier won the fight. There's a damn good chance that the cashier would be hauled off, and he might even do "hard time", in spite of it being a "first strike". If the cashier is spared from going to jail, then his employer will likely fire him, especially if his employer is a convenience store chain. I've heard of would-be car-jacking VICTIMS going to jail for successfully fighting off and beating the shit out of the goddam thug or running the bastard over. And there are battered wives on death row right now for killing their monster husbands in SELF-DEFENSE!!! Before I leave this part, Luke Kuhn and I have disagreed in debating posts several times. But I remember him mentioning that he successfully stopped a thief from robbing him. His post seemed to hint that he kicked his ass. If I read that right, then I must say that Kuhn was absolutely in his rights for doing so, although the law might look at that differently. If you choose to attempt to steal from someone, you bring whatever consequence on yourself.
NJ:
: But teh lien bewteen petty and serious crime is hard to draw....why not try to prevent crime, insetad of dealing with it afetr the fact? We can prevent crime by intergarting everyone better into our society.
MB:
One way to prevent crime is to educate children from the very start that stealing, murdering, and commiting other crimes is wrong, and to teach them good neighbor values, and the value of a good work ethic. There always will be poor people, but that doesn't mean that all or most of them will remain in poverty. Again, many have successfully pulled themselves out of poverty, instead sinking into self-pity, and making excuses to steal.
MWB.
None.
