imported post
Wynder wrote:
Manslaughter? Accidental, reckless or negligent homicide?
Sexual assault? Offensive touching?
Embezlement? Con games? Home improvement schemes?
As for drug users, you've advocated recreational drug use, but what about narcotics? People who sell to children? People who intentionally or unintentionally mix bad batches and distribute? Outside of that, the discussion is about crime control in our current governmental climate and habitual users who use to the point where they destory their lives and become a burden to the taxpayers need to be rehabilitated.
And an armed public is not "the only thing" that will prevent someone from stealing property. People CAN be rehabilitated -- your view just comes off as way too narrow to cover every type of offense.
Others have voiced concerns of the accuracy of our legal system to indicate they are not in favor of the death penalty. I can fully respect that and actually am still debating that concept in my own mind. So in leu of the death penalty, life without parole under the condition that the inmate must be working to pay for the costs of his incarceration. The problem is that it is very difficult to motivate someone to work when they are stuck for life. So if we are not willing to kill them, we must at least be willing to allow them to kill themselves by refusing to work for their food.
Now to your other listed crimes:
Manslaughter is murder: I see no difference between a "crime of passion" ie someone can't control their temper, and a well thought and planned murder.
Accidental, reckless and negligent homocide: typically these crimes are the result of a bad situation that happened once, as far as I know there is not a big problem with repeat offenders in this area. For these crimes I think current prision sentances are more than appropriate and possibly even too heavy.
Narcotics, whatever I don't care what people shoot in their vains. Also the perscription system should be abolished, I don't need my doctors permission to get some anti-biotics for a friggin ear infection.
Selling to children: What are the punishments for businesses that sell alcohol or tobacco to children? Whatever they are they seem to be working, everybody's got their we id card up. I think one of the many benefits of decriminalizing drugs is that it will allow drugs to be sold in real businesses that are operated in a safe manner.
-- On a somewhat related note, I'm not entirely sure what I think about age restrictions on controlled substances anyway. I'm inclined to say it is the parents job to raise their children, not the governments.
Bad baches: What happens if a perscription drug company does this?
Sexual Assault: I'll admit it, I don't have a good answer there.
Embezlement: These criminals are not the same as the common thief. The common thief steals for immediate gratification and the only prevention is an immediate deturrent (like the business end of a .45). The embezzler on the other hand is somewhat educated and looking into the future. Therefor I see prison sentances more effective for them. Con artists are somewhat middle of the road, though I still think a mix of appropriate prison sentances and the threat of an armed population would be effective.
I'll fully admit, I am very passionate about what should and should not be a crime, but in terms of how to enforce those crimes my opinions are not as well researched as many. I am in no way trying to assert what I wrote above, only writing my inclinations. I'm actually enjoying this thread as an opportunity to reflect and develop my ideas on those issues further.
