Crime-ridden Arkansas town expands 24-hour curfew

[kis123]

Anyway, no, stop twisting what I'm saying and maybe work a little harder on your reading comprehension. I'm not saying the poor are innocent simply by virtue of being poor. I'm saying that the way to ACTUALLY reduce crime instead of just punishing people for committing crimes is to take a look at the social infrastructures that we have in place that either encourage or necessitate criminal behavior. That is, <i>we would terrible human beings if we had legislation in place that fucked over the poor, and then solved all the problems that resulted by imprisoning all the people who were made desperate by the situation</i>.

And again, if you guys think it's always so easy and that poor people are poor just because they're lazy, go out and even double your current income and then get back to me about how easy it was.

First of all, I have no problem with reading comprehnsion so here's a kitty cat to go with that "meow"!

Yes, people who are poor that commit crimes are lazy IMO; take that effort used in breaking the law and improve your position in life! It's a cop-put and I have no sympathy for those who do it; not everyone who is poor is committing crime-just the lazy ones! No excuse using crime to get ahead in life but I'll leave it to you to keep making excuses for it!

I've been in the public assistance environment before and did what needed to be done to get off welfare rolls and generate a payroll. If I can do it, why can't the "poor and impoverished"? Many of them just make excusesf and don't bother to take any other route IMO! And criminals of all economic status should be punished if they break the law, not just poor ones.

You're making excuses, I'm providing possible solutions that leave few loopholes for criminals to jump through. Why don't you focus more on providing viable alternatives instead of mollycoddling criminals and using poverty as an excuse to justify their behavior?

 

[kis123]

Good points... I like to stress personal responsibility, but it always makes me wonder about people who seem to think that effort is all it takes for success.

A lot of success depends on who you know and actually even luck.

Well, let some around here tell it, personal responsibility doesn't matter if you're poor! "I'm poor so it's okay if I commit crime"-that sounds ridiculous in print, doesn't it??

But if you don't put forth the effort, you definitely won't get anywhere. And no one will ever convince me that committing crimes is the way out of poverty.

I don't feel luck has anything to do with it as much as sheer will and desire to better onesself. I have a sister who'll do whatever it takes to survive out here; she's in her 40s and I've never known her not to work at least two jobs at a time. She doesn't resort to committing crime to put food on her table.

 

[Cy/MiG]

You know a few years ago, before I became opposed to the death penalty, I would have agreed with this approach. It still has a certain appeal. Of course if you are killing people for multiple speeding tickets that might be taking the approach too far, but I can see executing repeat felons.

That being said, I no longer support the death penalty, so I have to disagree with the idea, but it is a solution.

That's what I meant. I'm talking rapists, molestors, murderers, etc. Obviously we shouldn't execute someone for three speeding tickets or other minor crimes.

I just think that without the death penalty, all we have is overcrowded prisons or 'revolving doors' and nothing really gets solved. Or we have a bunch of REALLY 'evil' and despicable people being pent in up prison on tax dollars. It's a double edged sword, but I'd rather get rid of the 'really bad' people then pay for them to sit in jail for 20 or more years. But that's just me.

As for me bringing religion into the equation, all I meant was I'm willing to be subjected to the same laws as criminals. If I kill someone, or three people and the system says the punishment is death, so be it. I won't bitch or complain or hide behind the constitution. Kind of a 'practice what you preach appoach'.

Now is my solution great? No, but it is one solution.

 

[MrMacphisto]

Well, let some around here tell it, personal responsibility doesn't matter if you're poor! "I'm poor so it's okay if I commit crime"-that sounds ridiculous in print, doesn't it??

But if you don't put forth the effort, you definitely won't get anywhere. And no one will ever convince me that committing crimes is the way out of poverty.

I don't feel luck has anything to do with it as much as sheer will and desire to better onesself. I have a sister who'll do whatever it takes to survive out here; she's in her 40s and I've never known her not to work at least two jobs at a time. She doesn't resort to committing crime to put food on her table.

Uh... ok... There's a difference between saying that you understand why people act a certain way and saying you approve of it. I could be wrong here, but neither I nor Machival were suggesting that crime is ok. I know I wasn't suggesting that.

All that really needs to be said is that, thanks to the war on drugs, we have a lot of ghettoes where people sell drugs because it makes them a lot more money than any legitimate job they can get. Again, it doesn't justify it, but you can see why it happens.

 

[kis123]

Uh... ok... There's a difference between saying that you understand why people act a certain way and saying you approve of it. I could be wrong here, but neither I nor Machival were suggesting that crime is ok. I know I wasn't suggesting that.

All that really needs to be said is that, thanks to the war on drugs, we have a lot of ghettoes where people sell drugs because it makes them a lot more money than any legitimate job they can get. Again, it doesn't justify it, but you can see why it happens.

Seeing why it happens is one thing; I see why it happens. But I make no excuses or justifications for it either and I see some here doing just that. There is no excuse and no reason why they couldn't take the same effort to improve the quality of their lives (going to school to get a higher paying job instead of being drug dealers and poisioning their communities).

 

[Redmage]

Hang on, so I'm acting like a monster because I want karma to kick the bastard's ass who stole my hard-earned things?

Is the government in charge of administering karma?

I'm positive he's not the only politician in a seat of power who thinks that way. Are you going to shut down any high government official who says something to that effect? Even the President?

Damned straight. That's one of the reasons that I have consistently opposed our current President for the last 7+ years. I said zero tolerance, and that's just what I meant.

The role of our Government is to do what's best for the people, even if we don't always agree, am I correct?

Oh, my God, no. You are not correct. The people decide what is best for them, then direct the government to do it. Anyone who actually trusts the government to make that decision for them is headed for serious trouble. This country was started by a bunch of folks who decided to stop taking their government's word on what was best for them.

Whoa............when did you become the person who decided which is a good idea and a bad one?

I'm assuming this is a serious question, but I'm having trouble understanding how you could take it seriously. I'm not THE person who makes that decision. I'm A person who makes that decision. So are you. At least, I assume that you decide an idea is bad or good before you choose to oppose or support it. Surely you don't go around opposing good ideas and supporting bad ones, just by the flip of a coin?

 

[MrMacphisto]

Seeing why it happens is one thing; I see why it happens. But I make no excuses or justifications for it either and I see some here doing just that. There is no excuse and no reason why they couldn't take the same effort to improve the quality of their lives (going to school to get a higher paying job instead of being drug dealers and poisioning their communities).

Well yeah, but most people aren't very logical. Foresight is a rarity among the general public.

 

[MrMacphisto]

Hang on, so I'm acting like a monster because I want karma to kick the bastard's ass who stole my hard-earned things?

Vigilantism is always an option, but as soon as you go down that route, you have to be prepared to face the consequences if you get caught.

Believe me... I can relate.

Just be sure to remember that the more power you give the government in doling out punishment, the more power you're handing them over to possibly abuse.

For example, mandatory drug sentencing is a large portion of the reason why our prisons are crowded now.

 

[Tamia78]

Ugh, I give up. You guys win.

Okay, just to clear a few things up. I don't condone acts of vigilantism(sp), but I understand when people commit them. Crime sucks, plain and simple. But hey, if you guys don't care about criminals and random acts of violence for no reason. I suppose you're right.........nobody should care. Let them have everything. Because, dammit, criminals have rights too!

And YES I did want to quote the Bible. I was quoting a part of the Bible, just as you were. Just clearing things up, you understand.

Red, I love you man, but you took me the wrong way this time. Perhaps I'll PM you about it later, too tired now.

Cy, I wholeheartedly agree with you on the death penalty there. I would definitely support that. Maybe that would turn some people around. Probably not because most people would think it too harsh a punishment for killers or something.

--T

 

[Redmage]

Well yeah, but most people aren't very logical. Foresight is a rarity among the general public.

It's not really a matter of logic or foresight. It's easy for someone to say, "Well, they could get a better job if they work hard," and then use failure as a justification for 24-hour curfews. But let's step back and look at the real world for a minute.

How many poor people manage to climb out of poverty? Even without dredging up statistics, it's safe to say relatively few make it. Most people live their whole lives in the same socioeconomic bracket they were born into. It's POSSIBLE to climb the ladder, sure, but it's a heck of a lot easier to talk about than it is to do. And the plain fact is that only a fraction will get it done.

There are lots of reasons: going to school costs money, and meanwhile the kids still need food. There may just not be any decent jobs in a certain area, and things have to get very bad indeed before most people will pack up and move somewhere else, leaving family and friends behind. Some people don't believe that the system will work for them, no matter how hard they try - so they don't try. It's not a good idea, but it's human nature.

So, we can develop policy around what we think people ought to be able to do, or we make policy for the way the world really works, and try to make gradual improvements. I choose B, and that means addressing conditions on the ground. It's not a stark choice between "giving the criminals a free ride" and "capital punishment for parking tickets." Real-world policies mean improving conditions so that more people can see the possibility of getting a better job through some attainable level of effort and sacrifice on their parts.

But, as I've said before, that's hard work, and complicated. A 24-hour curfew is easy.

 

[Machival]

"I don't like being called a fuckhead."
"FINE. Then why don't I just never talk to you AGAIN?"

"I'm feeling really lonely today."
"Well, why don't I just glue myself to your back? THAT would make you happy, WOULDN'T IT?"

"Man, sometimes I really don't like what people say on the internet."
"FINE, then. I'm canceling our internet service!"

"I think prisoners should still have rights."
"Fine, why don't we just GIVE THEM EACH A BILLION DOLLARS and LET THEM HAVE EVERYTHING THEY WANT and LASSO THE MOON AND CUT IT UP INTO LITTLE PIECES AND GIVE EACH PIECE TO THE PRISONERS."

"I think criminals should be punished for the things they do."
"FINE, why don't we just LOCK UP EVERYONE IN THE COUNTRY JUST FOR BREATHING!!!"

Yes, twisting what other people are saying to bizarre, reactionary extremes that don't in any way resemble what they were actually saying is a sound and rational debate technique. Definitely.

 

[kis123]

It's not really a matter of logic or foresight. It's easy for someone to say, "Well, they could get a better job if they work hard," and then use failure as a justification for 24-hour curfews. But let's step back and look at the real world for a minute.

How many poor people manage to climb out of poverty? Even without dredging up statistics, it's safe to say relatively few make it. Most people live their whole lives in the same socioeconomic bracket they were born into. It's POSSIBLE to climb the ladder, sure, but it's a heck of a lot easier to talk about than it is to do. And the plain fact is that only a fraction will get it done.

There are lots of reasons: going to school costs money, and meanwhile the kids still need food. There may just not be any decent jobs in a certain area, and things have to get very bad indeed before most people will pack up and move somewhere else, leaving family and friends behind. Some people don't believe that the system will work for them, no matter how hard they try - so they don't try. It's not a good idea, but it's human nature.

So, we can develop policy around what we think people ought to be able to do, or we make policy for the way the world really works, and try to make gradual improvements. I choose B, and that means addressing conditions on the ground. It's not a stark choice between "giving the criminals a free ride" and "capital punishment for parking tickets." Real-world policies mean improving conditions so that more people can see the possibility of getting a better job through some attainable level of effort and sacrifice on their parts.

But, as I've said before, that's hard work, and complicated. A 24-hour curfew is easy.

There are just some people in the world who have no drive, ambition, or desire to do better for themselves. Here's another example that bad circumstances can be changed without committing crime as a cop-out...er...um...solution:

There are three members in my family who all dropped out of high school. All three had babies in their teens and one married at age 19 to a man who stayed in jail longer than out!

Now, all of them have made somethng out of themselves; one is a nurse, one a surgical tech, and one in HR. All have educated themselves and changed their lives. Was is easy? No! Did they have to endure against seemingly insurmountable odds? Certainly! I'm proud of all three of them because they liked dating the dope dealers and compromised the safety of my entire family. Actually one of the baby daddys was killed in the back of a club about 10 years ago; that thing about "living by the sword" does has some truth to it!

Might not be able to save everybody but someone has to try saving somebody,stop beating the problem to death, and start putting viable short and long term solutions of the table IMO. We all know the 24 hr curfew isn't going to last forever; we can only hope it'll quiet things down for awhile. But criminals (especially thugs and dope dealers) cannot be allowed to take over cities either.

 

[Cy/MiG]

Cy, I wholeheartedly agree with you on the death penalty there. I would definitely support that. Maybe that would turn some people around. Probably not because most people would think it too harsh a punishment for killers or something.

--T

Someone agrees with me?! What?! That's not supposed to happen!

(I'm doing the charleston right now.)

But seriously, I do believe that 'capital punishment' does deserve a good look for serious offenders. But that's just me.