Maybe I'm just too idealistic, but yes I do think so. It is NOT an overnight, easy fix. It will take generations to accomplish, but if it isn't tried, we are destined to see violence increase very significantly as generation after generation of those affected by poverty continue the cycle.

 

I don't think there is a fix, it will always just be a problem to be dealt with. Things can improve some, but I don't see a fix.

 

I agree I think we shouldn't give up. If we don't try it will only get worse.

 

Imagine if we didn't have speeding tickets. If I still had the S I would be doing 85-90 mph all the time. I know it's wrong but the only reason I don't drive like that all the time is cause I know eventually I will get a ticket.

Again this works for most people.

 

Jail only deters crime if the individual can make the logical connection between the act in question and the consequence.
many just are not capable of the that or worse yet if they are suicidal the concept of jail has no penalty since it has no relevance in their thought process since "they'll be dead by then"

 

just like locks.
really only for the mostly honest people.
I suppose it's a matter of percentages, you will always have a percent of any population willing to commit crime, some deterrents in place may deter a chunk of the mostly homest people but I'm not sure we are doing ourselves any favors by segregating the criminal element, grouping them together really does nothing to increase their level of honesty or good citezinship. the same can be said of ghettos and a fair amount of low income housing developments, some places turn out ok because of a very strong local comunnity leaders influence but many become basically ababndoned s&*( holes that can breed poor values and criminals

 

OK, this was off topic, but I agree with what Kev says. While everyone understandably hates the idea of a cop sitting there with a radar gun to catch a speeder, or giving a ticket to the guy who runs a red light, imagine the world with absolutly no traffic enforcement whatsoever. It would not be safe for anyone to drive. Late for work? drive 120mph, stop signs? F' em.... Kids would be killed in the streets and your beautiful cars would be dented beyond recognition from people wildly changing lanes and running stop signs. Traffic enforcement is a necesary evil...



On to the gun situation. Steve, you are comparing apples to oranges when comparing a criminal trying to figure out whether a vicitm is potentialy armed and with a criminal shooting at a cop. Here's why...

When a criminal shoots a cop, it is because he is cornered and desparate to escape capture. A criminal does not rob a cop for his lunch money or try to car jack his cruiser. Why? because he knows he is armed. there have of course been a few documented cases where a deranged freak decideds that today is the day he will kill a cop and goes out to do just that... but those are rare and not comparible to what we are discussing. then you have "suicide by cop" where someone arms themselves and attacks a cop so that he will be shot and killed, because they don't have the balls to do it themselves.

In the US, there are usualy about 250-300 LEOs killied int he line of duty each year. Not all of these are by a guy with a gun or knife. I would guess that there are thousands upon thousands of armed robberies, car jackings, home invasions etc... These are the crimes in which the criminal ponders whether or not the intended victim is armed.

If you read Ted's article, and remove the fact that he tends to be over the top, he has valid points. If an armed person ready and willing to act would have been on scene at ANY of the major shootings in the US, it could have been stopped before more people were lost. Saving even one life is worth it, no? Two months ago that kook was shooting up the mall and already got a few people, then the off duty cop was able to stop the killing. What if he wasn't there? How many more would have been killed? A civilian legaly carrying could have taken the same action.

Get one thing straight... Guns don't kill people.. people themselves kill people. If you take guns out of the equasion totaly, like they were never invented... Criminals would utilize spears or wrist rockets if they had to. there will always be criminals.

On the subject of criminals... Yes, social disorder is a cause of some crime. But, you must consider that a certain portion of the world's population is pre-disposed to crime. Many are unable or unwilling to conform to societies accepted standards of work and honesty. Even if we had a surplus of jobs with employers begging to hire at great pay, criminals would not work. Much easier to rob someone then to have to listen to a boss and work 9-5. Sad, but very true. I think I was taught that 90% of the crime is commited by 10% of the poplulation or something along those lines. Many people enjoy jail and do what ever it takes to get there. They are institutionalised. They cannot be allowed to live on the streets and belong in jail. No ammount of rehab will fix them. They are a danger to us all. The overwhelming majority of people are detered from crime by the though of being caged up and losing all their freedom. You cannot compare their mores or ways of life with the general population. There is simply no comparison to these people whom in most cases have been brought up with no respect for life and certainly no respect for other people's property.

Social programs are wasted on 99% of the people whom they are intended for. If you think some crack smoking home invasion specialist is going to care for your narcotics annonymous meeting and turn his life around you are sadly mistaken. There are some people who will benefit from those meetings and programs, but the hard criminals do not. Increasing social programs will not attract those who do not already use them. Put more money into bigger and bigger prisons and pay the prison guards more because they spend most of their day in a hell you cannot imagine.

I am glad that most of you have very sheltered view of what real crime and criminals are. That means that the police are doing a good job keeping you sheltered from it as you should be to not have to worry about the true saddness in this world.

 

now there's a post that has me thinking..!! thanks Jeff you MAY have swayed me a little a VERY LITTLE

 

but i do have one question.. most on this board live in weathy towns - could that also be a reason why many of us see less crime than say more depressed areas.

 

Absolutly. Which is a GOOD thing! Most of the people who are unable to follow the mores of society end up poor and therefor live in the cities where more welfare and free housing is available. In a perfect world, we would be able to somehow change these people or help them out to become better people. However, we do not live ina perfect world, and frankly never will. The best we can do as a society in general is strive to protect and shield the good people from the dark side. That is the entire reason I do what I do for a living. Has it jaded me some? Sure, but the ability to help someone everytime I go to work makes it worth every bit of BS.


I am glad I MIGHT have swayed you a BIT :LOL

I also fully realize that most really good people like yourself can't begin to imagine the type of dark people are out there amongst us all. That tells alot about the goodness that you have in yourself, that you cannot imagine the type of behavior criminals find normal.

Sometimes, people have a very twisted view of how terribly violent life is and begin to be overly critical of the way the criminal justice system or even the military works. There certainly need to be checks and balances as with anything because no one is perfect. But, I am often reminded of a quote from Col. Jessup in A few good men...

"Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post".

A little over dramatic I know, but has some merit in some cases including our war discussions which I want to stay away from here