Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums

Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/index.php)
-   Critical Thinking (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/forumdisplay.php?f=33)
-   -   Zero tolerance (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/showthread.php?t=42907)

trillobyite 05-29-2006 08:17 PM

Zero tolerance
 
"Crime rates and particularly the rates of violent and gun related crimes are rising in most rich countries. Targets for blame include higher drug use, higher inequality and greater availability of weapons. While Liberal politics tends to favour rehabilitation and structural improvement to combat crime the right wing has always seen criminality as a rational choice that can be combated by deterrence. Zero Tolerance policing aims to stop serious crime by clamping down on the minor crimes like graffiti that the practitioners believe lead to further crimes and using custodial sentences for first offences. It includes set responses to particular crimes by the police although the courts maintain some discretion. Zero Tolerance is not necessarily exclusive of urban regeneration, social investment or community policing. Its exponents, however, often rule them out because of their political philosophy." (Sebastian Isaac)

Well, that's a nice opening, so what do you guys think? Is Zero Tolerance worthwile or not?

ruifio894 05-29-2006 08:41 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
It's a matter of opinion man. I personally think sometimes "Zero Tolerance" would be the only way to stop serious crimes. In a way, it would intimidate criminals. What do you think?

GuidoHunter 05-29-2006 10:04 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Honestly, I'd rather see cruel and unusual punishment. Maybe a combination of both? If that wasn't a crime deterrent, I don't know what would be...

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

BluE_MeaniE 05-29-2006 10:16 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
I just can't help but feel that if you need a harsh deterrent, there's a major problem in the first place. I remember hearing something about Plato saying you know a city is "happy" when it's in order and when you take away the police force and all that, it stays in order.

What's the solution? I don't know. It's got to be somewhere in the middle. But I'm not sure zero tolerance would help things any more than a ton of tolerance.

Tasselfoot 05-29-2006 11:17 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
I say adopt a penal code similar to that of Singapore or certain other harsh nations.

Let's bring back lashings, stonings, beheadings, and torture.

If you commit a crime, you receive physical pain. You commit a harsh crime, you die. No more prisons, no more worrying about how many tax dollars are going to maintaining the lives of criminals, and chances are... the crime rate will go down drastically.

And that would then lead to smaller police forces which again would lower tax spending in this sector.

Elect Tass and get corporal punishment. Graffiti? Lashing! Stealing? Lashing! Assault? Removal of a limb! None of that eye-for-an-eye bull****; you do something, you get it back twice as hard. Rape someone? Penis removal! Repeat offender? DEATH! Kill someone? You AND your immediate family all die!

I guarentee a drastic decline in crime, nationwide.

Grandiagod 05-29-2006 11:21 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Or they could just make Chardish head of some sort of Punishment Commitee or something.

Chrissi 05-30-2006 07:49 AM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tasselfoot
I say adopt a penal code similar to that of Singapore or certain other harsh nations.

Let's bring back lashings, stonings, beheadings, and torture.

If you commit a crime, you receive physical pain. You commit a harsh crime, you die. No more prisons, no more worrying about how many tax dollars are going to maintaining the lives of criminals, and chances are... the crime rate will go down drastically.

And that would then lead to smaller police forces which again would lower tax spending in this sector.

Elect Tass and get corporal punishment. Graffiti? Lashing! Stealing? Lashing! Assault? Removal of a limb! None of that eye-for-an-eye bull****; you do something, you get it back twice as hard. Rape someone? Penis removal! Repeat offender? DEATH! Kill someone? You AND your immediate family all die!

I guarentee a drastic decline in crime, nationwide.

Duh, because you're killing all the criminals so there's nobody left to do crime.

Tasselfoot 05-30-2006 09:18 AM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Not just that Chrissi... the threat of punishment for doing the crime is MUCH more severe, which becomes an even greater hurdle for potential criminals to get over before they start doing criminal acts.

Not that it really matters... it'll never happen.

Tps222 05-30-2006 04:10 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
I'd rather have the Police Force to be a centralized system of Artificial intelligence. Can't shoot down a robot. Robot's can't become dirty cops, justice will be held directly to the programming of it without emotional interference.

This would work much better with Tass's plan of action.

flamingspinach 05-30-2006 04:58 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Wow, people - you all seem to be forgetting that you don't necessarily have the choice to decide what's a punishable offense and what isn't. Zero tolerance compromises democracy because it puts a damper on minimal "crimes" of protest, such as graffiti. Also, what if they enact a law that you disagree with? Most people tend to think of the laws as just and righteous but often (not necessarily with bad intent) they'll overlook something, like zoning conflicts and whatnot, which cause people to have to go to great lengths and hardships to avoid breaking a stupid law. Tolerance allows society to function properly, and zero tolerance policies are simply a step in the direction of fascism.

-fs

Tasselfoot 05-30-2006 05:29 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
civil law, sports law, real estate, tort law, etc etc wouldn't be under this...

we're talking criminal law. therefore, your post is meaningless.

Hr2 05-30-2006 05:32 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
I agree with flamingspinach. Zero tolerance is not the way to go, most serious criminals can still be rehabilitated (Although sometimes repeat offenders of serious crimes such as murder or rape deserve to be shot.) and even if it costs some money it works out better in the long run. People should be obedient to laws because they respect the laws, as some random faggit said optional obedience is better than forced obedience. Obviously, people would take advantage of this if that was the whole philosophy we lived by, but there is some truth in it. If the only way to keep the people under control is by an iron fist, the government is doing something wrong.

Also, I don't believe in the idea of "gateway crimes", what a crock of ****. So you're an artist or you're just out for fun and you spraypaint a wall, that doesn't mean they'll later become a murderer or a burgaler, it just means that they defaced some public property. Vandalism is seen by many as a victimless crime, and therefore it doesn't take a perverted and criminal mind to commit it. Also what about con artists? They care nothing for human emotions and steal mercilessly, they are decently serious criminals, but they don't rape and murder people. There are no such things as gateway crimes, and people can reform. An iron fist isn't neccissary.

flamingspinach 05-30-2006 05:48 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tasselfoot
civil law, sports law, real estate, tort law, etc etc wouldn't be under this...

we're talking criminal law. therefore, your post is meaningless.

All right then, my example no longer applies - but the point of my post is certainly still valid. People only suggest harsher punishments by the strength of their unshakeable faith that if they follow their conscience they will never fall under the hooves, so to speak, of such punishments. However, laws are fickle, and this becomes a slippery slope. The harsher the punishment you exact upon others, the greater the risk you are putting yourself in as well - fortunes change and we are all human.

Also, Hr2's post reminded me - it costs the government more to imprison someone for a year than a lot of people (especially ones poor enough to fall into criminal patterns) earn in a year, and much more to imprison people for a full sentence than to rehabilitate them once.

-fs

Tasselfoot 05-30-2006 05:57 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Hence why my post pointed out that my solution would lower tax dollars spent on the penal system. Which, in the end, is the thing that people care about the most.

Would just be an excellent benefit that crime would likely drastically decrease.

skyrunner06 05-30-2006 06:14 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
people are still going to kill and steal just cause they want to nomatter what we do they wont stop

flamingspinach 05-30-2006 06:15 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by flamingspinach
All right then, my example no longer applies - but the point of my post is certainly still valid. People only suggest harsher punishments by the strength of their unshakeable faith that if they follow their conscience they will never fall under the hooves, so to speak, of such punishments. However, laws are fickle, and this becomes a slippery slope. The harsher the punishment you exact upon others, the greater the risk you are putting yourself in as well - fortunes change and we are all human.

You're still not addressing my first paragraph.

-fs

Tps222 05-30-2006 07:53 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
There is no need for any form of rehab for criminals. There are enough people to be interchanged into their slot into society, or what they could have been. No point in wasting funds.

I don't see the point you are making Spinach. Yes, the rules apply for everyone. How would that make the system any worse? Instead of looking at it from a "How would it affect myself and my life" look at it as "How would it affect the state of the nation". This mindset allows you to realize the benefits of Zero Tolerance.

sertman 05-30-2006 08:01 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Tass: you're forgetting that we have this thing called the "constitution" and we believe in "human rights"

Not to mention what happens if somebody is wrongly convicted, and likewise gets the **** beaten out of them, then it is found out that they are innocent, and they sue the government for billions? It's not an unplausible scenerio considering the lavish payouts that people get because McDonalds didn't let the consumer know that their coffee was hot. You'll find that you'll end up spending the money that you save from potentially housing prisoners on paying the wrongly tortured

trillobyite 05-30-2006 08:20 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Zero Tolerance is a pretty good deterrent, imo. With more officers, people will be aware of the police's abilities, and crime rates statistically go down when the ability to get caught rises. With strict punishment, criminals are ensured that if caught, they won't get off easy. Finally, zero tolerance can prevent recidivism or reoffense because it cuts short the cycle of intensity-escalating crimes.

Edit: The Constitution provides rights for the accused, very little rights for criminals (excluding cruel and unusual punishment).

Tasselfoot 05-30-2006 08:21 PM

Re: Zero tolerance
 
Sert: those huge jury verdicts on civil suits NEVER are the actual payouts...

BUT... how about "tort reform" and "appeals process". I didn't mention it, but I kinda assumed that the appeals process would be lengthier. I'm guessing this would still result in being cheaper than all the prisons we currently have.

Regardless, nothing we say here makes any different... so "constitution" and "human rights" are meaningless. BESIDES... does the constitution list penalties for crimes? Is it not inhuman to kill or rape someone? Why should they be given rights that they have already abused.

In the end, it is wishful thinking, because our Constitution does allow for absolute abuse of the system for all criminals. At least California is getting somewhere with their "3 strikes and you're in" law.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution