Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
US prison population hits 2 million.
- Thread starter Fonz
- Start date
- Status
K
KAYNE
Guest
FONZ..........WHY DO I GET THE DISTINCT IMPRESSION THAT YOU THINK YOU ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE? IT MAY BE JUST ME, BUT I GET THAT FROM YOU.
ANYWAY, THERE ARE LOTS OF FACTORS THAT GO INTO THAT 2 MILLION. SOME SHOULDNT EVEN BE IN THERE, SOME ARE MINOR OFFENDERS WITH PREVIOUS RECORDS WHO GOT LOCKED UP. SHIT LIKE THAT. MAJORITY OF THAT PROBABLY IS DRUG ADDICTS WHO GOT BUSTED BUYING DRUGS AND WERE REPEAT OFFENDERS.
KAYNE
ANYWAY, THERE ARE LOTS OF FACTORS THAT GO INTO THAT 2 MILLION. SOME SHOULDNT EVEN BE IN THERE, SOME ARE MINOR OFFENDERS WITH PREVIOUS RECORDS WHO GOT LOCKED UP. SHIT LIKE THAT. MAJORITY OF THAT PROBABLY IS DRUG ADDICTS WHO GOT BUSTED BUYING DRUGS AND WERE REPEAT OFFENDERS.
KAYNE
B
Baoh
Guest
KAYNE said:
*knowing smile*
KAYNE said:
It would be an interesting discussion to have...the "What makes on person better than another" ....but it would most likely be reduced to flame wars in our chat board.
I put education and experience as a VERY big factor when i deal with people. Those are 2 things I will always respect.
After that....well too many things to list.
But generally, if a person is older than you, more educated than you, and more experienced than you...they are more likely BETTER than you......don't you think?
I do.
Regardless, I simply put the number of convicts up because frankly it surprised me. I thought the number was far lower than that.
Fonz
W
Warik
Guest
I wonder what the population would be if they freed all of the drug users or the three strikes people.
Still pretty sad that almost 1% of a nation is in prison. Seems crime is getting worse, not better. Society would have killed these bastards centuries ago... now we treat them like royalty. sigh
Still pretty sad that almost 1% of a nation is in prison. Seems crime is getting worse, not better. Society would have killed these bastards centuries ago... now we treat them like royalty. sigh
S
satchboogie
Guest
i just got out dude.. that's 1,999,999.
j/k
j/k
collegiateLifter
New member
they're trying to build a prison
The US has the largest prison population in the world.
you can cite all kinds of confounding factors, but having such a large prison population is not a good thing, bottom line.
The US has the largest prison population in the world.
you can cite all kinds of confounding factors, but having such a large prison population is not a good thing, bottom line.
K
KAYNE
Guest
I DONT THINK THOSE STATISTICS PAINT AN ACCURATE PICTURE WHEN YOU HAVE COUNTRIES LIKE THOSE IN THE MIDDLE EAST WHO PUNISH PEOPLE DIFFERENTLY THAN WE DO. THEY ALSO DONT RECORD EVERYTHING LIKE THE U.S. DOES.
CHINA IS PRETTY BAD TO. THEY EXECUTE MORE PEOPLE THAN ANY OTHER CIVILIZED NATION (PER CAPITA OF COURSE).
KAYNE
CHINA IS PRETTY BAD TO. THEY EXECUTE MORE PEOPLE THAN ANY OTHER CIVILIZED NATION (PER CAPITA OF COURSE).
KAYNE
F
Frackal
Guest
Too many laws.
Drug laws # 1 reason.
Drug laws # 1 reason.
D
DcupSheepNipples
Guest
Using that logic, I'm a highly educated 130 year old! Just call me "Gramps" Brps!
D
DcupSheepNipples
Guest
#2 lack of Mental Health Laws! To many incarcerated are there as a result of no mental health support!
plornive
New member
Wow, you are proving Kayne's point. If you are educated, you should have a better ability to reason and present your ideas. There is hardly any reason to imply that you are more worthy of living because you have a few bachelor degrees and are working on a masters. Is that what your are implying? If you are, just SAY it. How do you act around a PhD?Fonz said:
K
KAYNE
Guest
Fonz said:
NARCISSISM EMANATES FROM EVERY ONE OF YOUR POSTS. YOU WILL NVR FIND ANYONE WHO LOVES YOU MORE THAN YOU FONZERELLI. YOU JUST PROVED MY POINT. SO YOU THINK CUZ YOU HAVE MORE DEGREES THAN SOMEONE ELSE YOU ARE BETTER THAN THEM? THAT MAY MEAN YOU POSSIBLY MAY BE MORE EDUCATED, BUT NOT A BETTER PERSON.
IF YOU ARE INFERRING THAT YOU ARE BETTER THAN ME SIMPLY CUZ YOU ARE WORKING ON YOUR MASTERS DEGREE.....I HIGHLY DOUBT THAT. YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE. NONE OF US ARE BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE. YOU SIR, JUST THINK YOU ARE. WHAT MAKES PEOPLE GOOD PEOPLE IS HOW THEY TREAT OTHERS AND HOW THEY HANDLE THE ADVERSITY THAT LIFE INCESSANTLY DEALS EACH INDIVIDUAL.
BY YOUR LOGIC, YOU ARE SAYING YOU ARE BETTER SIMPLY B/C OF A PEICE OF PAPER WITH YOUR NAME ON IT. DOES THAT MEAN YOU ARE BETTER THAN THOSE SOLDIERS WHO FAUGHT IN WWI AND WWII TO PRESERVE OUR FREEDOM? WHAT ABOUT EINSTEIN? WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE LIKE MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. AND OTHER PEOPLE WHO FAUGHT FOR A CAUSE. I'M SURE YOU HAVE MORE EDUCATION THAN MLK JR. SO I GUESS YOURE BETTER THAN HIM ARENT YOU?!
KAYNE
KAYNE
Last edited:
K
KAYNE
Guest
MY BROTHER IS IN JAIL. HE IS A CONVICTED FELON. YOU ARENT EVEN A BETTER PERSON THAN HIM.
JUST BY BEING IN JAIL DOESNT MAKE HIM A BAD PERSON. HE IS EDUCATED AND HELPS MANY PEOPLE IN HIS JAIL. PEOPLE THAT NORMALLY DONT GET MUCH HELP.
YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT HIM OR WHAT HE DOES SO YOU CANT ASSUME YOU ARE BETTER THAN HIM SIMPLY CUZ YOU HAVE A BACHELORS AND ARE WORKING ON YOUR MASTERS.
I HATE TO BREAK THIS TO YOU FONZERELLI......BUT WE ARE ALL IGNORANT, JUST ON DIFFERENT SUBJECTS. SO EDUCATION DOESNT HAVE MUCH TO DO WITH IT.
KAYNE
JUST BY BEING IN JAIL DOESNT MAKE HIM A BAD PERSON. HE IS EDUCATED AND HELPS MANY PEOPLE IN HIS JAIL. PEOPLE THAT NORMALLY DONT GET MUCH HELP.
YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT HIM OR WHAT HE DOES SO YOU CANT ASSUME YOU ARE BETTER THAN HIM SIMPLY CUZ YOU HAVE A BACHELORS AND ARE WORKING ON YOUR MASTERS.
I HATE TO BREAK THIS TO YOU FONZERELLI......BUT WE ARE ALL IGNORANT, JUST ON DIFFERENT SUBJECTS. SO EDUCATION DOESNT HAVE MUCH TO DO WITH IT.
KAYNE
Last edited:
B
Baoh
Guest
BOOM! Saw this coming a mile away.
This should be fun.
This should be fun.
Baby Gorilla
New member
My guess....
Watching this happen over the years, here's my guess of why it's exploding.
It's American culture.
The average American seems to want something for nothing. We glamourize violence. We say it's illegal to talk about God in the classroom but it's okay to talk about "alternative lifestyles" and sexuality. If religion is something reserved for the home and church, when did the birds and the bees suddenly become the perview of public education?
The only morality imposed in American society is the lowest common denominator. While I don't begrudge Tupac from his success, that a criminal can become such a public icon (God only knows how far that influence worked on young minds) doesn't bode well for our society. Remember when our childhood heros were people of virtue? Role models to live up to? Now we get Tupac, Bill Clinton, and the like.
Going back to prison population.
The common thread is that without morality, there is no respect for the law. I don't like what the laws say on many occasions, but I obey them because that's the moral thing to do. If a law is that bad, I fight to have it changed or recinded.
The average American thinks nothing of lying to get something they are not entitled to. The average American sees nothing wrong with breaking the law so long as nobody really gets hurt and they get away with it.
Sadly, a lot of people get caught, and if we don't punish them, it's going to become Hell on earth. So....lawlessness abounds, and prison populations explode. The solution isn't more prisons. The solution is a return to morality.
Beating up a guy over a dispute is not the way to solve the dispute.
Killing a person for anything but self-defense is not right.
Raping someone for sexual gratification isn't justified.
Selling drugs to make a living isn't right especially when you're pushing the really bad stuff. For the lesser things, push to change the laws, don't whine about getting caught.
Don't have the things you want? Get a job and earn them. Don't jack someone else's stuff to get it for free. Otherwise, learn to be happy with what little you have.
Watching this happen over the years, here's my guess of why it's exploding.
It's American culture.
The average American seems to want something for nothing. We glamourize violence. We say it's illegal to talk about God in the classroom but it's okay to talk about "alternative lifestyles" and sexuality. If religion is something reserved for the home and church, when did the birds and the bees suddenly become the perview of public education?
The only morality imposed in American society is the lowest common denominator. While I don't begrudge Tupac from his success, that a criminal can become such a public icon (God only knows how far that influence worked on young minds) doesn't bode well for our society. Remember when our childhood heros were people of virtue? Role models to live up to? Now we get Tupac, Bill Clinton, and the like.
Going back to prison population.
The common thread is that without morality, there is no respect for the law. I don't like what the laws say on many occasions, but I obey them because that's the moral thing to do. If a law is that bad, I fight to have it changed or recinded.
The average American thinks nothing of lying to get something they are not entitled to. The average American sees nothing wrong with breaking the law so long as nobody really gets hurt and they get away with it.
Sadly, a lot of people get caught, and if we don't punish them, it's going to become Hell on earth. So....lawlessness abounds, and prison populations explode. The solution isn't more prisons. The solution is a return to morality.
Beating up a guy over a dispute is not the way to solve the dispute.
Killing a person for anything but self-defense is not right.
Raping someone for sexual gratification isn't justified.
Selling drugs to make a living isn't right especially when you're pushing the really bad stuff. For the lesser things, push to change the laws, don't whine about getting caught.
Don't have the things you want? Get a job and earn them. Don't jack someone else's stuff to get it for free. Otherwise, learn to be happy with what little you have.
K
KAYNE
Guest
Fonz said:
SO ARE YOU READY TO ADMIT THAT BABYDOC IS A BETTER PERSON THAN YOU??? GOING BY YOUR CRITERIA OF COURSE.
GENERALLY, IF A PERSON IS OLDER THAN YOU, MORE EDUCATED THAN YOU, AND MORE EXPERIENCED THAN YOU.......THEY ARE OLDER, MORE EDUCATED, AND MORE EXPERIENCED. NOT A BETTER PERSON.
NONE OF THAT CRITERIA HAS SHIT TO DO WITH BEING A GOOD PERSON.
KAYNE
musclebrains
New member
Re: My guess....
Actually, you could as well argue that it's the imposition of morality, through the criminal justice system, that fills up the prisons. The demonization of pleasure through laws that regulate drugs and consensual sex is definitely moralistic -- as is turning sex into something that can only be talked about at home.
An example of the way sex is especially demonized: We attempted to impeach Clinton for lying about a blow job. Now we have Dubya and his cronies lying repeatedly about Saddam Hussein and Iraq. Which is the more serious lie? A curious logic has developed among the right: As the lies legitmating the invasion of Iraq are exposed, the right simply creates new rationales. We went from being under nuclear threat to being the liberating salvation of the Iraqi people. Dubya, according to his friends, sees himself as called by God. Iraq is in part a war on infidels.
The right makes quite a fuss about its support of individual rights but, now that it has ascended to power in this country, it is rapidly going about the business of attempting to impose its morality everywhere, diminishing the freedom of individuals -- whether its women's right to have abortions, the right to end one's own life under medical supervision, even the right of due process. There's a reason John Ashcroft equates, literally, terrorism and drug use. It's the same logic that partially underlies the invasion Iraq: Get the immoral infidels.
Baby Gorilla said:Watching this happen over the years, here's my guess of why it's exploding.
It's American culture.
The average American seems to want something for nothing. We glamourize violence. We say it's illegal to talk about God in the classroom but it's okay to talk about "alternative lifestyles" and sexuality. If religion is something reserved for the home and church, when did the birds and the bees suddenly become the perview of public education?
The only morality imposed in American society is the lowest common denominator. While I don't begrudge Tupac from his success, that a criminal can become such a public icon (God only knows how far that influence worked on young minds) doesn't bode well for our society. Remember when our childhood heros were people of virtue? Role models to live up to? Now we get Tupac, Bill Clinton, and the like.
Going back to prison population.
The common thread is that without morality, there is no respect for the law. I don't like what the laws say on many occasions, but I obey them because that's the moral thing to do. If a law is that bad, I fight to have it changed or recinded.
The average American thinks nothing of lying to get something they are not entitled to. The average American sees nothing wrong with breaking the law so long as nobody really gets hurt and they get away with it.
Sadly, a lot of people get caught, and if we don't punish them, it's going to become Hell on earth. So....lawlessness abounds, and prison populations explode. The solution isn't more prisons. The solution is a return to morality.
Beating up a guy over a dispute is not the way to solve the dispute.
Killing a person for anything but self-defense is not right.
Raping someone for sexual gratification isn't justified.
Selling drugs to make a living isn't right especially when you're pushing the really bad stuff. For the lesser things, push to change the laws, don't whine about getting caught.
Don't have the things you want? Get a job and earn them. Don't jack someone else's stuff to get it for free. Otherwise, learn to be happy with what little you have.
Actually, you could as well argue that it's the imposition of morality, through the criminal justice system, that fills up the prisons. The demonization of pleasure through laws that regulate drugs and consensual sex is definitely moralistic -- as is turning sex into something that can only be talked about at home.
An example of the way sex is especially demonized: We attempted to impeach Clinton for lying about a blow job. Now we have Dubya and his cronies lying repeatedly about Saddam Hussein and Iraq. Which is the more serious lie? A curious logic has developed among the right: As the lies legitmating the invasion of Iraq are exposed, the right simply creates new rationales. We went from being under nuclear threat to being the liberating salvation of the Iraqi people. Dubya, according to his friends, sees himself as called by God. Iraq is in part a war on infidels.
The right makes quite a fuss about its support of individual rights but, now that it has ascended to power in this country, it is rapidly going about the business of attempting to impose its morality everywhere, diminishing the freedom of individuals -- whether its women's right to have abortions, the right to end one's own life under medical supervision, even the right of due process. There's a reason John Ashcroft equates, literally, terrorism and drug use. It's the same logic that partially underlies the invasion Iraq: Get the immoral infidels.
Warik said:
Spoken like a boy who has never seen the inside of a jail.
Re: Re: My guess....
I agree. It is the desire of those in authority to impose their view of morality that increases the rate of incarceration. Until man stops thinking this way (the destruction of the major religions?) we will never know true freedom.
The country has moved so far right that people are not seeing this. But we will, and not from a perspective we like.
musclebrains said:
I agree. It is the desire of those in authority to impose their view of morality that increases the rate of incarceration. Until man stops thinking this way (the destruction of the major religions?) we will never know true freedom.
The country has moved so far right that people are not seeing this. But we will, and not from a perspective we like.
F
Frackal
Guest
Good posts Matt and MB.
And we're not talking libertarian right, ie, lower taxes, more personal freedoms, skepticism of govt... it is authoritarian right, which is the technical term for facism.
And we're not talking libertarian right, ie, lower taxes, more personal freedoms, skepticism of govt... it is authoritarian right, which is the technical term for facism.
KAYNE said:
Broly.... you, and many others on this board, think that you are superior to others simply b/c of the diameter of your arms so don't be sounding all righteous on Fonz.
If one had to choose a yardstick - brains or brawn - then brains is a better one to go with.
big_bad_buff
New member
I was watching a murder trial(investigation) yesterday on tv. and these investigators were trying to convict this 15 year old black kid for murder, and had no evidence, they just wanted to convict someone for the murder, they even beat his ass because he wouldn't admit he did it. pretty crazy. I HATE COPS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
B
Baoh
Guest
Bullit said:
Picking the lesser of two evils is still picking evil, though. Neither brain nor brawn determines who is a better person. It just translates into a selfish sense of worth or external value, which has nothing to do with how good or bad a person is.
Testosterone boy
New member
Most of the reasons for us being "Incarceration USA" have been well outlined by BG, MB, and MTS.
I would add some contributing factors as well. We have some damn petty laws that are enthusiastically enforced. We also have discretionary income that allows for drug purchases. Stress also makes drugs more attractive. Our work environment has spiralled into one where ones longevity is frequently measured in days rather than years.
We also put a great deal of subtle and not so subtle pressure on people to get laid. Drugs make sexual availability much, much, much easier.
We also have seemingly gazillions of cops, some of whom make up laws and some of whom make up reality.
I believe drugs are the number one reason for incarceration though. Clearly there is a better solution than simply slamming the prison doors.
Irresponsibility is also a major player. Don't have money? Then steal it. That is the message that many receive.
How about jailing a girl because she showed her nipples for 1/2 second at Mardi Gras? They had thousands of cops there to do exactly that..........needless to say.......I left in disgust.
I would add some contributing factors as well. We have some damn petty laws that are enthusiastically enforced. We also have discretionary income that allows for drug purchases. Stress also makes drugs more attractive. Our work environment has spiralled into one where ones longevity is frequently measured in days rather than years.
We also put a great deal of subtle and not so subtle pressure on people to get laid. Drugs make sexual availability much, much, much easier.
We also have seemingly gazillions of cops, some of whom make up laws and some of whom make up reality.
I believe drugs are the number one reason for incarceration though. Clearly there is a better solution than simply slamming the prison doors.
Irresponsibility is also a major player. Don't have money? Then steal it. That is the message that many receive.
How about jailing a girl because she showed her nipples for 1/2 second at Mardi Gras? They had thousands of cops there to do exactly that..........needless to say.......I left in disgust.
B
Baoh
Guest
Bullit said:
No worries, then.
atlantabiolab
New member
Re: Re: My guess....
Good post. I feel kind of weird actually agreeing with you. But you still are not seeing the complete picture, both groups are responsible for this problem. Since society has accepted the concept that morality is independent of reality, and that the mind creates reality, then whoever is in power, with this mindset, will interpret reality and morality to their wishes. The left does this with restrictions of freedom in lifestyles, such as smoking laws, increasing taxes on the working class, environmental regulations, affirmitive action, etc., while the right does it with expansion of government authority in criminal investigations and judicial actions. Both use the concept of "the good of society" to perpetuate their agenda, which is essentially power and control of thought.
You did good until you threw in euthanasia and abortion, though. Stick to real rights of individuals, not legalities.
musclebrains said:
Good post. I feel kind of weird actually agreeing with you. But you still are not seeing the complete picture, both groups are responsible for this problem. Since society has accepted the concept that morality is independent of reality, and that the mind creates reality, then whoever is in power, with this mindset, will interpret reality and morality to their wishes. The left does this with restrictions of freedom in lifestyles, such as smoking laws, increasing taxes on the working class, environmental regulations, affirmitive action, etc., while the right does it with expansion of government authority in criminal investigations and judicial actions. Both use the concept of "the good of society" to perpetuate their agenda, which is essentially power and control of thought.
You did good until you threw in euthanasia and abortion, though. Stick to real rights of individuals, not legalities.
A lot of the laws is this land are based on
1. Our Puritan founders
gambling laws
alcohol purchsing and bar closing laws AKA blue laws
anti-prostitution laws
2. How can we take money from people?
Any traffic offense
Drug laws
Taxation laws
Get rid of those and our legal system could reduced dramatically.
1. Our Puritan founders
gambling laws
alcohol purchsing and bar closing laws AKA blue laws
anti-prostitution laws
2. How can we take money from people?
Any traffic offense
Drug laws
Taxation laws
Get rid of those and our legal system could reduced dramatically.
atlantabiolab
New member
MattTheSkywalker said:
They are, but the Founders allowed the states the right to pass laws on such issues, based on local beliefs. The rights of the states control over local issues was superior to a strong central government, because one still remained the right to leave his state and reside in one that reflects his beliefs, whereas federal laws impose restrictions equally on all states and therefore against the wishes of many.
W
Warik
Guest
MattTheSkywalker said:
I don't see why the fact that I've never seen the inside of a jail (as if that's not something to be proud of, given the society we live in today) somehow makes my point any less valid. It's a well-known fact that many of the people who will commit a crime over the next week are repeat offenders whose past offenses were not as minor as we'd like them to be. Why are these people still out on the street?
Because, as I said, society treats them like royalty.
Want proof? Fine: How much time are you going to do for your DUI?
-Warik
Warik said:
I'm probably going to be acquitted. No crime no time. However, If I were convicted of DUI I could be sentenced to up to 6 months, and there was zero property damage and no injuries.
You're right about the repeat offenders, wrong about the royalty comment. Except for the occasional celebrated criminal "2Pac, etc.", we treat them like absolute shit. I know you're exaggerating but it kills your point.
The modern jail culture contributes mightily to the development of repeat offenders. Do you know what a huge loss to society it is to have over a million adults in jail, and a bunch of others who have to watch them?
Incarceraton is big business. As long as we can keep jailing the poor to give the lower middle class jobs, we're going to.
Testosterone boy
New member
Warik said:
He was saying that anyone who believes that prisoners get treated like royalty has never been to prison.
W
Warik
Guest
Testosterone boy said:
Walking the streets after committing a crime sounds like royalty to me... but what do I know? I'm just a kid who's never been to jail.
W
Warik
Guest
MattTheSkywalker said:
But you did commit a crime. See my point?
MattTheSkywalker said:
Wow. Sounds real fair, doesn't it? You could have killed somebody, but the impact on your life would be minimal in comparison to what it would have been to a victim.
MattTheSkywalker said:
OK, but saying "we treat them like shit" doesn't reinforce my point either. My point is that, in comparison to how they SHOULD be treated, they are treated like royalty. Shit gets thrown in jail with punishment equitable to that which the victim and his family received, suffers in there, and doesn't get out for a while... or never if he raped or murdered somebody. Royalty gets back on the street in a few months/years and does it again. That's my point - a fact - which is a problem.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Hence my support for the death penalty.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Oh no... you were making sense up until now. Do you honestly think that the poor would be making a meaningful contribution to society if they weren't sitting in a jail cell? Do you forget how they got into the jail cell in the first place? We don't go door to door in poor neighborhoods arresting people when no crime has been committed.
Do they get treated differently from lower middle class when they DO commit crimes? Possibly... but they're only being treated how everyone should be treated. The problem (if it is true) is not that the poor are treated worse - it's that the lower middle is treated better.
The fact is that when close to 1% of the population is in jail and you can walk around in a mall for 10 minutes and almost certainly see somebody who has been to jail at least one time in his life, you know we're living in a shitty world.
Warik said:
Not according to the law in the United States (or Florida) I didn't. The US justice system stipulates that you are innocent of crime until proven guilty in a court of law. As I have not been convicted, you're speculating. Are you suggesting we change the system to a speculative one??
The same is true every time you, I, or anyone else gets behind the wheel. We could kill someone. Typically, though, we only charge people based on what actually DID occur, not what "could have". Additionally, we punish people based on what they were convicted of, not what they "could have been" convicted of. I don't really see your point.
Your characterization of the incarceration process is quite narrow. If we used the sentencing guideline of "equal to the victim's suffering", there would be far fewer incarcerations. Many crimes do not even have victim, and theft type crimes could be resolved with financial judgments.
Additionally, are you familiar with any aspects of prison life? Any guards in your family or among your friends? It is not easy or pleasant, except maybe for minimum security inmates. I am not sure what kind of treatment you are advocating...
So should we just execute them? Achievement is equal to your opportunity, not just ability.
If you think that police presence is equal in poor neighborhoods as it is in rich neighborhhoods, you're just wrong.
Cops are crawling the streets in poor neighborhhoods, looking for dealers and street people. Crime, particularly drug use, is equally prevalent in rich neighborhoods, but if the cops started hanging out there, homeowners would bitch. It lowers property value.
When rich people complain, politicians listen, so cops don't hang out in those neighborhoods. When poor people complain, no one cares. Pick up a rich kid for drugs, his dad may know people. Pick up a poor kid, you got yourself a conviction.
I live in a very exclusive area. You NEVER (and I mean NEVER) see a police car. Before this I lived in a modest apartment while the house was being built, in a very average part of the city. Cops were around all the time.
Do they get treated differently from lower middle class when they DO commit crimes? Possibly... but they're only being treated how everyone should be treated. The problem (if it is true) is not that the poor are treated worse - it's that the lower middle is treated better.
[/quoet]
I like how you just brush aside an inequity that you discounted above as non-existent. Inequity is inequity. Justice should be blind, right?
Come to my house and you can be in the same room as someone who has been arrested 3 times.
KAYNE said:
Babydoc is not in my field. But I do repect his education. He's just very colourful w/ his insults.
"Good" Person? What the hell are you talking about?
We aren't mormons. We are talking about "Better" not "good".
Please tell me you're not this naive.
If there weren't BETTER people than you....then how do you measure your success...in your own socio/economic/academic world?
There is no such things as Equality in life. Its a constant struggle to see who can win. It really is that simple. Civility is the only thying that keeps everything from crumbling down.
Fonz
W
Warik
Guest
MattTheSkywalker said:
Oh please... don't give me this legal technicality bullshit. You committed a crime and there's plenty of evidence to convict you. Were you behind the wheel? Yes. Did a breath test show you to be above the legal limit? Yes. That's it - case closed. We're not "speculating" here. The fact that you're getting off despite the evidence suggests that there's a problem in the legal system. If you deny that, then show me why.
MattTheSkywalker said:
It's not illegal to get behind the wheel sober. It is, however, illegal to get behind the wheel with your blood-alcohol level above the legal limit. That's even though "we" could kill someone, "I" did not commit any crime.
MattTheSkywalker said:
So I suppose if I take a golf club to someone's head and he recovers fully somehow, battery+aggravated assault and not attempted murder, right?
My point is the following:
1) Was a crime committed? Yes.
2) Should the person committing the crime be punished? Yes.
3) Was/will the person be punished? No.
That presents an indisputable fault in our legal system.
Of course, I don't want to see you behind bars, but for the sake of this argument, you're the perfect target. =)
MattTheSkywalker said:
And that'd be a bad thing? Don't tell me you've never seen me rambling on about victimless crimes. An act without a victim other than oneself cannot logically be classified as a crime.
A financial judgment would be equitable to a victim's suffering. The victim had something taken from him by someone it didn't belong to. Vice-versa for the criminal. Sounds fair to me.
MattTheSkywalker said:
I am not familiar with prison life whatsoever, which is why my discussion has nothing to do with prison life. I'm talking about criminals on the street, not criminals in prison. If someone commits a crime, he shouldn't be on the street. Keep your red herrings to yourself.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Only the murderers and, possibly, the brutal rapists. No reason to execute drunk drivers, burglars, muggers, etc.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Oh yea... that's why neighborhoods within 1 mile of a golf course is a dangerous warzone and poor neighborhoods are so clean and safe. I walk around in poor neighborhoods with a suit and briefcase all the time but I just dread getting out of the car around a golf course for fear that someone will "jack ma' shoes."
Did it ever occur to you that there's less need for a police presence in a wealthier neighborhood because there's less violent crime going on? Get real man.
When was the last time you got mugged in your neighborhood?
How about your house being robbed? If there are so many cops in poor neighborhoods and so few in rich neighborhoods, well, you know the story.
MattTheSkywalker said:
The customer is always right. If the engine fell out of your new car after you paid for it, you'd have a right to complain. Likewise, if the police service you pay the bulk of (you know, since the rich DO pay 90850923842089432x more in taxes than the poor) do not perform to your liking, you have a right to complain.
Come on, you don't honestly think that someone should be forced to pay taxes to pay cops to arrest the people who pay for them, do you?
MattTheSkywalker said:
Think about this for a minute:
Compare where the rich kid got his money for the drugs to where the poor kid got the money for his drugs. Compare the rich kid's performance in school to the poor kid's performance in school. Compare the impact on society that the rich kid could have in the future to the impact the poor kid could have in the future.
MattTheSkywalker said:
OK - and how often do you hear about a brutal murder or a burglarly in your exclusive area on the news? rofl dude... your counterargument has strengthened my point beyond bulletproof.
Let me finish off this retort with a simple question that you won't be able to answer without completely destroying your point.
If there are so many cops preying on poor people in poor neighborhoods, and there are so few cops preying on rich people in rich neighborhoods, why is there still so much violent crime in poor neighborhoods compared to police-free rich neighborhoods?
Have fun.
-Warik
Warik said:
Referring to the right to a trial by jury as a "legal technicality" is bizarre. It's straight out of the Constitution.
Anyway: The charge is "driving under the Influence", not "driving with a BAC above .08". Free law note for you: There are states where being above .08 is itself a crime. Florida is not one of them.
Do you know what a partition ratio is? It's the ratio between alcohol on the breath and in the blood. The machine calculates it based on a partition ratio of 2100:1. However, this is an average and is not indicative of the person taking the test. Parittion ratios range from 700:1 to 3500:1. Florida allows the partition ratio defense, some states don't.
Another interesting note about the standard breathalyzer: Manuifacturers do not warrant that the readings will be accurate. Some states bar this defense at trial. Florida does not. The inaccuracy of the breathalyzer is well-documented. In fact, I had to undergo a second round of breathalyzer tests because my scores were outsideof teh acceptable range.
There are also other tests given at the scene. In each of those I performed "accetpably". In order to determine if I was in fact "under the influence" a jury must review all the evidence and make a conclusion. Exceeding .08 does not equal "DUI".
You said I could have killed someone. So can you when you drive to the store. Your response above is a non-sequitur.
For the DA to decide. Intent would play a big role. What does that have to do with anything?
1. If you support the Constitution, then the answer is "pending jury trial"
2. If a guilty verdict is rendered by a jury, the defendant is punished.
3. Irrelevant until convicted. BTW in my example I have already spent several thousand dollars.
Tell it to a legislator.
Tell it to a legislator.
You can't incarcerate everyopne convicted of a crime forever. Convicted criminals pay their debt to society and then what? The cost of that debt is determined through legislation, it is not randomly assigned.
I'll agree to the death penalty for murder convictions with a standard of absolute certainty: videotape, DNA etc.
Why can't the cops stop the crime, if they know where it is going to happen?
Seems to me like the police aren't making a difference in either neighborhood. If they don't stop crime in poor areas, and there is so little in rich areas, why have cops at all, except to jail the poor people away? It;s a great mouthpiece for politicians to say they are "tough on crime" yet crime has not gone down an iota in decades.
This is the bottom line:
COPS ARE THE WAY THAT THE STATE DEALS WITH POOR PEOPLE, SINCE THEY ARE THE MOST LIKELY TOENGAGE IN VIOLENT REVOLUTION AND KICK OUT THOSE IN POWER. IT GOES ABOUT LIKE THIS:
KEEP THE RICH WEALTHY.
PLACATE THE MIDDLE CLASS WITH RHETORIC, PROPAGANDA, THE TWO PARTY "BLAME THE OTEHR GUY" SYSTEM, TV, AND DREAMS OF WEALTH THEY CAN NEVER HAVE. (KEEPS THEM SLAVING AWAY UNTIL RETIREMENT AT 65)
JAIL THE POOR.
THE AMERICAN WAY
W
Warik
Guest
MattTheSkywalker said:
Red herring alert. I'm asking YOU.
I'm not asking you if you were convicted of a crime. I'm asking you if you committed a crime. There are only two possible answers: "yes" or "no." Conviction or acquital does not change that. I understand that for legal reasons, you may not be inclined to answer. I will accept "stop being a little kid who's never been to jail" as a "yes I clearly committed a crime."
MattTheSkywalker said:
uh, Florida's legal limit is 0.08. The fact is that you are presenting a mountain of evidence to suggest that you weren't driving under the influence, but none of which pertain to cold hard facts. The machine "could" have been inaccurate, you "could" have driven home just fine.
You know what the problem is? Someone whose test WASN'T inaccurate and who COULD NOT have driven home COULD get off on the same defense on which you're going to get off, and that's a problem.
Trial by jury is to protect the innocent, not the guilty bubba.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Fair enough. Ok - I could have killed someone when I went to the store... and you could have killed someone when you were driving that night. However, you're not in trouble simply for the fact that you could have killed someone; you're in trouble because of the fact that you performed an action prior to starting your car that is legally defined as an action that increases your chances of killing someone while driving... i.e. drinking alcohol to a point where your BAC equals or exceeds 0.08. That's why your "could have killed someone" is a crime and mine is not.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Who, besides me, would know for a fact whether I intended to kill the guy or not? If I really did not intend to kill him, then your legal system would lock me up. If I really did intend to kill him, and I had the lawyer who's going to get you off, then I would go free. Does that seem right to you?
MattTheSkywalker said:
Not trying to change the world here - just trying to beat you in an argument to kill some time.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Then they are put on a prison starship and hurled into the Sun. j/k
I don't think people should be incarcerated forever. The remainder of their natural lives should be sufficient.
Really, I don't know, but frankly a lot of the people who are convicted of a real crime where there is a real victim should be incarcerated for much longer than they typically are.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Has an innocent man ever be put to death? If so, who? (not a counterpoint... just asking out of curiousity).
MattTheSkywalker said:
Because they don't know EXACTLY where it is going to happen. They just know statistically where it is more likely to happen. If you want water you come to Earth, not the moon. If you want crime, you go to a poor neighborhood, not the Gables.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Eventually the only poor people left will be the one's trying to make something of themselves. Sounds like a noble goal to me.
COPS ARE THE WAY THAT THE STATE DEALS WITH POOR PEOPLE, SINCE THEY ARE THE MOST LIKELY TOENGAGE IN VIOLENT REVOLUTION AND KICK OUT THOSE IN POWER. IT GOES ABOUT LIKE THIS:
MattTheSkywalker said:
yawn... I've already addressed this and you've ignored my point completely.
Let's try again very slowly.
Police prey on the poor, right? But in order to prey on the poor, the poor must commit crimes, right? So when a poor person commits a crime, the police show up and haul him away, right?
NOW
Since there is no difference between a poor person and a middle-class or rich person, then rich neighborhoods should be rampant with crime because there are no police there to stop right, right?
But wait! Middle-class + Rich neighborhoods are NOT rampant with crime. POOR neighborhoods are. But aren't rich people and poor people the same? Aren't poor people just innocent victims who are preyed on by police? Sorry - you'll have to do better than that.
They are in jail because they committed a crime. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me. If people in rich neighborhoods committed so many crimes, they'd either be in jail or in a criminal warzone. Neither is the case.
Face it - the poor commit more crimes than the rich.
K
KAYNE
Guest
supernav said:
THIS IS BY FAR YOUR BEST POST EVER.
K
KAYNE
Guest
Bullit said:
ON WHAT DO YOU BASE THIS LUDICROUS STATEMENT??? VERY RARELY DO YOU EVER HER ME POSTING ANYTHING ABOUT ME THAT PERTAINS TO HOW BIG OR SMALL I AM. HOW MUCH I BENCH OR SQUAT, ETC., ETC.
YOUR STATEMENT DOES NOTHING MORE THAN FURTHER SUPPORT THE TYPICAL STEREOTYPE THAT A PERSON WHO IS INTO THINGS SUCH AS FITNESS OR FOOTBALL IS DUMB AS A ROCK. I ALSO GET THE IMPRESSION YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT I AM NOT VERY INTELLIGENT. I GUESS IF YOU COMPARE ME TO SOMEONE LIKE EINSTEIN, THEN SURE.....I'M NOT VERY INTELLIGENT.
YOU HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT MY INTELLIGENCE (WHICH IS ABOVE AVERAGE BTW) SO I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHAT YOU BASE YOUR ASSUMPTION ON.
K
KAYNE
Guest
Bullit said:
YEAH, I'M SO STUPID I MAKE 4.0'S SCHOOL EVEN THOUGH I'M EXTREMELY LAZY WHEN IT COMES TO STUDYING AND SCHOOL WORK.
___________________________________________________
FONZ
YOU WERE SPEAKING OF SOMEONE BEING MORE EXPERIENCED THAN ANOTHER. EXPERIENCED IN WHAT? I'M SURE YOU ARE MORE EXPERIENCED IN CERTAIN THINGS THAN I AM. BUT I'M ALSO QUITE POSITIVE THAT I'M MORE EXPERIENCED THAN YOU IN NUMEROUS THINGS AS WELL. SO WHO IS THE BETTER PERSON?
K
KAYNE
Guest
Fonz said:
WHEN YOU SAY YOU ARE A BETTER PERSON THAN SOMEONE ITS THE SAME AS SAYING THAT PERSON ISNT AS GOOD A PERSON AS YOU. APPLES AND ORANGES. YOUR CRITERIA ON WHAT MAKES A PERSON BETTER THAN ANOTHER IS SERIOUSLY FLAWED AND POMPOUS ON YOUR PART. NOONE IS "BETTER" THAN ANYONE (PROVIDING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NORMAL PEOPLE AND NOT PEOPLE LIKE MURDERERS, ETC. SO DONT EVEN BRING THAT UP).
BY YOUR LOGIC, YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT A PERSON WITHOUT THE SAME CREDENTIALS (SO TO SPEAK) AS YOU ISNT AS GOOD A PERSON AS YOU I.E....YOU ARE BETTER THAN THEM AS PERSON.
YOU EQUATE SUCCESS AND EDUCATION TO WHETHER SOMEONE IS AS GOOD AS YOU OR NOT. THATS STUPID. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.
KAYNE
D
DcupSheepNipples
Guest
Enough of this human speak! I am your Supreme Being! Bow down to your master! This discussion is over! Now sacrifice yourself for me! Or I will destroy your Bubble Universe with a Quantum Vortex!
plornive
New member
Let me interject. Defining "goodness", or who is better, doesn't make much sense. People are too complex to quantify them with a scalar (single dimensional) value.KAYNE said:
The fact that Fonz chooses to recognize one definition and the fact that his definition is based largely education reveal a lot about his personality.
K
KAYNE
Guest
plornive said:
YOU MEAN IT REVEALS THINGS LIKE VANITY, NARCISSISM, AND SELF-ADMIRATION. STUFF LIKE THAT RIGHT!
KAYNE
Kayne is arrogant, loudmouthed, ignorant and an insecure moron. He is best ignored. He's so deeply bothered by Fonz's statement that he just can't let it go, and that is a mark of a true idiot. His inability to move on, bashing Fonz about his statements and continually positng about it over and over show the low intellect and insecurity of his persona. Kinda like a hood rat. Busting the sag Kayne? Talk about a ghetto mentality and temperament. On ignore you go.
KAYNE said:
Anyways,
#1
Vanity?
Everybody is vain. If i were not vain I would not lift weights.
Anybody who says they do not lift weights in order to be more physcially pleasing to the opposite sex is just downright lying.
Sure, there are different degrees of vanity.....but IMO I'm more on the left side of the vanity spectrum than most people.
#2
Narcissm?
You have to stop trying to post big words if you don't understand their meaning.
Narcisstic = Thinks he's better than everybody else.
There are plenty more people better than me. Sorry.
#3 Self-admiration?
Dumbest combination of words I have seen in quite some time. Most people call it an ego. Everybody has it. Problem is until you "do the work"(Degree, training, job, whatever).........not much ego to talk about.
Funny how its the people who haven't "done the work" that try to tell some people how big of an ego they have.
Fonz
The Almighty
New member
Fonz said:
Not to get in the middle, but it actually refers to a person basing all of his conscious actions on his or her own self-interests in mind. Either that or simply the love of ones body.
I guess I did learn a lot from that psychopath course.
B
Baoh
Guest
KAYNE said:
Did you mean to say that you're so stupid that you make 4.0s IN school, even though you're extremely...?
Ironic.
musclebrains
New member
Re: Re: Re: My guess....
Oh, okay, dad. I forgot that morality is a set of universal, essentialist principles that, however much they are perverted from culture to culture and epoch to epoch, can always be articulated in their purity by you and are, as Pirandello said of absurdity, true simply because they ARE.
atlantabiolab said:
Oh, okay, dad. I forgot that morality is a set of universal, essentialist principles that, however much they are perverted from culture to culture and epoch to epoch, can always be articulated in their purity by you and are, as Pirandello said of absurdity, true simply because they ARE.
musclebrains
New member
Meanwhile, back to the state's means of self-legitimating the imposition of morality....there's this from a piece in today's NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/06/national/06GENE.html) We used to fear the military/industrial complex. Now we have the military/religious complex. Wait a minute! That sounds like them Isalamasatanic A-rab states:
__________
The Army major general who commands Fort Bragg's training center for special operations forces has invited a group of predominantly Southern Baptist pastors to the base this month to participate in a military-themed motivational program for Christian evangelists.
The unusual collaboration is the result of a friendship between Maj. Gen. William G. Boykin, commanding general of the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School at Fort Bragg, and the Rev. Bobby H. Welch, a Southern Baptist minister in Daytona Beach, Fla., who has started an evangelistic campaign called FAITH Force Multipliers.
Hundreds of ministers received an invitation last month from Mr. Welch saying that participants would observe weapons demonstrations, sleep overnight on the base and "go with General Boykin and Green Beret instructors to places where no civilians and few soldiers ever go!"
But the marriage of military and ministry offended one Baptist pastor invited to attend. That minister, who said he did not want to be identified for fear of his colleagues' ire, informed Americans United for Separation of Church and State, an advocacy group in Washington.
[...] Reached at his church in Florida, Mr. Welch, the minister who runs the FAITH Force program, said he was a Vietnam veteran, who trained at Fort Bragg and sought to apply military principles to evangelism.
At first, he spoke openly about the coming session at Fort Bragg. Then he asked not to have it made public because "I'll get in trouble."
"I don't want to do anything that sounds as if we're connected to the military," he said. "That would be an error." He said the Fort Bragg event, which had drawn applications from 50 to 70 ministers, was no different from one he conducted at a race track in Daytona Beach.
He also volunteered that a previous FAITH Force session of 70 pastors was held at Fort Bragg last year, at General Boykin's invitation.
Pastor Welch has spoken at graduations at the special operations school the general commands, Major Kolb said. And General Boykin gave a speech in the pastor's church in Florida in April last year.
"Bin Laden is not the enemy," General Boykin told the packed sanctuary, according to an account on the church's Web site. "No mortal is the enemy. It's the enemy you can't see. It's a war against the forces of darkness. The battle won't be won with guns. It will be won on our knees."
__________
The Army major general who commands Fort Bragg's training center for special operations forces has invited a group of predominantly Southern Baptist pastors to the base this month to participate in a military-themed motivational program for Christian evangelists.
The unusual collaboration is the result of a friendship between Maj. Gen. William G. Boykin, commanding general of the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School at Fort Bragg, and the Rev. Bobby H. Welch, a Southern Baptist minister in Daytona Beach, Fla., who has started an evangelistic campaign called FAITH Force Multipliers.
Hundreds of ministers received an invitation last month from Mr. Welch saying that participants would observe weapons demonstrations, sleep overnight on the base and "go with General Boykin and Green Beret instructors to places where no civilians and few soldiers ever go!"
But the marriage of military and ministry offended one Baptist pastor invited to attend. That minister, who said he did not want to be identified for fear of his colleagues' ire, informed Americans United for Separation of Church and State, an advocacy group in Washington.
[...] Reached at his church in Florida, Mr. Welch, the minister who runs the FAITH Force program, said he was a Vietnam veteran, who trained at Fort Bragg and sought to apply military principles to evangelism.
At first, he spoke openly about the coming session at Fort Bragg. Then he asked not to have it made public because "I'll get in trouble."
"I don't want to do anything that sounds as if we're connected to the military," he said. "That would be an error." He said the Fort Bragg event, which had drawn applications from 50 to 70 ministers, was no different from one he conducted at a race track in Daytona Beach.
He also volunteered that a previous FAITH Force session of 70 pastors was held at Fort Bragg last year, at General Boykin's invitation.
Pastor Welch has spoken at graduations at the special operations school the general commands, Major Kolb said. And General Boykin gave a speech in the pastor's church in Florida in April last year.
"Bin Laden is not the enemy," General Boykin told the packed sanctuary, according to an account on the church's Web site. "No mortal is the enemy. It's the enemy you can't see. It's a war against the forces of darkness. The battle won't be won with guns. It will be won on our knees."
K
KAYNE
Guest
Fonz said:
IF YOU GO BACK AND READ MY ORIGINAL POST TO YOU, YOU WILL SEE THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT......YOU THINKING YOU ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE.
I KNOW WHAT EACH AND EVERY WORD I TYPE MEANS. YOURE NOT THE ONLY INTELLIGENT PERSON ON THIS BOARD FONZERELLI.
I'M STILL WAITING ON AN ANSWER ABOUT MY EXPERIENCE QUESTION I POSED TO YOU A FEW REPLIES BACK.
KAYNE
posthuman said:
Its the only interpretation of the definition which makes sense..........in relation to Kayne's use of the word.
If I were to use The Almighty's definition...that all my actions on EF are made in my own self-interest, then Kayne would need to seriously think about a labotomy ASAP.
Posting information FREELY and VOLUNTARILY for others = My own self-interest
LOL
Thats damn funny.
Fonz
K
KAYNE
Guest
FONZ.......YOU LOVE YOURSELF. YOU LIKE TO HEAR YOURSELF SPEW OFF SHIT (OR IN THIS CASE, READ YOUR OWN SHIT). YOU THINK YOU ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE WHEN IN FACT, YOURE NOT.
GET OFF OF YOUR HIGH HORSE ASSHOLE. YOURE NO BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE ON HERE.
KAYNE
GET OFF OF YOUR HIGH HORSE ASSHOLE. YOURE NO BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE ON HERE.
KAYNE
KAYNE said:
We are on a FITNESS site. My knowledge vastly super-seeds yours in fitness....so I'm therefore BETTER than you in regards to fitness knowledge.
End of story.
Until you put in the necessary time researching and reading over data....you will just be another chat board moron to me.
I still find it funny you cannot let this trivial issue go. Talk about insecurity.
Fonz
40butpumpin
New member
If you really want to know why that number is so high take a look at the breakdown wrt race. Then take a look at the breakdown of judges, officials and politicians wrt race. Fonz no disrespect intended but education is not even in my top ten for respecting a person. It has to be more than that, bro. The fact of it is that many of the individuals in prison never had a chance outside because they were born into poverty. White collars are very educated people, obviously the most educated of our society, however, they, IMO, are the most corrupt by far.
Oops, I didn't realize this thread got off in a different direction. Anyway, my post is wrt the original one.
Oops, I didn't realize this thread got off in a different direction. Anyway, my post is wrt the original one.
40butpumpin said:
Its Ok.
Everybody has different view-points.
I just find it funny that people get blasted for being intelligent.
Like it was a crime to actually show your intelligence. i.e Kayne
I find education important b/c it think its a very important character building block.
Fonz
obscenegesture
Banned
KAYNE is insecure, that is for sure.
He refuses to check his own grammar or spelling before posting because it would allow a more thorough analysis of his writing ability.
He is afraid to fail so he refuses to try.
He also constantly professes his erudition even though it is taking him 6 years to get a degree in finance -- the business equivalent of elementary education.
I am sure he will make a mint as investment banker, though.... yeah, right
He refuses to check his own grammar or spelling before posting because it would allow a more thorough analysis of his writing ability.
He is afraid to fail so he refuses to try.
He also constantly professes his erudition even though it is taking him 6 years to get a degree in finance -- the business equivalent of elementary education.
I am sure he will make a mint as investment banker, though.... yeah, right
The Almighty
New member
Fonz said:
Sucker. I am a better person than you when it comes to the topic of psychopaths, criminal law, white collar crime, etc. We need to find a criminal justice board so I can mop the floor with ya.
40butpumpin
New member
Fonz said:
Cool bro. But as far as education and character I just don't know. I would say dignity yes, but not character. Not trying to play word games with you man but character to me is something that every man has the ability to choose to live with, and by, whether rich or poor, educated or not. I dunno, that's how I see it anyway, but I'll leave it at that. Anyway, it's a perception really.
B
Baoh
Guest
"super-seeds"
Hmmm.
Hmmm.
Baby Gorilla
New member
More truth than you'd imagine....
The cops don't go out to target the poor deliberately in some sinister way, but here is how it works....
1. The wealthy have ALL the power worth having.
2. The middle-class is made of rich wanna be's who are too pacified with pursuits of the dream to realize how sick the world really has become....effectively neutralized.
3. The poor are the often exploited. Many have worked hard only to be kept down. Many have turned to drugs (of any form) for escape. Many turn to crime to attain what can't be gained legitimately. Hence, they commit most of the crime and the wealthy (the power brokers) have the police focus on them to keep them in line or incarcerated. The constant police attention keeps the poor controlled.
Now, with that said, here's a basic known fact of crime that somehow doesn't get mentioned often. Much more crime is done by the wealthy (tax evasion, inside trading, embezzlement, etc.) than is done by petty blue-collar criminals. However, something like only 10% of the inmate population are white-collar criminals. White-collar crime is dealt with often very, very leniently while blue-collor crime is dealth with very harshly. Why is that so? It's because the wealthy control the CJ system. They basically don't view their indiscretions as something worthy of imprisonment.
The problem here is that the poor are not organized or "educated" in the right way. Many "activists" out there exist purely to serve the wealthy (Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson). They stir up division rather than show the poor what needs to be done.
If the poor channelled thier anger into a movement and avoided breaking any laws....spending say 10 years to plan and organize in totally legal ways. They could have a massive organized uprising that overthrows the wealthy powerbase. Cops can't be used to stop it because no crime is committed.
What's the current situation? The so-called activists get the poor worked up to the point of violence. Cops crack down with 100% justification as crimes are being committed. No opportunity to organize for the long haul. No ability to plan. Best of all (sic), the wealthy imprison and label those most likely to take action against oppression.
A nefarious scheme if you ask me.
I know this gets a lot of flack, but there's more truth in this than most would want to acknowledge.MattTheSkywalker said:
The cops don't go out to target the poor deliberately in some sinister way, but here is how it works....
1. The wealthy have ALL the power worth having.
2. The middle-class is made of rich wanna be's who are too pacified with pursuits of the dream to realize how sick the world really has become....effectively neutralized.
3. The poor are the often exploited. Many have worked hard only to be kept down. Many have turned to drugs (of any form) for escape. Many turn to crime to attain what can't be gained legitimately. Hence, they commit most of the crime and the wealthy (the power brokers) have the police focus on them to keep them in line or incarcerated. The constant police attention keeps the poor controlled.
Now, with that said, here's a basic known fact of crime that somehow doesn't get mentioned often. Much more crime is done by the wealthy (tax evasion, inside trading, embezzlement, etc.) than is done by petty blue-collar criminals. However, something like only 10% of the inmate population are white-collar criminals. White-collar crime is dealt with often very, very leniently while blue-collor crime is dealth with very harshly. Why is that so? It's because the wealthy control the CJ system. They basically don't view their indiscretions as something worthy of imprisonment.
The problem here is that the poor are not organized or "educated" in the right way. Many "activists" out there exist purely to serve the wealthy (Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson). They stir up division rather than show the poor what needs to be done.
If the poor channelled thier anger into a movement and avoided breaking any laws....spending say 10 years to plan and organize in totally legal ways. They could have a massive organized uprising that overthrows the wealthy powerbase. Cops can't be used to stop it because no crime is committed.
What's the current situation? The so-called activists get the poor worked up to the point of violence. Cops crack down with 100% justification as crimes are being committed. No opportunity to organize for the long haul. No ability to plan. Best of all (sic), the wealthy imprison and label those most likely to take action against oppression.
A nefarious scheme if you ask me.
Warik said:
I tried to explain this to you in my plast post but I guess I wasn't clear. Driving with a BAC above .08 is NOT A CRIME in Florida. In some states it is. This is not one of them.
I was charged with "driving under the influence". The Breathalyzer test is one of 5 tests I was given to determine intoxication. Some of them I failed, some I passed. The police report, videotapes and other evidence will be compiled in order for a jury to determine if I was in fact under the influence.
One more time: driving with a .08 BAC is not a CRIME in Florida. Red herring that.
A guy named Roger Coleman was executed in Virginia in 1992. The state of Virginia will not relesae DNA evidence for additional testing. This is likely an example of the "wrong guy" being put to death. There are dozens of inconsistencies and Coleman had a solid alibi (he was at work, his presence was verified by many witnesses).
No. Police arrest for suspicion of crime.
Most arrests never lead to trials. You can't discount that. But if you';re poor and you get arrested, you can't make bail and you stay in jail for a while. This only reduces your ability to succeed or as you said "make something of yourself" later on. Even without a conviction, the time is lost, and the mental impact is real.
Police don't stop crime. If they did, crime would decline acorss the board. But it never drops and stays low. The police presence or absence in any neighborhood IS IRRELEVANT to the amount of crime.
I think we are talking past each other. I never contested that poor people commit more crimes.
The police are a tool of the state, not an entity that reduces crime.
But wait! Middle-class + Rich neighborhoods are NOT rampant with crime. POOR neighborhoods are. But aren't rich people and poor people the same? Aren't poor people just innocent victims who are preyed on by police? Sorry - you'll have to do better than that.
They are in jail because they committed a crime. Sounds like a pretty good deal to me. If people in rich neighborhoods committed so many crimes, they'd either be in jail or in a criminal warzone. Neither is the case.
Face it - the poor commit more crimes than the rich. [/B][/QUOTE]
K
KAYNE
Guest
Fonz said:
I COULD BE ANYONE FOR ALL YOU KNOW ASSHOLE SO HOW THE HELL DO YOU KNOW IF YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF FITNESS "VASTLY SUPERSEDES" MINE? YOU HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT I KNOW AND DONT KNOW. SO DONT MAKE YOURSELF LOOK LIKE AN ASS BY ASSUMING SUCH. YOUR LOGIC IS TOTALLY FUCKED.
BY USING YOUR LOGIC, I'M QUITE SURE I CAN BEAT IN YOUR SKULL IF WE WERE TO MEET IN A DARK ALLEY. DOES THAT MEAN I AM A BETTER PERSON THAN YOU? NO, IT JUST MEANS YOU WOULD GET YOUR SKULL BASHED IN. THATS ALL. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH BEING A BETTER PERSON THAN SOMEONE.
YOU ARE GOING OFF ON YOUR OWN LITTLE TANGENT. NOW YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BEING BETTER AT SOMETHING THAN ANOTHER PERSON. THIS WHOLE THING IS ABOUT YOU THINKING YOU ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE....NOT AT ONE THING IN PARTICULAR......JUST IN GENERAL. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT SO DONT MANIPULATE IT LIKE A LITTLE GIRL DOES WHEN FIGHTING WITH HER BOYFRIEND. ESSENTIALLY I'M TALKING ABOUT YOU SITTING ON YOUR HIGH CHAIR LOOKING DOWN ON EVERYONE.
"SUPER-SEED" IS NOT A TYPO. "SUPERCEDE" IS A TYPO CUZ THE WORD IS SPELLED "SUPERSEDE". SUPER-SEED IS A COMPLETE FUCK UP AND TELLS ME THAT YOU HAD NO IDEA ABOUT THAT WORD.
BTW....IF YOU WERE IMPLYING THAT YOUR FITNESS KNOWLEDGE "VASTLY SUPER-SEEDS" MINE (OR SO YOU ASSUME) THAT YOU HAVE MORE KNOWLEDGE THAN ME IN THAT AREA.......THEN YOU HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT THE WORD ACTUALLY MEANS. WHY DONT YOU LOOK IT UP IN WEBSTER. IT MEANS TO REPLACE OR TAKE THE PLACE OF. THAT IS ALL GRASSHOPPER.
KAYNE
Last edited:
Kayne, you're becoming more and more like Puc every day.
Another bitter, jealous person.
There are people that are simply smarter than you.
I am one of those people.
Sorry to break it to you.
Now run along....back to finance or whatever degree you are doing.
I'm not wasting my time trying to talk to a person who always types in caps and claims to be secure.
LOL
Fonz
Another bitter, jealous person.
There are people that are simply smarter than you.
I am one of those people.
Sorry to break it to you.
Now run along....back to finance or whatever degree you are doing.
I'm not wasting my time trying to talk to a person who always types in caps and claims to be secure.
LOL
Fonz
atlantabiolab
New member
Re: Re: Re: Re: My guess....
You never forgot, you just don't want to accept it. It is much easier to believe the relativistic idea that reason is impotent to understand the world, and therefore morality is not real, but simply a personal term. Your insinuation that simply because man has failed to express morality, proves its non-existence, is no different than saying that because man has failed so many times in his endeavors in science, that science must not be real. But being a non-scientist, one who studies a field in which anyone can wish into being "illnesses", with no definable criteria, fits one who believes that the world is what you believe it to be.
musclebrains said:
You never forgot, you just don't want to accept it. It is much easier to believe the relativistic idea that reason is impotent to understand the world, and therefore morality is not real, but simply a personal term. Your insinuation that simply because man has failed to express morality, proves its non-existence, is no different than saying that because man has failed so many times in his endeavors in science, that science must not be real. But being a non-scientist, one who studies a field in which anyone can wish into being "illnesses", with no definable criteria, fits one who believes that the world is what you believe it to be.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: My guess....
By saying theat man has failed to express morality, you're implying that he is capable of expressing (or maybe defining would be a better word) morality.
Makes the sciene analogy less appropriate, doesn't it?
By the way I have a PhD in Parapsychology? is that a real science?
atlantabiolab said:
By saying theat man has failed to express morality, you're implying that he is capable of expressing (or maybe defining would be a better word) morality.
Makes the sciene analogy less appropriate, doesn't it?
By the way I have a PhD in Parapsychology? is that a real science?
musclebrains
New member
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: My guess....
I'm just teasing you a bit, Bio. I enjoy your posts, even though they invariably deteriorate into ad hominem rhetoric, like this one. It's inevitable, apparently, because your very philosophy requires that anyone who disagrees with you is a fool.
Your opinions do depend on certain assumptions which are not provable. It is very easy to live by a philosophy that divides things into clear dualities and then, when those dualities break down, blame it on a perceptual or non-scientific perspective. I'm sure I dont' need to educate you in quantum mechanics or refer you back to Kuhn's debunking of the notion of scientific revolution and the idea that science inherently deals in truth. Or I might refer you to Merleau-Ponty's analysis of Saussure's scientific study of linguistics that, whatever you think of phenomenology, pointedly questions the relation between the formal STRUCTURE of language and its EXPRESSION.
At the same time, I'll remind you that it doesn't take a scientific mind to be reductive to essentialist precepts. Religion was doing that long before science and, indeed, if you've read much history and philosophy of science you come to appreciate how the displacement of scientific "truth" by a new "truth" usually replicates religious structure rather than adhering to a (fictional) neutrality. Science too is a myth.
I don't trust poetry or the religious imagination more than science but I do appreciate the Greeks who were able to at once conceptualize a heliocentric cosmos and see Apollo driving his chariot across the sky. The poetic and the scientific, as Einstein himself observed, have something of value to tell one another. In one case we live received fact and in the other we acknowledge our lived experience, but neither, as Kuhn demonstrated, is reliably and permanently "true." The edge is in the intersubjectivity. Which will never make it to talk radio.
atlantabiolab said:
I'm just teasing you a bit, Bio. I enjoy your posts, even though they invariably deteriorate into ad hominem rhetoric, like this one. It's inevitable, apparently, because your very philosophy requires that anyone who disagrees with you is a fool.
Your opinions do depend on certain assumptions which are not provable. It is very easy to live by a philosophy that divides things into clear dualities and then, when those dualities break down, blame it on a perceptual or non-scientific perspective. I'm sure I dont' need to educate you in quantum mechanics or refer you back to Kuhn's debunking of the notion of scientific revolution and the idea that science inherently deals in truth. Or I might refer you to Merleau-Ponty's analysis of Saussure's scientific study of linguistics that, whatever you think of phenomenology, pointedly questions the relation between the formal STRUCTURE of language and its EXPRESSION.
At the same time, I'll remind you that it doesn't take a scientific mind to be reductive to essentialist precepts. Religion was doing that long before science and, indeed, if you've read much history and philosophy of science you come to appreciate how the displacement of scientific "truth" by a new "truth" usually replicates religious structure rather than adhering to a (fictional) neutrality. Science too is a myth.
I don't trust poetry or the religious imagination more than science but I do appreciate the Greeks who were able to at once conceptualize a heliocentric cosmos and see Apollo driving his chariot across the sky. The poetic and the scientific, as Einstein himself observed, have something of value to tell one another. In one case we live received fact and in the other we acknowledge our lived experience, but neither, as Kuhn demonstrated, is reliably and permanently "true." The edge is in the intersubjectivity. Which will never make it to talk radio.
W
Warik
Guest
MattTheSkywalker said:I tried to explain this to you in my plast post but I guess I wasn't clear. Driving with a BAC above .08 is NOT A CRIME in Florida. In some states it is. This is not one of them.
I was charged with "driving under the influence". The Breathalyzer test is one of 5 tests I was given to determine intoxication. Some of them I failed, some I passed. The police report, videotapes and other evidence will be compiled in order for a jury to determine if I was in fact under the influence.
One more time: driving with a .08 BAC is not a CRIME in Florida. Red herring that.
Impressive circular logic.
I suppose that's why I got off last year. I was charged with "murder," NOT shooting someone in the head point blank with a shotgun.
Anyway,
http://www.dui.com/duieducation/LegalDefinition.html
MattTheSkywalker said:
Oooh... impressive REVERSE logic here. My question was if an innocent person has ever been put to death. You claim that you're innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, constitution, blah blah blah. Wasn't this guy proven guilty in a court of law? So the death penalty is flawed because someone MIGHT be innocent and he is a LIKELY example? Sorry, that does not answer my question.
Can you cite someone who has been PROVEN to have been put to death unjustly?
MattTheSkywalker said:
Hence the reason they are (as I said in another thread) a misappropriation of tax dollars. Mass-armament of the populace is a far more effective way to reduce crime IMO.
MattTheSkywalker said:
Uh, wasn't that the whole point of the argument? You: "police prey on the poor and leave the rich alone. boohoo" Me: "police hang around poor neighborhoods because they commit more crimes than the rich." You: "no. it's because <this>" Me: "no. it's because <this>"
What are we arguing about again?
-Warik
K
KAYNE
Guest
Fonz said:
YOU PROVE MY POINT (OF YOU THINKING YOUR ARE GOD) WITH ALMOST EVERY POST. YOU ARE A MORON.....ITS JUST THAT SIMPLE.
YOU DONT GET IT DO YOU. ITS NOT ABOUT BEING SMARTER. I'M SURE YOU KNOW MORE THINGS THAN ME IN CERTAIN SUBJECTS AS I'M SURE I KNOW MORE THAN YOU IN CERTAIN SUBJECTS. YOU ARE TRYING TO CHANGE THE WHOLE ARGUMENT. ITS ABOUT YOU THINKING YOU ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE. YOU THINK YOU ARE SUPERIOR TO OTHERS.
AS TO YOUR PUC COMMENT.....I DONT KNOW WHAT YOURE TALKING ABOUT. THE DAY I'M JEALOUS OF YOU IS THE DAY I BLOW MY BRAINS OUT. I WOULDNT BE YOU IF I HAD TO BE.
YOU SOUND LIKE A LITTLE BITCH. "KAYNE, I'M SMARTER THAN YOU". WHAT A LITTLE GIRL YOU ARE. HOW SOPHOMORIC IS THAT? YOU SIT BY YOUR COMPUTER WITH YOUR BOOKS AND YOUR SEARCH ENGINE MINIMIZED IN ANOTHER WINDOW SO YOU CAN MAKE YOURSELF SEEM SMART BY SEARCHING FOR ANSWERS. ANYONE CAN DO THAT. BIG FUCKING DEAL SPARKY.
AS FAR AS SECURITY GOES, YOURE THE ONE WHO IS SAYING "WAH WAH I'M SMARTER THAN YOU KAYNE WAH WAH" LIKE BABY. HOW MUCH SECURITY IS THAT.
ALL THE KNOWLEDGE THAT YOU HAVE COULDNT SAVE YOU AGAINST SOMEONE LIKE ME IF YOU ACTED THAT WAY IN PERSON. PRICK.
KAYNE
K
KAYNE
Guest
Fonz said:
LMFAO!!!......ON WHAT DO YOU BASE THIS CONSIDERING YOU HAVE NVR MET NOR HAVE YOU SEEN ME!!!
YOU ARE REALLY SOUNDING LIKE A LITTLE BITCH NOW GIRL. I WAS READING ABOUT SOME OF THE JUICE YOU HAVE DONE AND ALL YOUR DIETING A WHILE BACK. SHIT MAN, YOU SHOULD BE FUCKING ARNOLD BY NOW. I HAVE NVR DIETED A DAY IN MY LIFE, NOR DO I WORK ABS, NOR DO I EAT ENOUGH, NOR DO I SLEEP ENOUGH AND I'M IN AS GOOD OF SHAPE AS YOU ARE. I HATE TO SEE IF I EVER GOT SERIOUS WITH THIS SHIT.
OH, AND BTW....YOUVE PROBABLY DONE 20 TIMES THE AMOUNT OF JUICE I HAVE. I HAVE DONE JUICE THREE TIMES IN LOW DOSAGES. YOUR LIVER IS FUCKING WORKING OVERTIME WITH ALL THE SHIT YOU DO.
SO I ASK AGAIN, WHAT DO YOU BASE YOUR COMMENT ON? WELL, I'M GUESSING YOU ARE BASING IT ON YOUR POMPOUS ATTITUDE THAT YOU ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE. MORON.
KAYNE
B
Baoh
Guest
Fonz said:
Whatever you say. lol
B
Baoh
Guest
Fonz said:
What kind of athlete are you?
K
KAYNE
Guest
Fonz said:
THAT WASNT A TYPO........THAT WAS A COMPLETE FUCK UP. THAT ISNT EVEN A FUCKING WORD. YOU JUST DECIDED TO ADD TWO WORDS TOGETHER WITH A HYPHEN AND MAKE IT YOUR OWN. YET YOU ARE SOOOOOOO SMART ARENT YOU.
W
Warik
Guest
side note: fonz is my bitch. he still hasn't answered that statistics question from months ago.
K
KAYNE
Guest
Warik said:
THATS NO SUPRISE. HE TENDS TO SIDESTEP AND MANIPULATE THINGS WHEN HE IS LOSING THE BATTLE. JUST LIKE HE DID WITH BABYDOC AND JUST LIKE HE IS DOING WITH ME.
KAYNE said:
Losing the battle?
What the F*ck are you talking about?
If you seriously think you've proven anything I've got news for you........you haven't.
All you've proven is that you're a Ghetto wannabe cyber tough guy sitting behind a computer that thinks knoweldge is suddenly
infused...not learned through hours of research.
And at least babydoc has some intelligence.
You have didley squat up there.
That shows in every single one of your dumb ass posts.
Stop frigging listening to your MTV culture driven dumb ass TV shows, and actually open a book for once in your sorry ass life.
I seriously think you're dumb. Thats D-U-M-B.
And no offense, that caps BS is just getting old, and is not fooling anyone. It just shows your obvious lack of grey matter.
Now STFU....and go shine some shoes.
Fonz
fistfullofsteel
Well-known member
is this a battle of egos thread?
K
KAYNE
Guest
AND REMEMBER DUM SPELLED BACKWARDS SPELLS MUD.
MAN FONZ, YOU REALLY SOUND LIKE A LITTLE BITCH. A WHINEY LITTLE GIRL. YOU ARE STARTING TO CEMENT MY SUSPICIONS THAT YOU ARE A FAIRY.
MAN FONZ, YOU REALLY SOUND LIKE A LITTLE BITCH. A WHINEY LITTLE GIRL. YOU ARE STARTING TO CEMENT MY SUSPICIONS THAT YOU ARE A FAIRY.
Testosterone boy
New member
Hold on.....I need to nuke some popcorn.
Fonz - 5 KAYNE - 0
Fonz - 5 KAYNE - 0
K
KAYNE
Guest
TEST BITCH.......SHOULD I BRING UP HOW YOU DELETED 4 THREADS AND REPLIES OF YOURS WHEN I MADE YOU LOOK STUPID BY BUSTING YOU IN YOUR OWN LIES? STUPID ASS.
ANYYWAY, FONZI GIRL, THE POINT IS.......YOU COMPLETELY TRIED TO CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF THE ARGUMENT. YOU ARE STARTED INSULTING AND SAYING YOU ARE BETTER THAN ME, YOU ARE SMARTER THAN ME, YOU ARE THIS, YOU ARE GAY, YOU ARE THAT, YOU ARE THIS, BLA, BLA, BLA.
ITS NOT ABOUT BEING BETTER AT SOMETHING OR SMARTER. ITS ABOUT YOU THINKING YOU ARE A BETTER PERSON THAN EVERYONE ELSE. ITS ABOUT YOUR STUCK UP ASS ATTITUDE BABY GIRL. BUT I SEE YOU WANT TO BE A LITTLE BITCH ABOUT THE WHOLE SITUATION. THATS ABOUT PAR FOR YOUR COURSE THOUGH ISNT IT. MAN, I'D LOVE TO SEE HOW FEMININE YOU ARE IN REAL LIFE. YOURE PROBABLY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY ARENT HOMOSEXUAL BUT ALL YOUR MANARISMS AND THE WAY YOU CARRY YOURSELF MAKE PEOPLE THINK OTHERWISE.
ARGUING WITH YOU IS LIKE TALKING TO A 12 YEAR OLD. NEXT YOURE GOING TO BE TELLING ME YOU ARE GONNA CALL YOUR BIG BROTHER TO COME BEAT ME UP.
WAH WAH WAH, I'M SMARTER THAN YOU. WAH WAH WAH I'M A BETTER ATHLETE. WAH WAH WAH I'M SUPERIOR TO EVERYONE. LOL. BITCH.
KAYNE
ANYYWAY, FONZI GIRL, THE POINT IS.......YOU COMPLETELY TRIED TO CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF THE ARGUMENT. YOU ARE STARTED INSULTING AND SAYING YOU ARE BETTER THAN ME, YOU ARE SMARTER THAN ME, YOU ARE THIS, YOU ARE GAY, YOU ARE THAT, YOU ARE THIS, BLA, BLA, BLA.
ITS NOT ABOUT BEING BETTER AT SOMETHING OR SMARTER. ITS ABOUT YOU THINKING YOU ARE A BETTER PERSON THAN EVERYONE ELSE. ITS ABOUT YOUR STUCK UP ASS ATTITUDE BABY GIRL. BUT I SEE YOU WANT TO BE A LITTLE BITCH ABOUT THE WHOLE SITUATION. THATS ABOUT PAR FOR YOUR COURSE THOUGH ISNT IT. MAN, I'D LOVE TO SEE HOW FEMININE YOU ARE IN REAL LIFE. YOURE PROBABLY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY ARENT HOMOSEXUAL BUT ALL YOUR MANARISMS AND THE WAY YOU CARRY YOURSELF MAKE PEOPLE THINK OTHERWISE.
ARGUING WITH YOU IS LIKE TALKING TO A 12 YEAR OLD. NEXT YOURE GOING TO BE TELLING ME YOU ARE GONNA CALL YOUR BIG BROTHER TO COME BEAT ME UP.
WAH WAH WAH, I'M SMARTER THAN YOU. WAH WAH WAH I'M A BETTER ATHLETE. WAH WAH WAH I'M SUPERIOR TO EVERYONE. LOL. BITCH.
KAYNE
C
Code
Guest
Wow, 2 million people in KAYNE's sites for dating.
- Status
Similar threads
