Why not? Resisting Arrest seems to have no downsides...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-Brighton.html

This takes place in liberal happy UK where criminals are apparently coddled. You can get violent, assault police officers and resist arrest and you get... community service. Wow.


"A teenager from Brighton has been hailed a hero after he rugby tackled a thug who attacked two police officers.
Kiya Ingham, 16, pulled Bradley Jay Hughes, 31, to the ground after he pushed PC Lynsey Burkinshaw and PC Johanna Clarke.
Mr Hughes was arrested on Lewes Road on June 10 over a domestic incident but CCTV footage of the incident has only recently emerged.
He pleaded guilty to two counts of assaulting a police officer, receiving 100 hours community service.
College student Mr Ingham has since been given a top police award and has dropped his studies in motor vehicles to become a police officer."

And your point is? Are our crime rates worse than yours? Are our recidivism rates worse?

Oddly enough Enoch and I are having a conversation in another thread so it's apt that you bring it up but our homicide rate is lower than all 50 of your States. So maybe rather than being a pretentious prick you could wonder what's working and learn a lesson.

I like that lewk equated 'liberal' with 'happy'. :)

Since you're already feeding the troll I wanted to point out that everyone seems to have made at least one bad decision in that video. Even the hero missed a perfect opportunity for a bulldog slam.

http://i1281.photobucket.com/albums/...psb79296f1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

And your point is? Are our crime rates worse than yours? Are our recidivism rates worse?

Oddly enough Enoch and I are having a conversation in another thread so it's apt that you bring it up but our homicide rate is lower than all 50 of your States. So maybe rather than being a pretentious prick you could wonder what's working and learn a lesson.

---

And there are plenty of reasons for it that are independent of low penalties for resisting arrest. Explain how having low penalties for resisting arrest leads to a lower murder rate?

Putting people in prison for petty crimes leads to hardening the criminal and results in recidivism and an increasing circle of violence. People who leave prison struggle as they step outside unemployed and more likely to have health issues, less likely to find steady employment so more likely to think gangs and other organised crime is their future leading to a circle of violence and recidivism. Ultimately resulting in somebodies death.

All because they were put inside when they didn't need to be. At the cost to the Exchequer of about £60,000 per prisoner per year. Or £1200 ($1840) of taxes per week.

Lewk, would you prefer this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_7637456.html

Maybe not shooting first has its own advantages?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Putting people in prison for petty crimes leads to hardening the criminal and results in recidivism and an increasing circle of violence. People who leave prison struggle as they step outside unemployed and more likely to have health issues, less likely to find steady employment so more likely to think gangs and other organised crime is their future leading to a circle of violence and recidivism. Ultimately resulting in somebodies death.

All because they were put inside when they didn't need to be. At the cost to the Exchequer of about £60,000 per prisoner per year. Or £1200 ($1840) of taxes per week.

---

Assaulting an officer isn't a petty crime.

EDIT: Neither is assaulting anyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Lewk, would you prefer this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_7637456.html

Maybe not shooting first has its own advantages?

---

Eh? I'm talking about the justice system's punishment for a criminal already in custody. No idea how you went from that to random poorly trained cop shooting at a dog incompetently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Assaulting an officer isn't a petty crime.

EDIT: Neither is assaulting anyone.

---

If what he did was push two officers then it is a petty crime compared to what we should spend thousands incarcerating someone for yes. 100 hours of community service is a punishment he now has to serve for that, without taking up a prison space, costing us tens of thousand of pounds and all the problems prison brings.

You've not given any explanation yet as to how long a sentence you expect for this and how many tens of thousands you want us to spend on it. It costs £60,000 per annum to incarcerate someone, close to $100,000 so how much would taxes have to rise to cover this spot and what purpose does it serve?

Ah, Lewk is trolling about morality and law again. What fun! When he can't blame those damn American lib'ruls for trying to reform a faulty US system....he criticizes the UK instead. :bored:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

If what he did was push two officers then it is a petty crime compared to what we should spend thousands incarcerating someone for yes. 100 hours of community service is a punishment he now has to serve for that, without taking up a prison space, costing us tens of thousand of pounds and all the problems prison brings.

You've not given any explanation yet as to how long a sentence you expect for this and how many tens of thousands you want us to spend on it. It costs £60,000 per annum to incarcerate someone, close to $100,000 so how much would taxes have to rise to cover this spot and what purpose does it serve?

---

And creating no incentive not to run. A healthy respect for the law is important. Doing so will lead to fewer criminals running, fewer police attacked, fewer bystanders in danger ect. Also if this is the kind of douche who will lash out and attack people you can't just look at the costs of imprisoning him, you have to look at the *benefits* of scum like that not being out on the street.

Fry him! :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Fry him! :rolleyes:

---

It doesn't have to jump to execution to create a powerful deterrent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

It doesn't have to jump to execution to create a powerful deterrent.

---

Of course not. But if you don't think an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.....when that means spending more tax dollars in public education, and less in jails/prisons....then what are we arguing about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

And creating no incentive not to run. A healthy respect for the law is important. Doing so will lead to fewer criminals running, fewer police attacked, fewer bystanders in danger ect. Also if this is the kind of douche who will lash out and attack people you can't just look at the costs of imprisoning him, you have to look at the *benefits* of scum like that not being out on the street.

---

Respect is important yes and respect is earned by treating people sensibly. Not by force.

I don't think the benefits of him not being on the street expand to spending tens of thousands of taxpayers money on giving him incarcerated food and shelter. Why do you have so little respect for taxpayers that you just want to tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend on incarceration when it isn't necessary and doesn't work. You're a socialist wanting high taxes and spending now?

This is a teenager so unless you want to sentence him to life in prison without parole he will be on the streets again so we need a solution that works for when he's on the streets. If you want to sentence him for life in prison for pushing somebody then that is insane. Assuming he'd live another 60 years and £60k per annum that is £3.6 million pounds you want to spend incarcerating somebody for pushing. Which is $5.5 million. You think that is sensible?

http://www.fox26houston.com/news/31983695-story If only all police officers were like this, everyone would fear the police, and we'd have law and order. :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Respect is important yes and respect is earned by treating people sensibly. Not by force.

I don't think the benefits of him not being on the street expand to spending tens of thousands of taxpayers money on giving him incarcerated food and shelter. Why do you have so little respect for taxpayers that you just want to tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend on incarceration when it isn't necessary and doesn't work. You're a socialist wanting high taxes and spending now?

This is a teenager so unless you want to sentence him to life in prison without parole he will be on the streets again so we need a solution that works for when he's on the streets. If you want to sentence him for life in prison for pushing somebody then that is insane. Assuming he'd live another 60 years and £60k per annum that is £3.6 million pounds you want to spend incarcerating somebody for pushing. Which is $5.5 million. You think that is sensible?

---

I think there are generally two types of people in the world. Those that have shit impulse control and those who are actual human beings.

Increase penalties of resisting arrest and people who actually think about their actions will clearly see form a Cost/Benefit standpoint its stupid to resist arrest and won't do it.

However the people with shit impulse control? Yeah they shouldn't be allowed out on the street. I'm in favor of a stiff penalty (not life) for the first offense that will make it clear. But we really can't have crazy people out and about. Increases in road rage, random shootings (or stabbings in your island), etc.

Now at some point I do feel the state should be able to recoup some of the losses for the housing/feeding of people. I'm in favor of possible reduced sentencing if they do some sort of prison job that replaces government workers (a festering boil on the workplace). Do a good job, get some time off. Don't want to do a job? Take your full sentence bitch. (Again impulse control, those who learn the behavior will do as their told and be trusted outside, those who do whatever they feel like and live for just the moment will stay in prison longer where they belong)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

http://www.fox26houston.com/news/31983695-story If only all police officers were like this, everyone would fear the police, and we'd have law and order. :o

---

Police officer was wrong, wasn't deliberate aggression. However if the teenager had thrown a punch, then yes he should have been taken down just like that.

To give an example of people who shouldn't be left to their own devices...

http://www.fox26houston.com/news/loc...32465927-story

Lakeland police say Beall received numerous text messages to stop driving before she killed someone or herself.

Beall told her viewers she was "drunk," "f---ing drunk," said she had a flat tire, and also said she didn't know where she was.

"I really hope I don't get a DUI," she says seconds before she hits a sign in the median, which was also caught on video.

"I'm really drunk, and I'm drunk on I-4," she says, even though she was not on Interstate 4.

A caller told 911 she was driving in north Lakeland and couldn't provide an exact location but said he was watching the video on the live stream.

////

Do you really think this person should be left to their own devices out on the street where should have easily killed innocent citizens? Her life, her goals, her dreams are utterly worthless compared to one person she may have injured or killed with her idiotic behavior. Prison for a minimum of 10 years for this utterly wretched piece of filth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Police officer was wrong, wasn't deliberate aggression. However if the teenager had thrown a punch, then yes he should have been taken down just like that.

---

So cop provokes confrontation, citizen retaliates, cop is a hero, citizen gets 10 years?

No one's saying that criminals shouldn't get tough sentences. But you might want to look into just how many "crimes" would still be crimes if all officers exercised some judgement and restraint. And for every case that makes the news, how many don't, because the victim is poor or black or because the police cams were "malfunctioning"?

Cops are civil servants and should be expected to treat everyone like a store employee is expected to treat their customers. This approach should be changed only when there's clear evidence that it will put the officer or someone else in serious danger. There are far too many cases of police officers resorting to force, even lethal force, at first provocation. And even more cases of police officers treating entire neighborhoods as consisting entirely of criminals, who can be treated like scum at an officer's whims. If cops don't treat citizens with respect, can they really expect to be treated with respect themselves? It really is unfortunate that the good cops, who probably are a majority, get to pay the price for the corruption, racism, and power-hunger of the rest, but the good cops need to do a far better job of policing their own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

I think there are generally two types of people in the world. Those that have shit impulse control and those who are actual human beings.

Increase penalties of resisting arrest and people who actually think about their actions will clearly see form a Cost/Benefit standpoint its stupid to resist arrest and won't do it.

However the people with shit impulse control? Yeah they shouldn't be allowed out on the street. I'm in favor of a stiff penalty (not life) for the first offense that will make it clear. But we really can't have crazy people out and about. Increases in road rage, random shootings (or stabbings in your island), etc.

Now at some point I do feel the state should be able to recoup some of the losses for the housing/feeding of people. I'm in favor of possible reduced sentencing if they do some sort of prison job that replaces government workers (a festering boil on the workplace). Do a good job, get some time off. Don't want to do a job? Take your full sentence bitch. (Again impulse control, those who learn the behavior will do as their told and be trusted outside, those who do whatever they feel like and live for just the moment will stay in prison longer where they belong)

---

So yes you do want someone to basically have a life in prison for pushing someone at a cost equivalent of at least $5.5 million dollars per person in taxes. What taxes should we raise to fund this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Prison for a minimum of 10 years for this utterly wretched piece of filth.

---

Prison for 10 years costs ~ a million dollars. That sentence is worth a million dollars in taxes for you?

I believe you will find that Lewk can think of many ways to reduce that cost dramatically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

So yes you do want someone to basically have a life in prison for pushing someone at a cost equivalent of at least $5.5 million dollars per person in taxes. What taxes should we raise to fund this?

---

You ignored my idea on reduced sentencing for proving that they can learn self control. Also you're only looking at the costs of housing/feeding. What about the costs of what they do on the outside? How much is a life worth when it is lost due to drunk driving? How much is peace of mind worth when it is taken due to armed robbery?

What about prison in America makes you think prisoners ever leave better than when they come in?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

How much is a life worth when it is lost due to drunk driving?

---

How much is a life worth when it is lost to a tube of toothpaste?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

What about prison in America makes you think prisoners ever leave better than when they come in?

---

Reality of consequences sinks in.

Though I'm curious about your argument. Essentially you take a violent offender. Put him in prison. You're position is that he won't improve while in prison. So at a minimum he is JUST as violent as now as he was when he did the crime - I take it you are then in favor of automatically denying parole for violent offenders? That is the only rational position you can take if you don't think prison rehabilitates people at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Timbuk2

How much is a life worth when it is lost to a tube of toothpaste?

---

Depends if the life is that of an innocent citizen or a criminal. Yes not all life is equal. (Every sane person would agree).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Reality of consequences sinks in.

Though I'm curious about your argument. Essentially you take a violent offender. Put him in prison. You're position is that he won't improve while in prison. So at a minimum he is JUST as violent as now as he was when he did the crime - I take it you are then in favor of automatically denying parole for violent offenders? That is the only rational position you can take if you don't think prison rehabilitates people at all.

---

Or maybe he is in favor of improving the American prison system. Unlike you :o