Pretty sure Dread posted studies in the past showing sex offenders actually have a lower recidivism rate than other criminals. Eithet way, nice of Rand to miss the point yet again.
Pretty sure Dread posted studies in the past showing sex offenders actually have a lower recidivism rate than other criminals. Eithet way, nice of Rand to miss the point yet again.
Hope is the denial of reality
When it comes to rapists (where is no doubt) I'm totally OK with them never leaving prison. Even if the recidivism rate is .1% (1 in 1,000) the lives of a 1000 pieces of shit that are worth literally nothing, is far more valuable than the one innocent victim.Originally Posted by Loki
I presumed the reporting and the social media and forum coverage was similar to our worse than that in Sweden but maybe Sweden is uniquely fucked up, who knows.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Maybe it is, for some? Do you have better ideas on how to assimilate refugees to their new society and cultural norms that wouldn't mean including them in public safety?
Yes recidivism for sex offenders is victimless. Thanks for educating me on that.
Not missed any point though. Recidivism rates of sex offenders attacking the general public is pretty close to zero if they are behind bars. It is upon releasing them that the public is put back at risk.
Still too high. Studies I've seen put overall recidivism at 36.9% for sex offenders and that is way too many to be acceptable.
The issue is that a lot of the European left is trying to paint the refugees who commit these sexual assaults as essentially innocent folks caught up in a difficult situation where they don't understand the appropriate cultural norms. That's bull shit. They are willfully and deliberately making a moral choice to harm others. This isn't a misunderstanding, it is assault. They know what they are doing is wrong and they are doing it anyway. That's the issue I have with this push for 'education' to clear up 'misunderstandings.' Its political correctness to a disturbing degree.
American or European? Because, you know the US doesn't really have a that good record in reintegrating people.
Besides that, the preventive detention of sexual offenders is made decided together with criminal psychologists.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
In Saudi Arabia it's still legally legitimate to deny women a driver's license. And it's still acceptable for the "religious police" to detain and jail women who aren't covered head-to-toe and/or accompanied by a male family member.
What do you expect from refugees seeking freedom, if they've never actually known it? Do you expect they'll automatically know the boundaries between doing what they want, and how that impacts others, and what the government mandates, and will come to a more civilized decision than the average UScitizenrapist has?
If you're worried about sexual assault, maybe you should focus on the US collegiate/sports world and the Catholic Church that's been perpetuating and hiding sexual assaults for generations.
Last edited by GGT; 07-25-2016 at 07:32 AM.
Why is it either/or?
I hold the Catholic Church in contempt. Why can I not equally hold Islamic rapists in the same level of contempt as Catholic ones?
If I was raised Catholic I would have left the Church a long time ago.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
By that logic, we should lock any criminal up for life.Yes recidivism for sex offenders is victimless. Thanks for educating me on that.
Not missed any point though. Recidivism rates of sex offenders attacking the general public is pretty close to zero if they are behind bars. It is upon releasing them that the public is put back at risk.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
If the crime is serious enough, yes.
Have you gained expertise in another area in which you've read nothing? FYI, the main objectionable disability claims come from people claiming to have lower-back pain.
Hope is the denial of reality
Even when the recidivism rate is lower than one in five? Congratulation, Rand, you're on the way to become the next Erdogan.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
You think there is no problem in the treatment or diagnosis of mental issues? A perfect job is being done by all?
I'm not sure what your FYI has to do with the price of tea in China. There can be more than one issue that can be over-claimed. Have I defended those claiming lower-back pain as been 100% unobjectionable?
"If the crime is serious enough" then I couldn't care less if its one in ten, any is too many.
I'm saying people who need an excuse to claim disability opt for lower-back pain, because it's a much more amorphous concept. No one wants to sit in a room with psychiatrists/psychologists for hours. There is a problem with anti-depressants being over-subscribed, but that's happening to mildly depressed patients, not to people faking mental illness.
Hope is the denial of reality
It happens to both.
Though I think "stress" is an easier one to claim if you go down the mental road.
We speak about convicted heavy criminals here, not some random journalist with the wrong opinion.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
Well, thankfully you're not in charge of our legal system, so, screw you.
Next you'll be telling us that false convictions are a myth. But, hey, locking someone up for life on a false conviction, sure, that does not fall under your "one is one too many!" dictum. It's the same shitty rationalization used by sociopaths going: "We had to burn the village down to save it!"
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Socialists, not sociopaths
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
How much value do you place on the life of a rapist compared to an innocent law abiding citizen? If there is even a 1% chance a person will murder/rape/arson/attempted murder/bomb that is too much. I'd rather those 100 people stay in prison forever. You obviously think differently. Where is your margin where it becomes unacceptable. 5%? 10%? Clearly if there was a 100% recidivism rate you would have issues with it and so somewhere between 0 and a 100% is where you consider an appropriate amount for recidivism. I'd like you to go out on a limb and actually give me the % you deem acceptable for violent criminals for these types of offenses.
How much value do you place on the life of a thief compared to an innocent law abiding citizen? If there is even a 1% chance a person will steal that is too much. I'd rather those 100 people stay in prison forever. You obviously think differently. Where is your margin where it becomes unacceptable. 5%? 10%? Clearly if there was a 100% recidivism rate you would have issues with it and so somewhere between 0 and a 100% is where you consider an appropriate amount for recidivism. I'd like you to go out on a limb and actually give me the % you deem acceptable for thieves for these types of offenses.
Somehow I doubt you'd disagree with the above.
Hope is the denial of reality
If I thought false convictions were a myth then I'd support the death penalty if the crime was serious enough. However false convictions are real and the death penalty is irreversible if later evidence can acquit the innocent person on appeal. So I support whole life sentences without parole for those crimes serious enough as an alternative. It doesn't make up for years of imprisonment but at least they're still alive.
For armed robbery, home invasion I'm good with life in prison. For theft < 1,000 that didn't involve violence I'm all right with a 10% recidivism rate.
Again, I'm thankful that morons like you don't get to decide our legal system. Also, you haven't defined what exactly you meant by a "serious enough" crime. Just look at Lewk, he'd condone the death sentence for a pickpocket.
That's the company you're keeping with this.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
I'm fine that morons like you don't get to decide our legal system. Also, you haven't asked what exactly I meant be a "serious enough" crime. I'm not Lewk, I'd not condone the death sentence for a murderer.
That's not the company I'm keeping with this.
Death Penalty for pickpocket won't ever happen at this point and you know it. How many innocents you are OK with suffering because of your desire for weak sentences for criminals is something that is debatable, one that you don't apparently want to engage in because in your crazy world a criminals life and happiness is somehow just as important as the law abiding citizenry.
It's one thing saying you can't have the death penalty, even for serial killers, because you might execute an innocent.
But apparently you can't even have life in prison even for serial killers. Imprisoning killers for life, how horrific ... Seriously, this is the kind of utter moron that I was meant to share a nascent nation with.
I notice that you still failed to provide a definition.
Well, I for one am glad that you Island Apes are out. Or at least, you're out when you finally begin to uphold your promise to get out and stay out.Seriously, this is the kind of utter moron that I was meant to share a nascent nation with.
I won't hold my breath for you sloths to finally getting around to it.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote