jamom123
Expert Expediter
My point exactly. They know it won't lower crime it's all about taking the guns and stopping resistence.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using EO Forums mobile app
That worked well
- Thread starter layoutshooter
- Start date
My point exactly. They know it won't lower crime it's all about taking the guns and stopping resistence.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using EO Forums mobile app
IF they wanted to lower crime rates they would not keep putting 36 time losers back on the street.
So much crime goes undetected or unreported that statistics may not give a meaningful overview. Some types of crime have a very high rate of being reported, while other types of crime are reported less often. Also, certain victims are reluctant to report crime. Some neighborhoods are diligent about reporting crime, whereas some neighborhoods are difficult to police.
Some communities are hostile to law enforcement, making solid data and statistics about crime incomplete.
Yet, it is worthwhile to study the data available, such as it is, in an effort to reduce crime; learning what is an effective tool or strategy is always useful. Likewise, learning what is ineffective is useful as well.
Some communities are hostile to law enforcement, making solid data and statistics about crime incomplete.
Yet, it is worthwhile to study the data available, such as it is, in an effort to reduce crime; learning what is an effective tool or strategy is always useful. Likewise, learning what is ineffective is useful as well.
What I'm referencing is the conservative/tea party mantra of lower taxes & regulations. Granted, they have no problem increasing regulations on things they disapprove, like Planned Parenthood, but that mantra is the rallying cry & litmus test for conservatism.
Cutting taxes results in cuts to state & city budgets, which means less public services, including law enforcement.
GPS tracking may be a liberal solution, but for profit prisons certainly aren't, and how's that working out?
Wow, you just really, really hate the Tea Party, huh! Just hate 'em in general and blame 'em for everything. Kind of like the exact opposite of those who want to blame Obama when it rains. Can you list even one example of a conservative/Tea Party call for reducing regulations that has resulted in increased leniency towards criminals?
Sometimes governments, and people, need to live within their means. Governments don't cut back on salaries much, tho.
Oh, for-profit prisons most certainly is a liberal solution. Or rather, a solution first championed by liberals. Conservatives like the idea, as well, because it rolls back the reach of the state (and also clouds transparency and reduces accountability as a side effect), but the notion of privatizing entire prisons (rather than outsoucing specific services) was first championed by Texas Senator Loyd Bentsen and Tennessee Senator Jim Sasser. The very first private prison in the US was the Houston Detention Center, a facility where people were detained while awaiting deportation resolution. The second one was the Juvenile Training Center in Memphis, TN, a juvenile prison. Texas and Tennessee, Bentsen and Sasser. Coincidence? Nope.
Oh, both Bentsen and Sasser were liberal Democrats, by the way.
Like RLENT, I'm wondering: who is "they"? Because the only gun control laws I've read of don't involve 'disarming' people - not completely, as you imply. Law abiding citizens will still be able to defend themselves - that's not going to change.
As for 'gun free zones', many of them are privately owned business locations, and that's their prerogative, not a government requirement.
The "they" is pretty obvious, it is the people, both in and out of government, who want to eliminate guns. There are people who think that if you eliminate guns you will eliminate murder. I listened to a radio show and heard this exchange between a caller and a well-known liberal Democrat, for example:
"People keep using guns to kill people, so we need to go after the guns and eliminate them."
Caller: "What happens when the criminal goes to knives?"
"Then you deal with knives. The same thing as if you have a head cold and the same thing you do if you have a head cold and the cold is gone and you have a headache. Then you take headache medicine. The job of society is to deal with whatever problem confronts it."
It's ironic, tho not surprising, that his analogy is one of treating the symptom rather than the cause.
As for laws completely disarming people, no, we don't have those yet, but that's the goal of many. The pesky Constitution stands in the way of complete disarming of the public. But the tactic of the gun control advocate is exactly the same as the anti-abortion crowd, which is "creep." Little by little there are restrictions added into laws, and then eventually all the little things add up to where you can't do that anymore. First they ban assault weapons, then they slowly expand the definition of assault weapons, and before you know it, anything that fires a projectile which can be used to assault someone is on the list. Viola! The anti-abortion crowd first tries to just change the definition of things, like baby and child, then adds more and more hoops to jump through before an abortion can be obtained. They think if abortion is illegal then abortions won't happen, in the same way that if guns are illegal then people won't kill other people. Treating symptoms.
I notice that those first for profit facilities were specifically for illegal immigrants and juvenile offenders, both of which are outside the mainstream of criminal court jurisdiction. It has morphed into something that it was not intended to be, and it's not something to be proud of.
Their business model depends on it, literally. And it's why these for-profit prisons spend millions of dollars lobbying legislatures to broaden what constitutes a crime which justifies a prison sentence, and in increasing prison terms. They also lobby against disclosure legislation (transparency) that state-owned facilities must adhere to, which is the primary evil of outsourcing things like this where certain things can be done without public oversight.
CCA's official statement is that they "educate(s) officials on the benefits of public-private partnership but does not lobby on crime and sentencing policies." But in their annual K-10 SEC filing they plainly state:
So you betcha they have a vested interest in keeping a full flow of prisoners coming. It's not a coincidence that the sudden explosion of the prison population just happens to coincide with prison administration outsourcing.
Last edited:
Those were just the first facilities built specifically by a for-profit organization (Corrections Corporation of America, based in Nashville) for offenders. Just prior to those two facilities, and it's what prompted them to build those facilities, CCA had been given the contract to take over the Hamilton County Jail in Chattanooga, TN, and the Knox County Jail in Knoxville, TN (I have a friend who is a Knox Country Deputy Sheriff and was working at the jail at that time - he then got certified as a fingerprint expert to get out of that mess). CCA now operates more than 60 prisons in the US.
Not in Kentucky, though. Not any more. Last year Kentucky ended it's last contract with CCA, and thus the last contract with a third party for corrections, and now have reincorporated all state, county and city corrections facilities back into the public government.
Is there a corresponding graph for total population? That looks awful but possibly isn't quite as bad as it looks if total population is factored in.
As for the 'common sense' gun laws and all the other talking points and code words, it's all just a smoke screen for gun bans. Anyone with any brain and common sense knows they are eating the elephant section by section. Anyone of any intelligence knows there's no need for any new law regulating firearms. They are grossly over regulated already. Idiots propose and support laws against inanimate objects, be they guns or cars or toasters or whatever, rather than laws against humans who abuse inanimate objects. We don't need gun control, we need criminal control.
As for the 'common sense' gun laws and all the other talking points and code words, it's all just a smoke screen for gun bans. Anyone with any brain and common sense knows they are eating the elephant section by section. Anyone of any intelligence knows there's no need for any new law regulating firearms. They are grossly over regulated already. Idiots propose and support laws against inanimate objects, be they guns or cars or toasters or whatever, rather than laws against humans who abuse inanimate objects. We don't need gun control, we need criminal control.