Im going to get alot of grief.
I think there are lot of things britain does that would work well over here. First i think we should adopt some election ploicies. Like set campaign funds from the govt. Also not television ads.
Also i think we should follow there example in prisons. Focus more on rehab then punishment.
Anything else you brits have to offer?
with 70% recidivism rate i think we are kinda failling in the cataagory. also studie show the longer they are in there the higher chance they will comeback.
I won't ask about the election policies, based on that I don't really care about how the British do it. I like our system, it gives me a wonderful nihilistic and optimistic feeling at the same time when I think about it.
Regarding the prisons though, why do you think we should work on rehab rather than punishment?
Rehab has showned to be more cost effective. Also the main thing is recidivism rate. if we can get the inmate a job he wont resort back to crime. Besides prisons are way over crowded to continue on the current system.
garret wrote:With a 70% recidivism rate, I think we are kinda failing in the category. It's also been shown in studies that the longer offenders are in prison the higher chance they will commit a crime again.
I tidied that up for you so that it's not just "they dun bad, and they keep dunnin' bad!".
But, anyways, your 70% recidivism rate isn't just because they were in prison or the corrections system to begin with. There's a lot of things to consider when talking about recidivism among offenders, and it's not all "they went to prison for a long time, and then they commit another crime when they get out!".
Offenders who are in for a long time? They tend towards being people like murderers or rapists. Y'know...capital crimes. They're also generally not coming back out, or if they're out on parole...they go and commit the same crimes again because it's the easiest way for them to get what they want.
While some people might disagree with my stance, in general the vast majority of offenders in prison belong there.
They're career criminals, and no amount of rehabilitation will change them. The fact that they get let out into the community at large with the halfassed monitoring systems we have in place is the problem.
People with jobs commit crimes too. Get someone who actually wants to change a job, and he'll blow you away with his hard work. Get someone who only wants a way out of jail faster will blow you away and take a run. It all depends on the person.
I don't have any suggestions for overcrowding aside from factory work and living centers or putting them in an arena to fight for a pardon for the last living man. Gladiator style.
People want to change. Career criminil may only do it because it is there only way. We need to help people not just give them time then out they go. In some parole systems they have to send you back to the town you commited the crime. If that not a bad idea? i think so.
I saw this documentary of this american prisoner (black guy) and it showed how as an unskilled person with a criminal record for car jacking, he couldn't find a job and had to live at his sisters house.
Now if I had been him, crime would have been tempting, because he was essentially unemployable. Thats where your 70% come from. Theres always plenty of unskilled workers without criminal records so how are xcons suppose to get a job and be productive again?
Rehab won't do to much unless these guys can get regular jobs. And who would want to employ them.. not me.
Yes because the serial rapist would totally like to refrain from his work. You are assuming that every criminal only does it because of their negative circumstances. There are some people who you just cannot rehabilitate. If someone randomly has the urge to go kill 10 or 20 people, it's going to take more than a counseling session or parole system to rehabilitate them.
Greetsz,
Mr. Self Destruct
Career criminals may commit crimes because it is their only way.
Not really. Look at most serial killers. They're completely normal people with nothing but a mental disorder--or even sometimes, no disorders involved just a lack of conscience or empathy or any number of the emotions that keep us from murdering each other in the streets.
We need to help people not just give them time then out they go.
That's not how it really works, mate.
In some parole systems they have to send you back to the town you where you committed the crime. Is that not a bad idea? I think so.
Not really sure what you're saying here. I think you're confusing that you're generally going to be tried where you committed the crime(due to jurisdiction) with parole.
Mr. Self Destruct wrote:Yes because the serial rapist would totally like to refrain from his work. You are assuming that every criminal only does it because of their negative circumstances. There are some people who you just cannot rehabilitate. If someone randomly has the urge to go kill 10 or 20 people, it's going to take more than a counseling session or parole system to rehabilitate them.
Greetsz,
Mr. Self Destruct
That is true. muderers and rapist and along with other very serious crime would most likely unrehabilitable.
But that is a small precent. Im talking about small to medium crimes. You should watch ted koppels video on california prison system. Same with drug users. they get little to no help in prison.
garret wrote:Im going to get alot of grief.
I think there are lot of things britain does that would work well over here. First i think we should adopt some election ploicies. Like set campaign funds from the govt. Also not television ads.
Also i think we should follow there example in prisons. Focus more on rehab then punishment.
Anything else you brits have to offer?
Grass is always greener.....
Sure we get some things right but others wrong.
The UK gets it right by:
Having a separate titular and administrative head of state.
Not having a politicised top level judiciary.
Having no unflexible Constitution but a custom in Common Law.
Having a non privatised National Bank.
Having the NHS.
Getting the speed limit right.
The US gets it right by:
Not pissing on citizens who fail to adhere to political correctness.
Supporting initiative development and industry.
Respecting civic rights issues doggedly.
Not canceling or playing cheap with technological projects.
Thing is, the US puts more people in prison per capita than anywhere else in the world. These people are frequently placed in prisons that are run on a profit incentive, there's no incentive in the prison to prevent further offences (they'd be spending money to reduce their future customer base). Ultimately, the US could look to a lot of places around the world to find better systems.
On elections, I think there's certainly a strong argument to get the money out of US politics. It makes corruption so much more likely, and places a bar on the amount of funding you need to be a candidate - ultimately it doesn't matter how talented and potentially popular you might be, you need so many dollars to run for office.
That said, there's a lot to like about US politics. There are real efforts to engage communities, to grow voter enthusiasm. I don't think the system in the UK is something you need to look towards, they've got all kinds of problems of their own.
Not everyone wants to change, as Kanulen noted. And it being the only way for them is sketchy at best. The mass murderer isn't exactly someone who does it because they have no choice in the matter, from our viewpoint. They might believe they have instructions from a higher, or lower power, but that does not excuse them from breaking the law. In this case, they still need to be punished, but their mental conditioning to obey this power needs to be broken.
Typically,the people who want to change are the ones who commit smaller crimes. This is because they have a set pattern. They have shorter sentences, but they should have some form to help them improve their lot in life. They commit smaller crimes because of their situation, and are trying to stay afloat through illegal means.
If you murder your boss for firing you, no, you do not need rehabilitation. Odds are, if you felt sorry for it afterwards, you're not going to do it again. And if you didn't feel sorry for it (Again, sketchy. Depends on reasoning), you should be in jail anyways, and might end up in there again, even if you are given a job.
People who want help, who need help, will actively seek it when offered most of the time. Those who don't want it, won't. It doesn't matter where your focus is. Ensure they can reform if they want, take some time off for trying to better themselves. If they want to slum it out for their time, fine.
Sending you back to the town you committed the crime isn't as bad as it sounds. Because the newspapers, and every gossip in town is going to let everyone know what you were convicted for. You will become a social pariah, and most times people will watch out for those you harmed in the first place. And people will take a bat at you if you seem to be committing the crime again (Child snatcher around kids will probably get beaned four of five times). All in all, they'll probably move very quickly unless they can get away with it. Bigger cities, bigger problem of handling it, but that's what guns are for, 'ja? And those tazer doo-hickey's.
ORRR we could send them to mars to start a new world.
That would take care of housing
As well as long term care.
Plus a major influx of jobs to set everything in place to send them there.
Shaman wrote:I saw this documentary of this american prisoner (black guy) and it showed how as an unskilled person with a criminal record for car jacking, he couldn't find a job and had to live at his sisters house.
Now if I had been him, crime would have been tempting, because he was essentially unemployable. Thats where your 70% come from. Theres always plenty of unskilled workers without criminal records so how are xcons suppose to get a job and be productive again?
Rehab won't do to much unless these guys can get regular jobs. And who would want to employ them.. not me.
There are programs they can enter after release where they work for government agencies, there are companies that specialise in taking on ex-cons after release. When a guy is given an employable skill for the first time in his life, and gets one chance to make good, you'd be surprised how often they work harder than anyone else.
Shaman wrote:I saw this documentary of this American prisoner (black guy) and it showed how as an unskilled person with a criminal record for car jacking, he couldn't find a job and had to live at his sisters house.
Now if I had been him, crime would have been tempting, because he was essentially unemployable. That's where your 70% come from. There's always plenty of unskilled workers without criminal records so how are ex-cons supposed to get a job and be productive again?
Rehab won't do to much unless these guys can get regular jobs. And who would want to employ them.. not me.
This part is kind of a catch-22.
A lot of the people who commit crimes have no real skills that would have gotten them a decent paying job in the first place. It's partially what leads them to commit the crimes to begin with.
But where this really comes into play, is when they are released from prison with a college education(provided for free by the state)--they're not going to be considered for the jobs that they would have wanted due to the fact that they've got a prison term on their record that makes employers very leery of hiring them.
Britain is looking to copy Australia's voting method. So America copying the UK would be odd.
Drugs seem to be a big problem for why people are going to prison (somewhere above 80% in Oz)
How about if you get busted with a certain amount you have your non dominant hand chopped off, and can no longer access welfare for the rest of your life.
That should sharpen the mind somewhat.
Shaman wrote:I saw this documentary of this American prisoner (black guy) and it showed how as an unskilled person with a criminal record for car jacking, he couldn't find a job and had to live at his sisters house.
Now if I had been him, crime would have been tempting, because he was essentially unemployable. That's where your 70% come from. There's always plenty of unskilled workers without criminal records so how are ex-cons supposed to get a job and be productive again?
Rehab won't do to much unless these guys can get regular jobs. And who would want to employ them.. not me.
This part is kind of a catch-22.
A lot of the people who commit crimes have no real skills that would have gotten them a decent paying job in the first place. It's partially what leads them to commit the crimes to begin with.
But where this really comes into play, is when they are released from prison with a college education(provided for free by the state)--they're not going to be considered for the jobs that they would have wanted due to the fact that they've got a prison term on their record that makes employers very leery of hiring them.
What is nice, however, is that there are several places run by ex-cons for newly released inmates to try and get a job. I do recall a hot dog shop on that very premise. All the workers are from jail, and are just trying to get on with their lives. There's not a whole lot of them though. Hot dogs ain't much, but it's a paycheck, and a start with a good reference.
Like Sebster said, there's companies and programs that are exclusively for ex-cons but the problem is that some upon their release set their goals way too high.
When they fail those goals, they resort back to what they know works.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Britain is looking to copy Australia's voting method. So America copying the UK would be odd.
Drugs seem to be a big problem for why people are going to prison (somewhere above 80% in Oz)
How about if you get busted with a certain amount you have your non dominant hand chopped off, and can no longer access welfare for the rest of your life.
That should sharpen the mind somewhat.
Kanluwen wrote:Like Sebster said, there's companies and programs that are exclusively for ex-cons but the problem is that some upon their release set their goals way too high.
When they fail those goals, they resort back to what they know works.
One must wonder if that's similar to touching the hot handle, then decided to grab it again. Nature's way of saying "Keep this one out of the gene pool." Then again, I suppose it's a good thing that there are laws that handle repeat offenders.
garret wrote:Im going to get alot of grief.
I think there are lot of things britain does that would work well over here. First i think we should adopt some election ploicies. Like set campaign funds from the govt. Also not television ads.
Also i think we should follow there example in prisons. Focus more on rehab then punishment.
Anything else you brits have to offer?
Grass is always greener.....
Sure we get some things right but others wrong.
The UK gets it right by:
Having a separate titular and administrative head of state.
Not having a politicised top level judiciary.
Having no unflexible Constitution but a custom in Common Law.
Having a non privatised National Bank. Having the NHS. Getting the speed limit right.
Agreed on pretty much all counts and doubly agreed on the two bolded ones.
Orlanth wrote:The US gets it right by:
Not pissing on citizens who fail to adhere to political correctness.
And having a education bar set so low that most don't even know what political correctness means or is and therefore, don't even know that they're not adhering to it.
Orlanth wrote:Supporting initiative development and industry.
Respecting civic rights issues doggedly.
Agreed here.
Orlanth wrote:Not canceling or playing cheap with technological projects.
Cept those levies. Those really came back to bite us. And all those "Bridges to Nowhere". And using alternate forms of energy en masse (like ocean current power and solar cells). And anything we cancel because of religious fervor.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Britain is looking to copy Australia's voting method. So America copying the UK would be odd.
Drugs seem to be a big problem for why people are going to prison (somewhere above 80% in Oz)
How about if you get busted with a certain amount you have your non dominant hand chopped off, and can no longer access welfare for the rest of your life.
That should sharpen the mind somewhat.
That should increase the crime rate somewhat.
It is somewhat harder to commit crimes with 1 hand.
Unless you are trying to kill a famous surgeons wife and then frame him.
ip vin snarller dehizvin wrote:
ORRR we could send them to mars to start a new world.
That would take care of housing
As well as long term care.
Plus a major influx of jobs to set everything in place to send them there.
Too true, It wouldn't even be that hard to do it.
Give them some plants and soil, boom, you have oxygen and food.
If you really wanted to, get some Martian soil, figure out what its rich in, and genetically alter some vegetables to run on the stuff. Throw some domes up there with plants in them, wait a few months, open them, start all over, rinse repeat. It is a semi-plausible way of putting air on the planet, at least.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Where does Australia send its prisoners? Convicts from a penal colony...they have to make Charlie Manson look like a saint! Do they go to Liechtenstein? Is that why Fraz is being all Johnny Raincloud?
JEB_Stuart wrote:Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Where does Australia send its prisoners? Convicts from a penal colony...they have to make Charlie Manson look like a saint! Do they go to Liechtenstein? Is that why Fraz is being all Johnny Raincloud?
Similar to what Canadia does with it's convicts. Works them to death in the Syrup Mines.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Drugs seem to be a big problem for why people are going to prison (somewhere above 80% in Oz)
How about if you get busted with a certain amount you have your non dominant hand chopped off, and can no longer access welfare for the rest of your life.
That should sharpen the mind somewhat.
I really just don't understand why people like talking about the State hurting and maiming other people. I really just don't get it.
JEB_Stuart wrote:Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Where does Australia send its prisoners? Convicts from a penal colony...they have to make Charlie Manson look like a saint! Do they go to Liechtenstein? Is that why Fraz is being all Johnny Raincloud?
Just for the sake of a little historic interest, around 160,000 convicts were sent to Australia. Around 60,000 were sent to the Americas.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Britain is looking to copy Australia's voting method. So America copying the UK would be odd.
Drugs seem to be a big problem for why people are going to prison (somewhere above 80% in Oz)
How about if you get busted with a certain amount you have your non dominant hand chopped off, and can no longer access welfare for the rest of your life.
That should sharpen the mind somewhat.
That should increase the crime rate somewhat.
It is somewhat harder to commit crimes with 1 hand.
Unless you are trying to kill a famous surgeons wife and then frame him.
Or you are a pirate.
How nice. I wonder if you would advocate the same treatment for white-collar criminals?
garret wrote:. Like set campaign funds from the govt. Also not television ads.
We don't have set campaign funds. There's been a lot of talk about it, but it hasn't happened. The Con. party spent about £18 Million on the last election, Labour about £9=10 million IIRC.
We also do have TV adverts for the parties. The BBC, under a kind of fairness doctrine, shows lie...err...adverts from all the (main) parties.
Anything else you ahve to offer ?
We have this thing called "weather" which we'd be quite happy to swap for your "climate" if you're up for it. ... no ?
ip vin snarller dehizvin wrote:
ORRR we could send them to mars to start a new world.
That would take care of housing
As well as long term care.
Plus a major influx of jobs to set everything in place to send them there.
Too true, It wouldn't even be that hard to do it.
Give them some plants and soil, boom, you have oxygen and food.
If you really wanted to, get some Martian soil, figure out what its rich in, and genetically alter some vegetables to run on the stuff. Throw some domes up there with plants in them, wait a few months, open them, start all over, rinse repeat. It is a semi-plausible way of putting air on the planet, at least.
Well it's a step up from Australia this time right.
garret wrote:with 70% recidivism rate i think we are kinda failling in the cataagory. also studie show the longer they are in there the higher chance they will comeback.
But if prisoners were used to plug the BP Horizon leak then there would be a 0% recidivism rate.
Automatically Appended Next Post: [quote=Orlanth
The UK gets it right by:
Having a separate titular and administrative head of state.
***No. Too many of my relatives fled from such enlightened places. Vive le Republic!
Not having a politicised top level judiciary.
***Sure.
Having no unflexible Constitution but a custom in Common Law.
***I’ll take my Constitution with its Bill of Rights thank you very much
Having a non privatised National Bank.
***Its technically private but not really, at all.
Having the NHS.
***HAHAHAH. I’ll take the CD system but NHS HAHAHAHA
Getting the speed limit right.
*** What is the British speed limit?
The US gets it right by:
Not pissing on citizens who fail to adhere to political correctness.
***We don’t?
Supporting initiative development and industry.
***We do?
Respecting civic rights issues doggedly.
***Some rights yes, others no.
Not canceling or playing cheap with technological projects.
***Er, what?
I agree that there are criminals who need training and rehabilitation more than punishment, such as people cooking meth or stealing stereos. I also think that there are criminals who need to be permanently removed from society by one means of another. I think it stands to reason that someone is less likely to steal goods to fence if he has job skills and isn't blowing his money on drugs.
I think sebster cut right through the nationalistic distractions and correctly points out that many if not most prisons in the US are privatized. I too question whether there isn't a profit motive in incarceration. I don't think public services should be privatized in general. Those would include things like sanitation, transport, utilities, etc. I've only heard of that working well in Hong Kong.
I really think it is silly to start comparing countries. The US is simply different than the UK and can't be compared. You're assuming some absolute standard that you need to reach by either your own policies or emulating someone else. We don't have the same land mass, we have different transportation systems, we have different population, we have a broader representation of ethnicities, the list could go on and on.
I applaud Waaagh_Gonads wonderful perspective on this. I approve of draconian measures for serious offenses not because I believe that they'll reduce the crime rate, but because I believe that they will stop the punished individual from doing it again.
As for our common carjackers, drug addicts, larcenist, and other nonviolent criminals we still have something on the books which I think would elegantly solve this issue- letters of marque. We can authorize ships to prey on enemy shipping, and stock the crew with convicts. It will cut down military costs and allow our criminals to pillage and plunder in a way that benefits us. We could target North Korean shipping and anyone else that we normally sanction. After a set tour of duty, they could either sign on as professional privateers or return to their normal lives with a set of marketable skills- boat operation and maintenance.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Britain is looking to copy Australia's voting method. So America copying the UK would be odd.
Drugs seem to be a big problem for why people are going to prison (somewhere above 80% in Oz)
How about if you get busted with a certain amount you have your non dominant hand chopped off, and can no longer access welfare for the rest of your life.
That should sharpen the mind somewhat.
I don't think drugs are that big of a problem. I think it is the circumstances that lead people into addiction and the focus on prohibition rather than harm reduction.
ShivanAngel wrote:Theres a 50 cent solution to deal with all the rapist, murderers, and child molesters. Ill let you guess what it is...
Significantly cheaper if you use .22 LR. I don't think that is a good solution for a nation of virtue and compassion, which is what we should strive for. Not everything is black and white and cut and dry.
ShumaGorath wrote:ITT privileged white kids talk about beating up prisoners to make themselves feel better.
Yeah im doing it to make myself feel better...
It has nothing to do with the fact we spend millions on corrections a year housing criminals with multiple life sentences that will never see freedom. If their crime is so heinous that they have to be locked up for eternity why not just end it.
ShumaGorath wrote:ITT privileged white kids talk about beating up prisoners to make themselves feel better.
Yeah im doing it to make myself feel better...
It has nothing to do with the fact we spend millions on corrections a year housing criminals with multiple life sentences that will never see freedom. If their crime is so heinous that they have to be locked up for eternity why not just end it.
Multiple appeals court cases due to the high salaries of judges and lawyers and the cost of facilities cost more than interred life sentences by inmates. It's statistically cheaper to keep them locked up for life than it is to run the gamut of high cost court procedures to kill them. Neither option realistically puts a particularly large dent in the total cost of corrections in America, though if you wanted to start killing people for any and all life sentence crimes you will see a dramatic uptick in the total cost immediately. An upwards trend that would not abate for decades. You believe this because you want to have a hard stance on criminal activity and you think that the public is somehow mistaken about it's soft treatment of people you've never met who did things you've never had experience with.
Cutting people's hands off for committing minor crimes is one of the stupidest ideas ever.
Woohoo, a crippled unemployable immediately recognisable criminal underclass! WHAT A WONDERFUL SOCIETY THAT WOULD BE!
I believe that prisons should be for rehabilitation. However, I think (from what I know, which isn't enough) that current policies in various places aren't very effective in that regard.
And most people in prisons aren't murderers or rapists.
Da Boss wrote:Cutting people's hands off for committing minor crimes is one of the stupidest ideas ever.
Woohoo, a crippled unemployable immediately recognisable criminal underclass! WHAT A WONDERFUL SOCIETY THAT WOULD BE!
I believe that prisons should be for rehabilitation. However, I think (from what I know, which isn't enough) that current policies in various places aren't very effective in that regard.
And most people in prisons aren't murderers or rapists.
One thing I've asked my self. Maiming someone is now considered barbaric, but is it better that we hook someone up to an automated machine to kill them? Same thing with countries that still behead as capital punishment. I think that is better than creating a machine that kills people.
Kanluwen wrote:"Death penalty" immediately comes to mind.
Huge difference between someone who's committed a crime, then sentenced to death via lethal injection...and chopping off someone's hand for stealing.
I'm not sure I agree, or rather, I don't know if maiming is "less civilized" than lethal injection. I find the idea of an automated machine that kills people a little creepy. Does anyone else or am I the odd man out here?
Kanluwen wrote:"Death penalty" immediately comes to mind.
Huge difference between someone who's committed a crime, then sentenced to death via lethal injection...and chopping off someone's hand for stealing.
I'm not sure I agree, or rather, I don't know if maiming is "less civilized" than lethal injection. I find the idea of an automated machine that kills people a little creepy. Does anyone else or am I the odd man out here?
Civility is a social construct measured in it's entirety by social beliefs and taboos. If it is more commonly believed that punishing major crimes with death is far less barbaric than chopping off the hands of minor offenders than it is by virtue of the fact that the concept of what is civilized is governed under the same beliefs that determine the common belief of what is acceptable or barbaric. Logic doesn't really enter the equation.
Kanluwen wrote:"Death penalty" immediately comes to mind.
Huge difference between someone who's committed a crime, then sentenced to death via lethal injection...and chopping off someone's hand for stealing.
I'm not sure I agree, or rather, I don't know if maiming is "less civilized" than lethal injection. I find the idea of an automated machine that kills people a little creepy. Does anyone else or am I the odd man out here?
Maybe so but there is a reason.
Using the machine is actually more humane then having a person do it. The machine is fully automated, the drugs they use in the lethal injections arent pretty.
The first knocks the convict out, the second renders him paralyzed, the third is a huge dose of potassium that stops his heart.
These have to be administered at certain speeds in order for the desired effect to take place without unwanted (or inhumane) consequences. Ex. if you put the second in to quickly and they arent knocked out from the first one they suffocate cause they cant breathe. If you put the first one in to fast they get shocked and seize.
Automated death machines are definitely creepy. Honestly, I'd rather be decapitated than strapped to a table with an IV in my arm. It is a slow way to die. For me, a swift death is more humane than a painless but slow one.
I'm torn. Execution should be about removing individuals that are too dangerous to live as swiftly and efficiently as possible. I don't know if precision and lack of pain are more humane than a less efficient but faster and more direct death.
ShumaGorath wrote:ITT privileged white kids talk about beating up prisoners to make themselves feel better.
Yeah im doing it to make myself feel better...
It has nothing to do with the fact we spend millions on corrections a year housing criminals with multiple life sentences that will never see freedom. If their crime is so heinous that they have to be locked up for eternity why not just end it.
Most of US states have the death penalty, don't they?
It seems to me that argument has been made and won on some level.
Gitzbitah wrote:Automated death machines are definitely creepy. Honestly, I'd rather be decapitated than strapped to a table with an IV in my arm. It is a slow way to die. For me, a swift death is more humane than a painless but slow one.
I'm torn. Execution should be about removing individuals that are too dangerous to live as swiftly and efficiently as possible. I don't know if precision and lack of pain are more humane than a less efficient but faster and more direct death.
Humane doesn't mean fast. Your car doesn't get more humane when you put a big muffler on it. This thread is making me wish for a really humane death, the kind of humane you need a good turbocharger for. It's awful.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote:
ShivanAngel wrote:
ShumaGorath wrote:ITT privileged white kids talk about beating up prisoners to make themselves feel better.
Yeah im doing it to make myself feel better...
It has nothing to do with the fact we spend millions on corrections a year housing criminals with multiple life sentences that will never see freedom. If their crime is so heinous that they have to be locked up for eternity why not just end it.
Most of US states have the death penalty, don't they?
It seems to me that argument has been made and won on some level.
About two thirds of states still have the death penalty. Most are steadily reducing it's use.
Your saying the USA should be more like Britain? Well, I knew you'd come crawling back, but it's too late. You had your chance to be part of the greatest nation on earth, but you threw it away, seduced by Paine, tea parties, Jefferson and Franklin. The shutters are down!
We can quit sending people to jail over BS. I went to pay a ticket the other day, in the court, the judge was giving out 1000$ tickets for things like not having blinkers on long enough before you turn. This young white fellow had a tail light go out on the way to work, he was in the work release program, so the judge gave him a 1400$ fine and another year in jail. People were crying, nobody could pay their super high fines. hardly anybody there even had jobs and the place was packed. In every other state I lived in these fines are like 200$ at most. Oh everybody got 12 months probation too. people who couldn't pay their fines, got to spend a week or two in the stockade working off the debt. Painting the Government building and whatnot.
Kilkrazy wrote:Not if the people he judged are felons and can't vote.
Judges don't administer to a large enough portion of the population for those that they judge to have a noticeable impact on any sort of vote. He sounds like he's either exaggerating a bit or that there are pieces of the story that are missing.
British murder rates run about 4x the US rates. The british have an extensive CCTV system, draconian gun laws and roughly equivalent police per capita (450 vs. 400).
If the British process yielded better results, we would see it in reduced crime rates. We don't. The only way the British are going to get the USA to adopt their policies is when they switch over to the Judge Dredd system
Durandal wrote:British murder rates run about 4x the US rates. The british have an extensive CCTV system, draconian gun laws and roughly equivalent police per capita (450 vs. 400).
If the British process yielded better results, we would see it in reduced crime rates. We don't. The only way the British are going to get the USA to adopt their policies is when they switch over to the Judge Dredd system
Actually america runs about two to three times the rates that the UK does. Please stop making gak up.
This thread is bad and you should all feel bad. I haven't been so floored by a total lack of knowledge in a discussion since I last tried to explain how heat doesn't actually go up to a co-worker.
Durandal wrote:British murder rates run about 4x the US rates. The british have an extensive CCTV system, draconian gun laws and roughly equivalent police per capita (450 vs. 400).
If the British process yielded better results, we would see it in reduced crime rates. We don't. The only way the British are going to get the USA to adopt their policies is when they switch over to the Judge Dredd system
Actually america runs about two to three times the rates that the UK does. Please stop making gak up.
This thread is bad and you should all feel bad. I haven't been so floored by a total lack of knowledge in a discussion since I last tried to explain how heat doesn't actually go up to a co-worker.
Since when was Wikipedia a reliable source of information , and when did hot air stop rising?
In the great state of GA in the City of Newnan
County of Coweta. About 30 miles south of Atlanta. I was wondering what I can do to proterst what seems to me to be a cheap money grab. I really don't know what rights people have agiant unfair fines.
Im not patriotic, i think the UK is full of people that i loathe, but some of the ridiculously jingoistic Americans i see on here or met when i lived there (only about 10%) actually manage to make me feel proud to be British. America isnt 'the greatest country in the world' no matter how many times you incessantly repeat it. You are no more 'free' than any other decent european nation, and 40% of you think jesus is coming back so we dont need to worry about the future. Stop making random gak up because anyone with google can see it is ridiculous. Oh and for the record, i do think we should have the death penalty, but not if it means we suddenly develop a baying mob mentality like some of you guys are displaying.
Punishment sets an example to the rest of people to not commit crimes. If a guillotine was waiting for you as soon as you were convicted of a crime, you would think twice. UP the punishment. Rehab does nothing. The criminal is just like, "Hell yeah, I don't have to do anything or get punished, I just get to tell my feelings and then go home scot free."
Automatically Appended Next Post: @mattyrm
You don't think America is the greatest nation since the Roman Empire? We have the strongest military in the world, and that is what counts. Plus, look at how much we have done in the past couple hundred years. It has taken the ancient UK forever just to become what they are now, below young America. As for the British, they outlawed an American radio talk show host from their nation, putting him on a list with terrorists that were forbidden to enter Britain. Shows their commitment to free speech. PS- He was a conservative radio host, not an islamic extremist.
BlutEisenRegel wrote:Punishment sets an example to the rest of people to not commit crimes. If a guillotine was waiting for you as soon as you were convicted of a crime, you would think twice. UP the punishment. Rehab does nothing. The criminal is just like, "Hell yeah, I don't have to do anything or get punished, I just get to tell my feelings and then go home scot free."
There are problems with any rehab actually working, but if it ends up being more cost effective, then it makes perfect sense to me. I don't consider the assumption that career criminals are career criminals... are career criminals (ad infinitum), a very sound assumption. In fact, I consider it blatantly false. A person that enters prison for theft, may leave with knowledge that could elevate their status to murderer. A balance of punishment and rehab seems to be the most obvious compromise.
I don't want potheads entering prison, to exit as thieves. Nor do I want thieves, to exit prison as murderers. That is a very real problem with our current prison system, and it is a very complicated subject.
@mattyrm
You don't think America is the greatest nation since the Roman Empire? We have the strongest military in the world, and that is what counts. Plus, look at how much we have done in the past couple hundred years. It has taken the ancient UK forever just to become what they are now, below young America. As for the British, they outlawed an American radio talk show host from their nation, putting him on a list with terrorists that were forbidden to enter Britain. Shows their commitment to free speech. PS- He was a conservative radio host, not an islamic extremist.
BlutEisenRegel wrote:
As for the British, they outlawed an American radio talk show host from their nation, putting him on a list with terrorists that were forbidden to enter Britain. Shows their commitment to free speech. PS- He was a conservative radio host, not an islamic extremist.
With some of the conservative radio nuts you hear, I fail to see how this is an outrage.
Durandal wrote:British murder rates run about 4x the US rates. The british have an extensive CCTV system, draconian gun laws and roughly equivalent police per capita (450 vs. 400).
If the British process yielded better results, we would see it in reduced crime rates. We don't. The only way the British are going to get the USA to adopt their policies is when they switch over to the Judge Dredd system
Actually america runs about two to three times the rates that the UK does. Please stop making gak up.
This thread is bad and you should all feel bad. I haven't been so floored by a total lack of knowledge in a discussion since I last tried to explain how heat doesn't actually go up to a co-worker.
Britain leads both the EU and the US. Although, I must admit according to this it isn't four times as much.
Of course it is all in how you slice the data. I found some 2003 documents that show the Britain reported 2,715,000 incidents of violent crime, and the USA 1,383,676. When you normalize for population that gives Britain 46 per thousand and the USA at 4.7 per thousand, so unless I made a decimal place error that is a 10x difference.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Britain is looking to copy Australia's voting method. So America copying the UK would be odd.
You have got to read between the lines here. Voting change, I hate to say reform as reform sounds too positive is a Big Lib Dem issue because Lib Dems will profit from it. Thus this is central to a deal with Clegg, niether Tories nor Labour will like this so expect the referendum to end in an open vote in the commons.
Clegg will get his fair chance at voting 'reform' and Cameron will get his fair chance to se it voted out. Cameron is in fact playing this smart use an agreement with the Lib Dems on an issue critical to them to garner their support and use the Labour Party to quash the idea.
Durandal wrote:British murder rates run about 4x the US rates. The british have an extensive CCTV system, draconian gun laws and roughly equivalent police per capita (450 vs. 400).
If the British process yielded better results, we would see it in reduced crime rates. We don't. The only way the British are going to get the USA to adopt their policies is when they switch over to the Judge Dredd system
Actually america runs about two to three times the rates that the UK does. Please stop making gak up.
This thread is bad and you should all feel bad. I haven't been so floored by a total lack of knowledge in a discussion since I last tried to explain how heat doesn't actually go up to a co-worker.
Since when was Wikipedia a reliable source of information , and when did hot air stop rising?
So check some reliable sites like the UN Crime Survey and CIA World Factbook.
The truth is that the per capita murder rate of the US is triple the UK rate.
I found some 2003 documents that show the Britain reported 2,715,000 incidents of violent crime, and the USA 1,383,676. When you normalize for population that gives Britain 46 per thousand and the USA at 4.7 per thousand, so unless I made a decimal place error that is a 10x difference.
Yeah, for violent crime, not MURDER.
I find that not at all surprising, because that's just violent crime. I'm no sort of expert, but my impression has always been that the British have a real tradition of physical violence. I'd think soccer hooliganry alone would outpace all American "violence" in and of itself. They just seem to enjoy a good drink and a good punching.
If you think about it, it stands to reason. In the US, guns are all over the place. If you do enough brawling, eventually somebody is going ot pull a gun out. That'll diminish enthusiasm fast... But in the UK, you can be pretty sure a brawl is just gonna be a brawl. I guess knives have to be considered, but it seems like there's just a more clear attitude of fighting and being done at that.
What's the worst that could happen? You get a tooth punched out. You're British, it's not like it was any good, right?
Yeah the Dj your talking about was that Savage Nation bloke, i actually mentioned him in another thread last week, saying that its odd that we banned him, but lets be honest, the mans an absolute tool, and most of the public will agree with the decision, so whats the problem? See this is the thing that annoys me about the right in America, they would love it if we banned an extreme islamist, and we do all the time. Its just hypocricy. As i said, dont take this the wrong way, my missus is American, ive lived there for about 2 years all in, and i liked it for a while, ive been to and trained in 6 states and i enjoy the company of most people there and i have numerous good American friends both civvie and military, but if i do the math i prefer it in the UK, because maybe only one in every hundred people is a far right DB. In the USA there seems to be this core 10-15% of people that just get rolled off a production line. I meet one everytime i go out there. A right wing gun loving gay hating 'im not racist but really i am racist' religious zealot. They seem to like the British for some reason, so we always get along to some degree, especially with me invading iraq and being so pro military action and all, but i just think people like that arent quite wired properly. And just like you said, they seem to think that having the biggest military makes you 'the best'. Norway has a better standard of living than the Uk and the Usa, so i dont see the fascination in having a mighty army. Its odd for me as im pretty right wing myself, and i agree with maybe half of what those type of blokes say, i like guns, dislike liberals and enjoy a good war or two, but they just take it to a whole new level of flag waving insanity. Being patriotic is certainly not a virtue, and the USA strikes me as easily being the most Jingoistic and aggressively patriotic, and i genuinelly think its a bad thing.
Automatically Appended Next Post: most patriotic of the English speaking nations i meant to say, excuse my grammar im on my phone. :-)
NationMaster.com aggregates information from a variety of sources including the CIA World Factbook and the UN Crime Survey...
The assertion that per capita violent crime in the UK is 10 times that of the US would appear to be incorrect. Obviously this table does not cover all forms of violent crime, perhaps there is some category in which the British are so resolutely criminal that it overbalances all the other statistics.
Those stats seem about right to me just because of common sense, ie we have lots of assualts because i see one nearly every night out!
My girlfriend told me she personally knows 3 or 4 people that have been raped, and i didnt believe her because she has always seemed very down on her own country to me, and i hate that attitude. But im sure that sex related crimes over there are way more common, and i have absolutely no idea why.
I know i blame everything on religion, but do you think maybe its because they teach that feeling "lusty" is a bad thing, even though it is a normal human emotion, so people try and repress their natural sexual urges and it sends them a bit nuts?
Well then i have no idea.. i have alot of conervsations with my missus where we try and figure out possible reasons for why something is the way that it is.
And Japan has low rates of rape right?
I always thought maybe cos they got all their frustrations out via the bizarre mangas and such or go to the pervy clubs with the knicker vendors and such.. rather than in the real world.
Its fascinating to me that two nations that are so alike US/UK can have such varying crime levels.. we all teach kids the same stuff, so why the big increases?
Easy access to firearms explains the higher murder rate, you know, like you hear about a guy going nuts cos they asked him to put his safety goggles on, then he shoots 8 people, and kills himself afterwards. I think that is simply explained, in that when you get the red mist, if you actually have a firearm on you, then you will use it, even if you regret it 20 seconds later.
But im at a loss with regards to the higher rape statistics.
Obviously we don't know if there are large numbers of unreported rapes. Since Japan is low on the UN index of equal rights for women (whatever the official name is) there might be a lot of unreported rapes.
There is certainly an awful lot of molesting of women on the trains.
Japan has a thriving porn and sex industry so there is no reason for sexual frustration.
About 2/3rds of murders in the USA are done with guns, which implies that if guns were banned the murder rate might drop to UK levels.
I don't think it's that simple, though. It might go up because obviously criminals would still carry guns. OTOHUK criminals have easy access to guns, but don't commit a lot of murders.
Of course most murders are committed by close relations and friends.
Some troll wrote:You don't think America is the greatest nation since the Roman Empire? We have the strongest military in the world, and that is what counts. . It has taken the ancient UK forever just to become what they are now, below young America. As for the British, they outlawed an American radio talk show host from their nation, putting him on a list with terrorists that were forbidden to enter Britain. Shows their commitment to free speech. PS- He was a conservative radio host, not an islamic extremist.
This is so hilariously full of fail, I had to mention it. You obviously don't have even a rudimentary knowledge of history.
Plus, look at how much we have done in the past couple hundred years
You mean the last hundred years at most. Before that the USA was pretty much a backwater, certainly not a major player in world affairs. No offence intended.
It has taken the ancient UK forever just to become what they are now, below young America.
Did you miss the bit in the history book where The British Empire effectively owned or directly controlled large areas of North America, the Indian subcontinent, Africa, The Carribean islands, the Antipodes, Pacific Islands, China (arguably)and parts of South America and South-East Asia? Or are you assuming that our current (admittedly diminished) position was the ultimate goal? You fething div.
Kilkrazy wrote:NationMaster.com aggregates information from a variety of sources including the CIA World Factbook and the UN Crime Survey...
The assertion that per capita violent crime in the UK is 10 times that of the US would appear to be incorrect. Obviously this table does not cover all forms of violent crime, perhaps there is some category in which the British are so resolutely criminal that it overbalances all the other statistics.
mattyrm wrote:As i said, dont take this the wrong way, my missus is American, ive lived there for about 2 years all in.....
mattyrm wrote:
My girlfriend told me she personally knows 3 or 4 people that have been raped, and i didnt believe her because she has always seemed very down on her own country to me, and i hate that attitude.
It is not where the Penal system is, it is where it is headed. Also, the lack of knowledge in this thread concerning how the US deals with its current inmates and ex-cons is truly sad.
Since 1980, the states and federal government have been engaged in a steady assault on the rights of the individual through a quote"War on Crime" were each legislative session has removed obstacles to conviction. It is a tribute to how well Bill of Rights was written that there is still a jury process. Unfortunately, the Jury process doesn't do much good when the government has an almost inexhaustable fund to prosecute is compared to the individual who has to pay for their defense out of pocket. Compound this with an increasingly judgemental populace(Schadenfreude) and you will find that most of what people believe will protect them against malicious prosecution is simply just that, a belief nothing more.
Now take the the increasing number of people that we throw into prison (BTW,Streaking is a registerable sex offense in Texas) and make those prison's privatized.
For profit prisons, think about the implications. Where does the profit come from? Some of it comes from cutting corners on food and health care(possibly creating giant sources for pan-demic outbreaks), but a sizable portion comes from prison labour. These inmates are promised time off for good behavior for participating in the labour programs, but the time doesn't equate to the labour and the good behavior time can be taken away for a variety of minor reasons.
HHHmmm, A group of people with no right to vote, defend themselves, or to a fair pay rate. What would you call people like that?
Then look at these prisoners after release. Most Insurance companies will not cover them for two years after their release, so getting a car to go back and forth to work becomes a near impossibilty. Most apartment buildings won't rent to them so they become homeless. See where this is going?
Now, think about where a system is headed when it is becoming increasingly privatized and is one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy. Where does that put us in 10 years? In 20 years?
Orlanth, in the marines we call our girlfriends 'the missus' regardless of matrimony, but they are one and the same. There aint that many americans in Middlesbrough. :-)
I agree with some of what you say, disagree with some as well, but this part is most important. There really aren't great options for released felons, particularly sex offenders.
Some sex offenders need no protection at all, and probably should have been executed.. But a lot of them are getting that flag for much, much more minor stuff. There's just no precision or wisdom it on. One category, no levels. You're an 18 year old kid, getting with a 15 year old girl, your life is ruined. Is that really so bad? Should you be in the same category as a guy who forcibly raped a 6 year old? I don't think so.
What I DON'T agree on is the idea that people in American prisons are innocent. It certainly happens, but I'd think the vast VAST majority of inmates are guilty of whatever they're in for, and then more that was never caught. I don't think our legal system has a problem with false convictions, if anything it's still too lenient. This is certainly the case for the severest crimes, but for lesser stuff, then it might be a bit quick to convict.
The impression I get is that you have to have MAJOR proof to get somebody on murder, but relatively little to get them on crack sales, and for some stupid reason the two crimes end up with similar jail sentences.
So, in any case, I agree that our entire legal system is in need of a major overhaul, but I don't think it's as universally stacked against the criminal as you seem to. I think it's more "all over the place" treating the criminal like a prince one second, then flagrantly ignoring his rights the next. It's just inconsistant and has no feeling of a uniform morality.
Phryxis wrote:
Some sex offenders need no protection at all, and probably should have been executed.. But a lot of them are getting that flag for much, much more minor stuff. There's just no precision or wisdom it on. One category, no levels. You're an 18 year old kid, getting with a 15 year old girl, your life is ruined. Is that really so bad? Should you be in the same category as a guy who forcibly raped a 6 year old? I don't think so.
You make a some valid points here but I'd like to also mention that the "Molester" accusation became the modern day "Witch"hunt when the laws and MEDIA attention were cranked up on these type of charges in the 1990's. It was eventually found that almost 80 % of the accusations, and that later a disproportionate number of the convictions, were proved to be false. It has to do with how the laws were set-up and that often these cases come down to the question of character where if the accuser is underage, then said accuser's character can not be questioned.
It seems that law enforcement uses media coverage on these cases as more of a defacto fund-raiser and tool for regaining public support than they for achieving justice.
Phryxis wrote:
What I DON'T agree on is the idea that people in American prisons are innocent. It certainly happens, but I'd think the vast VAST majority of inmates are guilty of whatever they're in for, and then more that was never caught. I don't think our legal system has a problem with false convictions, if anything it's still too lenient. This is certainly the case for the severest crimes, but for lesser stuff, then it might be a bit quick to convict.
Recent events prove that there are more innocent people in prison than we as a nation should be comfortable with. A notable example would be the Houston crime lab. A facility operated off of public funds that is supposed to be impartial but due to constant contact and eventual friendship with those in Law Enforcement, many of their employees began to help the police "find" evidence against the primary suspects. Recent DNA tests and evidence analysis by outside facilties are showing a disturbing number of skewed test results by the Houston lab. These skewed results helped the DA to achieve convictions that other-wise would have been unobtainable.
It is not just the Houston crime lab that this is a problem, but rather seems systemic as more cases receive outside review. What I find even more troubling is that those whom have been fasely convicted have to go through a process that is ludicrously long in order to get their recoed expunged and even after it is cleared the paperwork of having been convicted still follows them for the rest of their lives. The process for releasing and clearing these individuals names should take less time than it does to convict them.
Phryxis wrote:
The impression I get is that you have to have MAJOR proof to get somebody on murder, but relatively little to get them on crack sales, and for some stupid reason the two crimes end up with similar jail sentences.
Not necessarily true. We have a system that rewards convictions with political success and increased funding but nothing to reward acquittals. This immediately throws the system out of balance as to the level of commitment and the amount of resources availble that the attorneys on each side have. Their are murder cases where the public defenders never read through the full case file but rather immediately start working for a plea deal.
Phryxis wrote:
So, in any case, I agree that our entire legal system is in need of a major overhaul, but I don't think it's as universally stacked against the criminal as you seem to. I think it's more "all over the place" treating the criminal like a prince one second, then flagrantly ignoring his rights the next. It's just inconsistant and has no feeling of a uniform morality.
Note that in your sentence you said "I don't think it's as universally stacked against the criminal". Your use of the word criminal denotes an existing prejudice against those appearing in the courtroom as defendants. Then you go on to say," treating the criminal like a prince one second, then flagrantly ignoring his rights the next". Try substituting the word "individual" in place of the word "Criminal" and you might start seeing why false covictions are more of a problem than many think.
Why would we emulate a country (and continent) we wanted to get away from?
The Parliamentary system has it positives, but a past parliament produced Hitler. The NSDAP only won 32% of the German vote in 1932, but it was enough to completely derail any semblance of sanity in Germany.
The UK (which I like) unfortunately is a terrible model for "successful" government.
Stormrider wrote:Why would we emulate a country (and continent) we wanted to get away from?
The Parliamentary system has it positives, but a past parliament produced Hitler. The NSDAP only won 32% of the German vote in 1932, but it was enough to completely derail any semblance of sanity in Germany.
The UK (which I like) unfortunately is a terrible model for "successful" government.
"Don't emulate the UK - you'll end up like Germany in the '30s!"
Stormrider wrote:Why would we emulate a country (and continent) we wanted to get away from?
The Parliamentary system has it positives, but a past parliament produced Hitler. The NSDAP only won 32% of the German vote in 1932, but it was enough to completely derail any semblance of sanity in Germany.
The UK (which I like) unfortunately is a terrible model for "successful" government.
"Don't emulate the UK - you'll end up like Germany in the '30s!"
Erm...OK?
Bit of loss in translation there. The UK isn't headed for political facism anytime soon. Religous facism? Maybe, but not political.
I am saying a Unicameral "House" is a dangerous thing. A fringe group that has only moderate support in a few areas can completely run the country off the cliff.
Although our current bastardization of our original system is really worse in the end.
Kanluwen wrote:no disorders involved just a lack of conscience or empathy or any number of the emotions that keep us from murdering each other in the streets.
Actually, Kan, that's the very definition of a certain mental disorder: Sociopathy, also known as Antisocial personality disorder.
Clinical sociopaths lack the ability to empathize with others(along with other signs and symptoms, such as chronic lying and an inability to tolerate boredom). Some who are diagnosed can use their chronic lies and a knowledge of what the social mores(aka, what is expected of them in society and relationships) of their respective society are to cover their sociopathy, whilst others can't and either end up in mental institutions or prison.
Stormrider wrote:Bit of loss in translation there. The UK isn't headed for political facism anytime soon. Religous facism? Maybe, but not political.
I am saying a Unicameral "House" is a dangerous thing. A fringe group that has only moderate support in a few areas can completely run the country off the cliff.
Although our current bastardization of our original system is really worse in the end.
Umm, there are a range of differences between the Westminster and Weimar systems of government.
In addition to the economic and social causes of the rise of Nazism, institutional weaknesses in the Weimar Republic did contribute to the rise of Nazism. The President was given wide ranging powers in a state of emergency, and there was no oversight on when he could call such a state. Proportional representation allowed minority parties significant power in their government.
None of which exist in the UK system. Your point is very silly.
BlutEisenRegel wrote:Punishment sets an example to the rest of people to not commit crimes. If a guillotine was waiting for you as soon as you were convicted of a crime, you would think twice. UP the punishment. Rehab does nothing. The criminal is just like, "Hell yeah, I don't have to do anything or get punished, I just get to tell my feelings and then go home scot free."
That's garbage. First up, increased punishment has not shown any correlation with crime rates. High rates of conviction do.
Second up, there's a difference between a sensible punishment tied to a rehabilitation program that will allow a person to play a useful part in society after prison, and no punishment at all. You know the difference, you know that no-one suggested no punishment, but you pretended otherwise to make a cheap point. That's really crap form.
@mattyrm
You don't think America is the greatest nation since the Roman Empire? We have the strongest military in the world, and that is what counts. Plus, look at how much we have done in the past couple hundred years. It has taken the ancient UK forever just to become what they are now, below young America. As for the British, they outlawed an American radio talk show host from their nation, putting him on a list with terrorists that were forbidden to enter Britain. Shows their commitment to free speech. PS- He was a conservative radio host, not an islamic extremist.
By this logic China is the second best nation on Earth. I‘ve been there, life there is much harder than it is for citizens of Western nations.
It is therefore quite reasonable to conclude your measure of national success is bunk.
Your post was terrible, and you need to do better.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Durandal wrote:British murder rates run about 4x the US rates.
Your factual claim was, as several posters established, very wrong. The conclusions you drew from it were completely wrongheaded.
You need to own up to your mistake. I really think the culture on OT isn't going to improve until we get some measure of intellectual honesty on this board, and that means owning up to incorrect statements.
Correcting people's mistaken beliefs about politically significant fact may actually entrench them in their incorrect opinion.
Interesting piece, the findings certainly correlate with a lot of people I know. The difference, I think, is that the article gave a single passive correction, and then the respondents were asked their opinion afterwards.
What I'm talking about is a culture where that kind of failing isn't accepted. Where someone who is clearly called on an error just avoid the point, or drop out of the thread, they're expected to acknowledge their error. It's a culture where the response given in the thread, of incorrect beliefs being more strongly believed after correction, is not accepted.
Sorry, for a minute there i thought that an American, a citizen of one of the most religiously devout nations in the western world with 40-50% of them being young earth creationists and the second highest amount of evolution denialists in the world after Turkey said the increasingly secular UK with one of largest number of agnostic citizens in the world would possibly become a religiously facist nation. Surely i didnt see that.. My mistake. :-)
Stormrider wrote:Why would we emulate a country (and continent) we wanted to get away from?
The Parliamentary system has it positives, but a past parliament produced Hitler. The NSDAP only won 32% of the German vote in 1932, but it was enough to completely derail any semblance of sanity in Germany.
The UK (which I like) unfortunately is a terrible model for "successful" government.
"Don't emulate the UK - you'll end up like Germany in the '30s!"
Erm...OK?
Bit of loss in translation there. The UK isn't headed for political facism anytime soon. Religous facism? Maybe, but not political.
I am saying a Unicameral "House" is a dangerous thing. A fringe group that has only moderate support in a few areas can completely run the country off the cliff.
Although our current bastardization of our original system is really worse in the end.
mattyrm wrote:Sorry, for a minute there i thought that an American, a citizen of one of the most religiously devout nations in the western world with 40-50% of them being young earth creationists and the second highest amount of evolution denialists in the world after Turkey said the increasingly secular UK with one of largest number of agnostic citizens in the world would possibly become a religiously facist nation. Surely i didnt see that.. My mistake. :-)
It's not native Britons I am talking about, it's your radical friends from the Middle East who are moving in.
cormz wrote:I am in total agreement that america should follow britains examples and that we should also pour millions of gallons of oil into the gulf.
Hey BP is Dutch these days!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
mattyrm wrote:
cormz wrote:I am in total agreement that america should follow britains examples and that we should also pour millions of gallons of oil into the gulf.
Hey BP is Dutch these days!
Oh and SR, mate, im pretty right wing myself. But some of your guys just take the biscuit. If you honestly believe that Muslims are somehow going to "take over" the UK you are watching too much Fox News.
We outnumber Muslims by 50 to 1. And immigration is getting tighter by the year. It really cant happen, despite what you read in the right wing tabloids.
cormz wrote:I am in total agreement that america should follow britains examples and that we should also pour millions of gallons of oil into the gulf.
(sigh) I suppose it was only a matter of time before BPs industrial accident and ensuing catastrophe became 'OMG the BRITISH ARE COMING!!!1! tO POUR OIL IN THE SEA!!one!!1'
I blame Obama - he was quick to refer to BP as 'British Petroleum', conveniently sidestepping the fact that Halliburton were also heavily involved. American politicians really DO play to the lowest common denominator, don't they?
Regardless, BP are a listed company with an American branch - they also bid for contracts to drill oil. They don't just drill wherever they like.
I'm not sticking up for BP, just saying that:
BP=BRITISH=BAD
Is manipulative. Don't be taken for a moron by self-interested politicians.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
mattyrm wrote:
cormz wrote:I am in total agreement that america should follow britains examples and that we should also pour millions of gallons of oil into the gulf.
Hey BP is Dutch these days!
That's Shell, or 'Royal Dutch Shell', if you prefer. They are British/Dutch owned.
Albatross wrote:(sigh) I suppose it was only a matter of time before BPs industrial accident and ensuing catastrophe became 'OMG the BRITISH ARE COMING!!!1! tO POUR OIL IN THE SEA!!one!!1'
I blame Obama - he was quick to refer to BP as 'British Petroleum', conveniently sidestepping the fact that Halliburton were also heavily involved. American politicians really DO play to the lowest common denominator, don't they?
Regardless, BP are a private company with an American branch - they also bid for contracts to drill oil. They don't just drill wherever they like.
I'm not sticking up for BP, just saying that:
BP=BRITISH=BAD
Is manipulative. Don't be taken for a moron by self-interested politicians.
Aye I agree with albatross, its ridiculously purile blaming individuals for things as if international incidents are reasons for slating people.
So purile infact i cant believe i just typed that. But just for Cormz..
Its like me saying
"LOL! Americans all act and dress just like this guy!"
Picture of liberace removed. Don't use dakka to host yadda yadda yadda ad nauseum
... no ?
, and when did hot air stop rising?
