[ColossalContrarian]

Mods, feel free to move to hall of flames. joelcolorado is going offtopic on the russia/georgia war thread and it's pissing me off so I started this thread for discussion.

joelcolorado doesn't seem to understand that the US criminal justice system is full of minorities and poor people. It preys on the poor.

Individuals who can afford a lawyer get off with little to no repercussions (aka rich people).

There are far worse criminals in American who steal far greater amounts of money and effect far more people. These are white color criminals who blow the pensions of thousands of hard working American’s not to mention wars that are started in their interests.

joelcolorado, the point isn’t whether or not stealing is good or bad, its why do minorities and poor people do so much more time than rich people for disproportionate crimes?

[Cashmere]

There can be no doubt that minorities are discriminated against in the Judicial System of the U.S.. The only question is - how much?

Regardless, discrimination can account for only a small fraction of convictions/sentence length.

The main reason is . . .

. . . that minorities break more laws. Maybe it's socioeconomic, maybe it's cultural, maybe it's both, but there it is.

1 in 4 black males in America will be in the criminal justice system during their lives.

That staggering number can't be explained in substantial part by discrimination.

Stop offering excuses, point to the root of the problem, and maybe you can help lower the numbers.

[Tyler_JC]

What does society do to fix this tragedy?

I suggest removing barriers to entrepreneurship, reducing illegal immigration in order to reduce competition for low skill labor, increasing funding for work training programs, increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit, and providing refundable tax credits for community colleges.

Provide African Americans with the tools to improve their lives and they will do it, just as every other ethnic group in the United States did. Segregate them into ghettos, create a culture that glorifies it, and then keep them addicted to government handouts and they will continue to remain an underclass.

But I'm a conservative so I have a slight bias on this.

[Cashmere]

I suggest removing barriers to entrepreneurship, reducing illegal immigration in order to reduce competition for low skill labor, increasing funding for work training programs, increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit, and providing refundable tax credits for community colleges.

Provide African Americans with the tools to improve their lives and they will do it, just as every other ethnic group in the United States did. Segregate them into ghettos, create a culture that glorifies it, and then keep them addicted to government handouts and they will continue to remain an underclass.

All of this is an excuse.

My ancestors were dirt poor. They weren't driven to crime by virtue of their impecuniousness.

Why not?

Because their culture was one of rigid morality.

You write: "Segregate them into ghettos, create a culture that glorifies it . . . ."

What do you mean "create"?

The implication is that somebody created black culture other than blacks.

Not true.

Blacks invented the "gimme 5". They improved on it with the "low 5", and then really found paydirt with the "high 5". The raising the roof, chest bump, earthquake, crotch grab, and all the variations thereof were minor accomplishments compared to the high 5.

I remember being beaten to death throughout my years in the idiot factories with "black history month".

They taught us that blacks invented peanut butter and the traffic stop light.

I'm not sure where the peanut butter fits in, but I think the whole invented-the-stop-light thing worked out great, because later, through indirect use of the stop light, blacks invented the car jack.

Blacks also invented Jazz and Blues, and, indirectly, laid the ground work for Rock.

But blacks also invented Rap and Hip Hop - the two sources of the metastasizing cancer that have helped to destroy black America from within.

I didn't invent black culture.

As far as I can tell, white people didn't invent black culture.

Blacks invented black culture.

If you look back at the history of blacks in this country, one thing is extremely clear:

At the end of the main portion of the civil rights movement, blacks seemed poised to enjoy the upward mobility that virtually every other group has enjoyed in America.

What happened?

In 1940, the illegitimacy rate among blacks was 19 percent, in 1960, 22 percent, and today, it's over 70 percent.

NOT getting married is glorified.

NOT having a monogamous relationship is glorified.

Antagonism toward white people is glorified.

Non-integration with the existing society is glorified.

Blacks were treated miserably for several hundred years.

When King and other brave people finally broke through and offered hope, what was done with it?

It was discarded, and blacks have re-enslaved themselves.

Peak Oil will be hard on everybody.

Peak Oil will be brutal on blacks.

As the easy oil society fades, we will revert to what was once before.

Blacks will become slaves again, through indentured servitude or other means.

The solution can only come from within.

I don't see it happening.

[dinopello]

Blacks invented the "gimme 5". They improved on it with the "low 5", and then really found paydirt with the "high 5". The raising the roof, chest bump, earthquake, crotch grab, and all the variations thereof were minor accomplishments compared to the high 5.

Gimme 5 is great. Gimme what ?

But nobody is given credit !

Like many elements of popular culture the origin of the high five is not definitively known

Maybe they say here...

[ColossalContrarian]

I would be curios to see stats on punishments for money related crimes, non violent.

So if a poor person commits a second degree burglary (more than $15k I believe) while a CEO (regardless of race) commits insider trading worth $150k who does more time. Where can I get stats like this?

Joe Nacchio, former CEO of Qwest for instance, convicted of 19 counts of illegal insider trading last year but is conviction was overturned even though he obviously committed fraud.

Another example -- We all know how crack carried a far greater punishment than cocaine even though the two substances are essentially the same, the only difference being that cocaine is generally used by well to do while crack is generally used by poorer populations and cut with baking soda.

[Cashmere]

I would be curios to see stats on punishments for money related crimes, non violent.

So if a poor person commits a second degree burglary (more than $15k I believe) while a CEO (regardless of race) commits insider trading worth $150k who does more time. Where can I get stats like this?

Joe Nacchio, former CEO of Qwest for instance, convicted of 19 counts of illegal insider trading last year but is conviction was overturned even though he obviously committed fraud.

Another example -- We all know how crack carried a far greater punishment than cocaine even though the two substances are essentially the same, the only difference being that cocaine is generally used by well to do while crack is generally used by poorer populations and cut with baking soda.

Crack was considered more dangerous than cocaine - quick, cheap, and addictive.

I can't surmise that the sentencing laws were set up to stick it to blacks. I'm not even sure if, when the laws were enacted, crack was even considered a predominantly black drug.

The fact that crack has become a drug of choice among poor blacks can be viewed 2 ways.

One way is that the higher sentencing for distribution of crack makes a lot of sense if your goal is to protect poor communities.

The other way is that it unfairly targets blacks.

What if the laws were changed tomorrow to reduce the currently harsh penalties for trafficking crack?

What would happen is that crack use in the black community would skyrocket.

So if a poor person commits a second degree burglary (more than $15k I believe) while a CEO (regardless of race) commits insider trading worth $150k who does more time. Where can I get stats like this?

I definitely don't think white collar criminals get harsh enough sentences.

Martha Stewart should have done 10 years for her theft.

But that written, who does the average person consider a larger risk?

A burglar breaks into your house at night with the intent to commit a felony.

The embezzler steals money from . . . somewhere, with no threat of violence.

Most people would prefer to see the burglar put away for a good long time, because a direct threat to your person is more frightening than some guy ripping off a company.

[Micki]

There are far worse criminals in American who steal far greater amounts of money and effect far more people. These are white color criminals who blow the pensions of thousands of hard working American’s not to mention wars that are started in their interests.

I know us white colored people have done a lot of bad things, but I am sure you ment white collar criminals. We don't want to start any racial hatred here.

[jlw61]

What if we simply quit putting people in jail for using drugs and instead used a portion of the savings realized from the criminal justice system on education and rehabilitation for drug use? Sort of like what we do for tobacco and alcohol, two addictive drugs of choice for many. And would it not lower the cost of these drugs and make them safer? Could we not figure out a way to make american companies distributers of safer, better recreational drugs?

What if we eliminated a lot of the barriers to small business ownership? Such as the taxes, licenses, and fees required just to start a business. For instance, any business that employs less than 3 people and/or grosses under $250,000 a year? Only the pay check would be taxed, not the business.

What if we quit forcing people into a failed educational system and started making it possible for communities to create viable solutions to their educational problems? What if we quit forcing schools to buy new text books every year or so? What if teachers were paid to teach and not be a home room monitor? What if we put more money into art and band and less into football and basketball?

What if we actually went after violent criminals instead of pot heads? Quit busting doors down for a gram of coke or an ounce of pot? Made it possible for people to protect themselves? Quit forcing government solutions onto community problems?

What if we clamped down on credit card companies that prey on the lower end of the economic scale? What if someone actually taught kids how to use money wisely? What if we quit pusing the "buy it now, now, now" mentality and instead pushed the "buy it when you can afford it" mentality?

The evil in the system affects everyone, but it affects the economically disadvantaged the most. The rich can afford better lawyers, consultants and teachers. They can also afford to hide their drug use better than poor people.

[Micki]

What if we simply quit putting people in jail for using drugs and instead used a portion of the savings realized from the criminal justice system on education and rehabilitation for drug use? Sort of like what we do for tobacco and alcohol, two addictive drugs of choice for many. And would it not lower the cost of these drugs and make them safer? Could we not figure out a way to make american companies distributers of safer, better recreational drugs?

My thinking has over the years gone more towards the liberal on the subject. I haven't quite managed to formulate the ideal solution but some thoughs are in line with;
A lot of crime is committed to get money for drugs. If drugs were legal and of reasonable price there would be less crime to get money for drug purchase. Government could collect tax income, which hopefully went to education etc.
Furthermore I think it is principally wrong to tell adult people what they can do with their bodies or what plants to grow in their own backyard (especially if it is native plants).

I am also saddend when I hear about death sentences etc. for carrying drugs on your body. We currently have the Australian Bali 9 awaiting death sentence in Indonesia. And not too long ago a young man was hung in Singapore.

The crime....carrying something someone has decided is illegal.
What if someone decided that carrying a six pack of beer across the border would give death sentence. Or to carry a cheese sandwich. I know, I am taking it a bit far with the cheese sandwich but basically sentence, which may be Death, can apply to someone for carrying something.

Some people would say...but that drug can kill people.
That is true. But so can alcohol. And most people taking drugs do it of free will. If not, then it is the person forcing them that commits the crime.
And overdoses would be less of a problem if the product was government controlled.

Some dilemma however remains; The fact that some drugs can be so much more powerful (addiction, psychological changes or delusion/psychosis/paranoia etc) than alcohol.
Education has for instance not stopped binge drinking.
So are we prepared to wear what ever other costs there may be to society in order to allow adults freedom of choice?
Although principally I am inclined to say yes....I hesitate.

[jlw61]

Some dilemma however remains; The fact that some drugs can be so much more powerful (addiction, psychological changes or delusion/psychosis/paranoia etc) than alcohol.
Education has for instance not stopped binge drinking.
So are we prepared to wear what ever other costs there may be to society in order to allow adults freedom of choice?
Although principally I am inclined to say yes....I hesitate.

No dilemma. If a drug is patently harmful to most people upon first use or in very small doses, then consider a ban on it. That would affect a limited number of drugs.

Education has lowered the number of drinking deaths and other such problems. Binge drinking is a fairly new thing amonst the population and needs to be addressed. In time, it will fade.

We are wearing far worse costs of rampant crime, deaths through competing criminals, theft, massive taxes on the "war on drugs" and much more. I think you'll find this to be a much better fitting and lighter-weight piece of cloth.

Give freedom a chance.

[Tyler_JC]

It appears as thought jlw61 and I mostly agree on this one.

I've never understood why Black voters support policies that actively keep them dependent on the government rather than allow them to break free from the cycle of welfare.

Giving vouchers to families so that they could send their children to decent private schools instead of horrible public schools would be have enormously positive consequences.

But the "liberals" in Washington think that allowing government money to be spent on religious schools is a violation of the 1st Amendment.

Why can't they just let the kids have the chance to go to a good school? If the kid can finally learn how to read and function in society, why should it matter if the school happens to be grounded in faith?

Sweden's Success

If Swedes can improve their education system by giving competition a chance, why can't Americans have the same opportunities?

Better education = Less crime

[vision-master]

What does society do to fix this tragedy?

I suggest removing barriers to entrepreneurship, reducing illegal immigration in order to reduce competition for low skill labor, increasing funding for work training programs, increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit, and providing refundable tax credits for community colleges.

Provide African Americans with the tools to improve their lives and they will do it, just as every other ethnic group in the United States did. Segregate them into ghettos, create a culture that glorifies it, and then keep them addicted to government handouts and they will continue to remain an underclass.

But I'm a conservative so I have a slight bias on this.

Yo pimp daddy, they blew it.

I'm retired and who do I see hanging around the street corners everyday doing nothing but looking for trouble. Young black males.

Put em in work camps. Losers!

[jlw61]

But the "liberals" in Washington think that allowing government money to be spent on religious schools is a violation of the 1st Amendment.

It has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with government being the caretaker. They would reject it even if you only allowed kids to go to non-religious schools. That's because Liberals believe governement is the solution, unfortunately, neoconservatives now feel the same way but from a different angle.

The worst thing you can do to someone is to give them that which they can get for themselves.

[joelcolorado]

You dont get it, they dont want to start a company or cannot start a company. They are not that kind of ppl. THey are too used to the dole and not doing anything.

THe single mother thing amongst blacks is horrible. Where are those dads ? Good lord. DOnt preach to me that theywant to change.

New orleans has received record amounts of money since the 60's and there are more ppl there on welfare now than ever. GOOD GRIEF> wake up, some ppl dont WANT to live like you and I.