|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:24 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Street Magic wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Wow, this really takes the cake. So, lets NOT send crack dealers in Compton to prison. Because Crack dealers are all harmless. NONE of them carry firearms or are affiliated with Gangs that murder people. |
Aside from what Fox responded with, way to imply that carrying firearms is somehow a criminal behavior in itself. Apparently, that would make you the Democrat. |
http://forums.eslcafe.com/korea/viewtopic.php?t=137086&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
Why not read the title of that thread, the creator, and the contents. YEah, I'm a BIG anti-gun guy.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
conrad2
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The number of nonviolent drug users and dealers in prison far, far outnumber those who are violent and carry guns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Street Magic
Joined: 23 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Street Magic wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| Wow, this really takes the cake. So, lets NOT send crack dealers in Compton to prison. Because Crack dealers are all harmless. NONE of them carry firearms or are affiliated with Gangs that murder people. |
Aside from what Fox responded with, way to imply that carrying firearms is somehow a criminal behavior in itself. Apparently, that would make you the Democrat. |
Oh my bad. I just assumed drug dealers in Compton carried guns. Maybe they all stand on the street with Katana swords and ninja stars. |
Or maybe, because crack is really easy to make and doesn't cost that much money, a lot of them don't carry weapons at all. But let's say the vast majority of them own guns illegally: Then I guess you're right-- let's abolish that whole "court" sham and automatically sentence anyone found with crack in Compton for murder.
If they're all carrying weapons illegally, why is it such a problem to only try them for carrying weapons illegally when you actually have evidence of them carrying weapons illegally?
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| BTW, I'm an NRA member and a supporter of 2nd amendment rights. I just assumed that drug dealers that carry weapons didn't go through the normal route of a proper background check, registration, and waiting period with buying firearms. |
By the way, I obviously know your political leanings, otherwise the irony of you saying something entirely against them would have no meaning. But yeah, once again, it's not that hard to tell the difference between someone who has his gun registered and someone who doesn't once you have them in custody. Aside from the repeated desire to make such assumptions without evidence being horribly corrupt, it baffling-ly has no pragmatic purpose either given how easy it is to figure out if the guy you have in custody actually did any of what you're suggesting.
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| I forgot common sense, logic, and some deductive skills is absent on this board. |
Yes, it's crazy for me to suggest that people should be tried only for the specific crimes they commit based only on the specific evidence for those crimes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| conrad2 wrote: |
| Whats to stop a white collar criminal if he knows beforehand that worse case scenario he just has to give the money back? Prison is a powerful deterrent. |
Because my suggestion goes beyond simply taking back their ill-gotten wealth. Seizure of all stolen funds would only be the first step, followed by immense fines and long term or permanent probation. In short, you'll probably be a member of the lower class for the rest of your life as money you earn is seized by the government. This turns white collar criminals into people who earn money for the government during their punishment rather than soaking it up, while still punishing them.
I don't think that would be substantially less of a deterrent than prison; most people who commit crimes do so because they genuinely believe they won't get caught after all. Deterrents only go so far. After that, it's a matter of how you choose to deal with offenders. My proposal involves turning them into a financial asset to the state. Imprisoning them turns them into a financial liability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Hiring illegal aliens has all the benefits of exporting jobs, with few of the downsides. The only Americans actually hurt by illegal immigration are the people in the extreme lower class who might have been hired in their place, |
Is that really true? Exported jobs are not performed by people who need US health care nor US public education. I thought one of the problems with illegal aliens was that, as they are not hired in the usual way that requires SS# or the some equivalent, they do not pay into SS nor taxes in general that go toward education, infrastructure and such. But they do need to attend school and receive health care. Honestly, I don't pay too close attention to this issue so perhaps I'm off base here, but if some guy over in India "steals" a job from an American, Uncle Sam won't be paying for his hernia operation or his kids' schooling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Probably because few politicians really want to stop illegal immigration. It's just a talking point conservatives use to rally their base and distract from real issues. |
You're right. I sometimes forget how apathetic the American voting base is in regards to keeping their elected officials in line. Though I do think you're being a bit too dismissive in saying it only distracts from real issues. Illegal immigration is obviously an issue in California, as evidenced by, among other things, the topic of this thread.
| Quote: |
| Hiring illegal aliens has all the benefits of exporting jobs, with few of the downsides. The only Americans actually hurt by illegal immigration are the people in the extreme lower class who might have been hired in their place, and needless to say, they aren't exactly a powerful voting block from a political perspective. |
Implementing accessible guest worker programs in addition to strengthening our border security would have all the benefits you just listed with the added bonus of keeping gang violence and other unwanted elements from spilling across the border. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flakfizer wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Hiring illegal aliens has all the benefits of exporting jobs, with few of the downsides. The only Americans actually hurt by illegal immigration are the people in the extreme lower class who might have been hired in their place, |
Is that really true? Exported jobs are not performed by people who need US health care nor US public education. |
Trivial when compared to the actual, long term economic costs of exporting jobs to other countries. An illegal immigrant is still going to be spending most of the money he earns supporting himself in America; he might send some back to his family, but both he and his employer will still be keeping money in the U.S. economy. By comparison, exporting jobs shifts that money out of the American economy. We get the low cost labor without the long-term economic cost of shipping those jobs to other countries. Good and services produced by them also don't need to be imported, which lowers their cost.
Spending on things like health care and education for illegal immigrants is ultimately trivial, and that's even using the fairly obviously inflated figures put forward by people attacking illegal immigrants.
| flakfizer wrote: |
| I thought one of the problems with illegal aliens was that, as they are not hired in the usual way that requires SS# or the some equivalent, they do not pay into SS nor taxes in general that go toward education, infrastructure and such. |
They don't pay Social Security but they don't receive it either, so that's a wash. They don't pay taxes, but they earn so little that they'd assuredly be eligible to receive almost all, if not all of their tax money back anyway, so that's a wash. In fact, them not interacting with these systems probably actually saves us money from an administrative costs point of view. And they do pay things like road toll taxes, sales tax, and so forth.
| flakfizer wrote: |
| But they do need to attend school and receive health care. Honestly, I don't pay too close attention to this issue so perhaps I'm off base here, but if some guy over in India "steals" a job from an American, Uncle Sam won't be paying for his hernia operation or his kids' schooling. |
True, but he also won't be using his pay check in American stores to buy American products, paying money to American citizens for living space, paying American sales tax, and keeping that money in the American economy. A far better deal for us, I think, if we take the guy who might occasionally need emergency treatment, and who might have a child that requires education, but who spends that money in the American economy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2010 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Probably because few politicians really want to stop illegal immigration. It's just a talking point conservatives use to rally their base and distract from real issues. |
You're right. I sometimes forget how apathetic the American voting base is in regards to keeping their elected officials in line. Though I do think you're being a bit too dismissive in saying it only distracts from real issues. Illegal immigration is obviously an issue in California, as evidenced by, among other things, the topic of this thread.
| Quote: |
| Hiring illegal aliens has all the benefits of exporting jobs, with few of the downsides. The only Americans actually hurt by illegal immigration are the people in the extreme lower class who might have been hired in their place, and needless to say, they aren't exactly a powerful voting block from a political perspective. |
Implementing accessible guest worker programs in addition to strengthening our border security would have all the benefits you just listed with the added bonus of keeping gang violence and other unwanted elements from spilling across the border. |
I agree completely about the guest worker program. In fact, I almost suggested it myself, but didn't feel there was that much interest in discussing it. Border security + guest worker program would be better than the current situation. I was more explaining why I felt politicians weren't sincere in their discussion about illegal immigration than actively standing up for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| And Bernie Madoff or Enron execs wouldn't go to jail either despite ruining thousands of people's lives. |
Seizing these men's ill gotten assets helps people. Locking these men up in prison helps no one. |
It stops them from doing it again.
it also shows potential criminals that there is a punishment, and a possible deterrant. If you don't believe that prison/punishment deters criminals, you've never been a criminal. Criminals weigh the options all the time... and they are very conscious of the risks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Taking drugs out of the area of criminal offense alone would have a substantial impact. |
I'm not certain that it would. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| And Bernie Madoff or Enron execs wouldn't go to jail either despite ruining thousands of people's lives. |
Seizing these men's ill gotten assets helps people. Locking these men up in prison helps no one. |
It stops them from doing it again. |
They can be stopped without locking them up, so why waste taxpayer money locking them up?
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| it also shows potential criminals that there is a punishment, and a possible deterrant. |
So can other punishments. Prison isn't the only possible punishment, and thus isn't the only possible deterrent.
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| If you don't believe that prison/punishment deters criminals, you've never been a criminal. |
Well, this is true.
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| Criminals weigh the options all the time... and they are very conscious of the risks. |
And risks can include things other than prison time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Taking drugs out of the area of criminal offense alone would have a substantial impact. |
I'm not certain that it would. |
Are you saying that, on the whole, individuals currently incarcerated for drug related offenses would simply be locked away for other crimes they would undoubtedly commit, or that our legal system would simply find another law under which to persecute said individuals regardless of whether it's warranted? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Probably because few politicians really want to stop illegal immigration. It's just a talking point conservatives use to rally their base and distract from real issues. Hiring illegal aliens has all the benefits of exporting jobs, with few of the downsides. The only Americans actually hurt by illegal immigration are the people in the extreme lower class who might have been hired in their place, and needless to say, they aren't exactly a powerful voting block from a political perspective. |
Democrats support illegal immigration because they see it as a way to build a permanent majority:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK7K0itgQt0
| Quote: |
So I think there�s two things that matter for the progressive community.
When you are in the middle of a fight for your life you will remember who was there with you. And immigrants count on progressives to be able to do that.
Number one, if we are to expand this electorate to win, the progressive community needs to solidly be on the side of immigrants, that we�ll expand and solidify the progressive coalition for the future��
Number two.
We reform the immigration laws, it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters. Can you imagine if we have, even the same ratio, two out of three?
If we have eight million new voters who care about �� and will be voting. We will be creating a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle.�
There you have the strategy. Fight for the illegal immigrants, grant them citizenship, then exploit their gratitude in the form of votes to create a �governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle..� |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Probably because few politicians really want to stop illegal immigration. It's just a talking point conservatives use to rally their base and distract from real issues. Hiring illegal aliens has all the benefits of exporting jobs, with few of the downsides. The only Americans actually hurt by illegal immigration are the people in the extreme lower class who might have been hired in their place, and needless to say, they aren't exactly a powerful voting block from a political perspective. |
Democrats support illegal immigration because they see it as a way to build a permanent majority |
I wouldn't call this support for illegal immigration, but rather support for granting citizenship to illegal illegal immigrants. I agree Democrats are often for this, and I agree this is precisely why, but I feel it's ultimately a slightly separate issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2010 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| pkang0202 wrote: |
| And Bernie Madoff or Enron execs wouldn't go to jail either despite ruining thousands of people's lives. |
Seizing these men's ill gotten assets helps people. Locking these men up in prison helps no one. |
It stops them from doing it again. |
They can be stopped without locking them up, so why waste taxpayer money locking them up?
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| it also shows potential criminals that there is a punishment, and a possible deterrant. |
So can other punishments. Prison isn't the only possible punishment, and thus isn't the only possible deterrent.
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| If you don't believe that prison/punishment deters criminals, you've never been a criminal. |
Well, this is true.
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| Criminals weigh the options all the time... and they are very conscious of the risks. |
And risks can include things other than prison time. |
I would love to see your other proposed solutions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
