Proof Positive, New Jersey is run by idiots

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by IRISHMAFIA

Another issue swift execution of given punishment would handle. Instead of 6-month sentence, make it 30 lashes and 1 month. This should also create a positive turn in the expense of operating correctional institutions.

Its just not going to happen. besides the fact its been rule cruel and unusual, or surely would be, todays society would not tolerate it. Essentially society is happy thinking criminals are punished, when the reality is, there are a myrid of "outs" provided to criminals of that punishment, including - if they dont agree to comply, there is no real recourse. Your drivers license can only be suspended once, only so many of your fines can be put into collections, before its considered a non issue by said criminal.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by FUBLUE

I do not have the document in front of me, but I will look for it, so you know I'm not making this up. A study done several years ago showed that punishments do not deter most crimes. The study was about the death penalty (the ultimate punishment in the minds of some). It showed that most murders will openly admit that they did not care what the penalty was; they were going to commit the murder. Having talked to several muderers (as their teacher) they honestly did not care what the penalty was...they were going to do it.

Crimes of necessity? A great topic for debate! Having already debated this, my class decided that there should still be a penalty, but (again, from their experiences) it was still worth it to commit the crime (i.e. stealing money for food or rent or whatever they deemed necessary).

Of course there should still be a penalty. Punishment is also about punishment.

For example, the threat of prison may not deter people the first time, (I believe it does on a big level though -and admittedly I dont have numbers in front of me, just personal experience of dealing with these issues every day- not in a class room either) - most people do not want to go back to prison once out. I've literally seen people tatoo on their hand "No mistakes" to remind them not to get into trouble so they dont find themselves back in prison.

For those that Prison does not work on - leave them there for life or until they have no life left 65-70 y/o.

For those that commit capital crimes, execute them (sooner the better). Will it deter? No, but they are punished and gone. Its a nonissue. There is no detering those who will do it whether they will be executed or not. So forget about that end - These people are useless to society and turn your stomach when you look at them. Their momma may miss them, me and you certainly wont.

The BIGGEST fraud on society is behavioral and diversion programs, which are actually excuses to let the criminals the streets because we CANT keep them, so we trick them into thinking we'll be nice and let them out of jail if they do their weekly program or if they be good, we'll dismiss the charges. Its money for the program teachers, thats about it. Rehabilitation is a joke until the person WANTS to rehabilitate. That comes at the point when they have hit bottom and been crushed beyond the point of functioning. Crush them sooner, and they probably would want to rehabilitate sooner.

[Skahtboi]

Talk about your thread hijacks, this one takes the cake!!!

We started out discussing the legislation by one state of the rules of a sport, and suddenly it has morphed into a discussion of the US Constitution and Crime and Punishment (apologies to Dostoevsky).

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by Skahtboi

Talk about your thread hijacks, this one takes the cake!!!

We started out discussing the legislation by one state of the rules of a sport, and suddenly it has morphed into a discussion of the US Constitution and Crime and Punishment (apologies to Dostoevsky).

Off season... don't do dome ball; can't wait for spring!

[FUBLUE]

Originally Posted by Dakota

You haven't addressed the issue at all; only hurled insults, declared self-proclaimed expertise, and revealed yourself to be, apparently, only able to demean instead of debate. Apparently you are used to intimidating people. Good luck with that.

You are the one who declares things about me based on a shallow reading of what I am saying. If you are such a great government teacher, why is it you have still not addressed the issue of limited powers of the federal government?

So, oh great government teacher, what DO you think about enumerated powers? Does the concept have any meaning left? Do you think that is a good thing?

Can you debate an issue without belittling? Are you used to indoctrinating or teaching? Do you allow contrary views in your class, or do you intimidate, ridicule, and insult and call that debate?

Bottom line: I don't care what you "think" since it seems you have forgotten how.

I believe it was you who hurled the first insult by dismissing what my students said. I currently see 4 insults in your reply. Look in the mirror before you speak to me anymore.

I'd be glad to discuss all the issues in a true debate setting: Not the word twisting I see here.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by FUBLUE

I believe it was you who hurled the first insult by dismissing what my students said. I currently see 4 insults in your reply. Look in the mirror before you speak to me anymore.

I'd be glad to discuss all the issues in a true debate setting: Not the word twisting I see here.

You two are starting to sound like a couple of politicians preparing for Tuesday.

[Dakota]

You believe wrong, but, hey, I'm just a poor slob who has the temerity to challenge a school teacher. (OK, increase your insult count by one. I thought I should tell you that since you seem incapable of recognizing the real insults. Now increase it by another one.)

Let's see, in my first reply to you, all I said was your recounting of what your darlings said was out of context. It was. Just because they are of the mentality that they took this "as if" I was insulting them does not mean I was. But, street thugs probably have a different definition of being insulted. Then, you then said, among other things,

Originally Posted by FUBLUE

...it is just in your nature to be rude . ... Of course, you would probably just blow them off because their opinion disagrees with yours. ... It's sad that kids with an IQ of 60 can get the connection, and adults can't (or refuse to)!

I generally (but not completely) ignored these digs, and instead focused on this comment...

The "average" kid (if you can call a triple-homicide committing, drug-dealer average) even said, "man, they're getting what they THINK the government can and can't do mixed up with what the government LEGALLY can do."

Which told me you (and therefore, they) did not understand my point. I was expressing a political opinion on the proper interpretation of the consitution, not stating what I think our current legislatures can do or what the courts would find legal.

I did, indeed, respond in kind to your IQ of 60 dig. But, you started it.

You still have not addressed the issue of enumerated powers. Do you not understand the issue, or do you just not wish to address it?

[Skahtboi]

I have oft read, and marvelled at the wisdom of Mr. Jefferson. Here is a quote that really seems to fit this original post:

"Laws provide against injury from others, but not from ourselves."

[FUBLUE]

Justification does not lead to vindication.

[Dakota]

I voted for #3! Send 'em all here... they'll go running, screaming into the night!

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by FUBLUE

Justification does not lead to vindication.

Neither do short, meaningless, quips.

So, what about enumerated powers?

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by Dakota

I voted for #3! Send 'em all here... they'll go running, screaming into the night!

Probably the one statement you have made in this thread that won't bring an argument.

[LMan]

Originally Posted by AtlUmpSteve

I, for one, think we could accomplish the same affect with less overall impact by lowering the .COR of the game balls. Changing the .47 ball for a .44 ball would create a more than 6% reduction in the resultant force from the bat impact. I think that is a favorable alternative to reducing bat perfprmance 6%, and would certainly be less costly.

I support an even more effective change to small iron cannonballs. These will not leave the bat more than a few inches no matter how hard they are struck.

[Skahtboi]

Originally Posted by LMan

I support an even more effective change to small iron cannonballs. These will not leave the bat more than a few inches no matter how hard they are struck.

But they sure are difficult to pitch or throw with any effectiveness.

[greymule]

I have lived in the once-great Garden State for more than 50 years, and it is indeed run by idiots, particularly of the nanny-state variety. We had a governor known unaffectionately as "Flim-Flam," for example, who saw to it that restaurants were forbidden to serve eggs that were the least bit runny. (Public outrage put an end to that one.) Our legislature has decreed that as soon as the attorney general of the state deems the technology "available," every firearm sold in the state will have to contain a sensor that prevents it from being fired except by the "hand" programmed into it. (Don't think—vote!) In case you hadn't looked, our attorney general was recently fired for, among other things, being a scofflaw who didn't take care of her mountain of traffic tickets. (The fact that she was utterly incompetent was immaterial.) And one former governor has apparently returned to trolling highway rest stops.

(Of course it has long been common knowledge that New Jersey is run by crooks, too. Frankly, I'd take crooks over nanny-state idiots any day.)

So it's no surprise that our legislature is considering banning metal bats. Don't look into the matter. Don't ask anyone who knows anything about sports equipment. TheTrenton Times simply ran an editorial glibly claiming "advantage batter" from non-wood bats, and demanded a ban.

Not all that long ago, New Jersey was a low-tax, business-friendly state. But it is now fast becoming very much like New York City: OK if you're rich or poor, but not if you're somewhere in the middle. In fact, if it were not for immigration, mainly from the Far East but also from Mexico and Guatemala, New Jersey would be losing population rapidly—the old residents are leaving in great numbers. And the people of New Jersey complain but keep returning the high-tax nanny-staters to office.

I am very partisan in my politics, and I used to write to my legislators. But in NJ today, believe me, there is no bigger waste of time. They do not care what a constituent thinks, because it's all fixed. New Jersey sends 13 representatives to the U.S. House (7 Democrats, 6 Republicans). In 2004, all 13 won by 17 points or more.

So we will ban metal bats. Meanwhile, the guy who murdered 7-year-old Megan Kanka (in 1994) watches TV and plays cards. I predict, incidentally, that before our present governor leaves office, he will commute the sentences of all the killers on death row. In a great example of cost-effectiveness, that governor bought a seat in the U.S. Senate 6 years ago. He served 5 years and botched every job his party gave him to do, then quit to run for governor. It cost him, out of his own pocket, $29,000 per day for the time he was a U.S. Senator.