Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on February 18, 2021, 08:31:45 AM
-
The fact that people suggest this makes me angry. The fact that it apparently works makes me even angrier.
Richmond, Calif., previously tested the controversial strategy of paying people not to commit crimes in order to combat gun violence that plagued the community
It resulted in the city seeing its lowest murder rate in more than 30 years, the station reported. Richmond also saw a 66% reduction in firearm assaults causing injury or death between 2010 and 2017, according to advancepeace.org.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/baltimore-activist-suggests-paying-killers-not-to-kill-to-solve-citys-high-murder-rate
-
I've never killed anyone at all - am I eligible for back pay?
-
First, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that most of their crimes are committed by a fairly small number of people and they know who most of them are. That said, if you subsidize something, you get more of it. I don't expect this sort of policy to work very long. If they would throw the book at the criminals and prosecute them aggressively, that also might keep them out of circulation.
Second, there is very little hard information in the article. I have to wonder if they are cherry picking their statistics to make this look good and the media isn't digging very far.
IMO, there are no short cuts around human nature.
-
???
Paying the mob not to murder you (or burn down your store) is not exactly a novel concept. The only new part of this is the criminals are gig workers, and they want to use taxes to do it.
-
Voluntary extortion, started by the victims.
-
Voluntary extortion, started by the victims.
Crowdsourcing the funding for your extortion. Not actually a bad idea if you can pull it off.
-
Voluntary extortion, started by the victims.
That sums it up perfectly. Maybe they can also develop a government program to pay ransoms to kidnappers. That would certainly eliminate kidnappings entirely.
-
Voluntary extortion, started by the victims.
Yes, well said.
Men without chests.
-
Rope is far cheaper
-
First, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that most of their crimes are committed by a fairly small number of people and they know who most of them are. That said, if you subsidize something, you get more of it. I don't expect this sort of policy to work very long. If they would throw the book at the criminals and prosecute them aggressively, that also might keep them out of circulation.
Second, there is very little hard information in the article. I have to wonder if they are cherry picking their statistics to make this look good and the media isn't digging very far.
IMO, there are no short cuts around human nature.
(Bolding mine --230RN)
Hooooo-ly crap, ya think? That's impossible with modern fact-checking entities like Snopes, isn't it?
That sums it up perfectly. Maybe they can also develop a government program to pay ransoms to kidnappers. That would certainly eliminate kidnappings entirely.
Excellent way of pointing out the fallacy, by you, and touched on by MechAg94.
The "back pay" remark was pretty funny, too.
Makes me think of offering to move there and not commit any crimes for only $10,000 per month, except I know some folks who would outbid me.
Terry
-
Our nation's first foreign war came about because some criminals wanted us to pay them protection.
-
First, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that most of their crimes are committed by a fairly small number of people and they know who most of them are.
This sort of program has been discussed here before, at least a few years ago, and I seem to recall that was a big part of the reasoning behind it.
I also find that skepticism about this sort of solution is tremendously difficult for me to overcome. I can't help but think this is a solution that "works" for a culture too timid or too delicate to simply apply justice (executions, hard labor, etc) to those who commit serious crimes against fellow citizens.
-
Paying Murderers Not to Kill You
How much does it cost to get a murderer to kill me?
-
How much does it cost to get a murderer to kill me?
Well, I know a guy that knows a guy....just sayin'.
-
How much does it cost to get a murderer to kill me?
Depends, have anything on Hillary?
-
The "activist" with such a great idea certainly has a rather extensive history with the courts.
http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/casesearch/inquiry-results.jsp?d-16544-p=1&lastName=MOOREHEAD&d-16544-o=2&filingDate=&d-16544-s=7&filingEnd=&partyType=&courtSystem=B&courttype=N&firstName=TYREE&site=00&filingStart=&action=Search&company=N&middleName=&countyName=
-
Our nation's first foreign war came about because some criminals wanted us to pay them protection.
History forgotten by most.
-
This sort of program has been discussed here before, at least a few years ago, and I seem to recall that was a big part of the reasoning behind it.
I also find that skepticism about this sort of solution is tremendously difficult for me to overcome. I can't help but think this is a solution that "works" for a culture too timid or too delicate to simply apply justice (executions, hard labor, etc) to those who commit serious crimes against fellow citizens.
IMO, we don't even need to look at executions or hard labor. Just give them the prescribed prison sentences instead of slapping them on the wrist. Prosecute them instead of doing plea deals. Give the maximum sentence for repeat offenders. Don't turn them loose on low bail amounts (or no bail) immediately after they are caught. This applies to murder charges all the way down to petty theft. Could it be a budget issue? Maybe so. That is an area it would be worth more investment.