• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Solution to Reducing Crime

What is the Optimal Solution for Reducing Crime

  • More police and harsher penalties

    Votes: 3 9.1%

  • Invest in infrastructure and education

    Votes: 11 33.3%

  • Something else (please specificy)

    Votes: 19 57.6%
  • Total voters
    33
ajn678 said:
So then why don't people just get a legit job then?
Click to expand...

The problem is there is not enough good paying jobs to go around. If you live in a bad area and have a bad education, it will just make things tougher.
 
lurchadams said:
Some argue that investing in more police and imposing harsher sentences for all crime will help reduce it. Others say the problem in poverty and that investing in infrastructure nationwide, education, especially in impoverished areas is a better solution.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

Infrastructure, not camoflauged Corporate Welfare (school buildings, highways, pipelines, Corporate tax breaks, etc.) but money that goes into a LOCAL labor pool and is spent locally. Education, but not buildings, teachers, who spend locally. Renewable Energy grants for on home renewables that keep Utility monies in the local community (not solar fields that feed Utilities and money leaves the community).
/
 
Optimal solution for reducing crime?

Heart surgery. Too many people have become soulless.

Being poor doesn't make someone a criminal. A bad heart does.

People raising kids without supervision and a good example for the child to follow void of scruples and morals produces criminals.

People making poor choices like getting addicted to drugs creates criminals. They get strung out on drugs and can't hold a job. The next step is to steal, rob or even kill for money to feed their habit. Sure you could legalize drugs but that isn't going to change the fact that those addicted will still remain poor and unable to provide for themselves.

Yes, we have too many in our society who need heart surgery and might I add a reality check.
 
KevinKohler said:
No it doesn't. Long term, legit jobs almost always pay better. You've got to factor in time spent not working, health insurance, retirement savings, plus the cost of tax evasion or money laundering.

To quote Nicholas Cage from Matchstick Men...."Oh, crime pays. Just not very well."
Click to expand...

Not to mention that the risks of crime as an occupation involve being killed or incarcerated.
 
KevinKohler said:
No it doesn't. Long term, legit jobs almost always pay better. You've got to factor in time spent not working, health insurance, retirement savings, plus the cost of tax evasion or money laundering.

To quote Nicholas Cage from Matchstick Men...."Oh, crime pays. Just not very well."
Click to expand...
It's hard to get young people, who don't have the life experience to compare, to buy into long-term benefit when the larger short-term money is staring them in the face.
 
lurchadams said:
Do you think the fact that many prisons now are privatized and that more occupancy = more profit has anything to do with legislative reluctance to ease up on harsher penalties and shorter sentences for non-violent crimes?
Click to expand...

You weren't asking me, but I say 'yes'. Minimum occupancy rates should never be a goal in any way for a prison, public or private.
 
radcen said:
It's hard to get young people, who don't have the life experience to compare, to buy into long-term benefit when the larger short-term money is staring them in the face.
Click to expand...

Yet, I remember when I was a kid, getting my first job, at age 15, and never once did I consider selling drugs, or robbing the quickie mart. My first job was for the Boy Scouts, so the pay was crap, then I got a job at a grocery store, making minimum wage, which was almost 6 bucks an hour at the time, in SC.

And that was 15 years ago. And the minimum wage has since rocketed up to a whopping 7 dollars an hour since then.
 
rabbitcaebannog said:
The problem is there is not enough good paying jobs to go around. If you live in a bad area and have a bad education, it will just make things tougher.
Click to expand...

And even young dumb kids know that 10-15 hours per week at 7 bucks an hour ain't worth their time. That won't even keep up with the amount that tuition goes UP by each year, let alone paying all of it.
 
parents take no responsibility for their kids so, the kids KNOW they can get away with being little assholes

little assholes grow up to be BIG assholes aka criminals

make parents responsible for the actions of their progeny until the kids are of 'legal' age, 18

allow parents the ability to NOT be punished by LE & the courts for offering their own flesh & blood punishments for misbehavior(s) as the parents see fit

if little Johnny needs some tuff luv to get the message across that doing activity X will get him in hot water, then so be it

bring back the age of proactive parenting, the concept of a bygone era in which parents actually took responsibility for their offspring

if the kid is still a POS by time they are 18, then oh well ................. send the SOB to prison ...........
 
Last edited:
KevinKohler said:
Yet, I remember when I was a kid, getting my first job, at age 15, and never once did I consider selling drugs, or robbing the quickie mart. My first job was for the Boy Scouts, so the pay was crap, then I got a job at a grocery store, making minimum wage, which was almost 6 bucks an hour at the time, in SC.

And that was 15 years ago. And the minimum wage has since rocketed up to a whopping 7 dollars an hour since then.
Click to expand...

Nor did I. Then again, nor was I in anything that even resembled a dire situation, either. We were solid middle class. I chose to start working because I wanted to make money to buy and do extra stuff. I could have chosen to be a lazy bum and still been well-fed and quite comfy.

MW for me was $3.35/hr. I'm sure due to an age difference.

Seems you're making the mistake in presuming that all people are the same.
 
Last edited:
KevinKohler said:
And even young dumb kids know that 10-15 hours per week at 7 bucks an hour ain't worth their time. That won't even keep up with the amount that tuition goes UP by each year, let alone paying all of it.
Click to expand...

Are you advocating an increase in MW? I agree it's not keeping up, and I believe it needs to be raised, but I'm not convinced about the !5/hr demands I keep seeing lately.
 
radcen said:
Nor did I. Then again, nor was I in anything that even resembled a dire situation, either. We were solid middle class. I chose to start working because I wanted to make money to buy and do extra stuff. I could have chosen to be a lazy bum and still been well-fed and quite comfy.

MW for me was $3.35/hr. I'm sure due to an age difference.

Seems you're making the mistake in presuming that all people are the same.
Click to expand...

No, the point I'm making is, the cost of living has doubled, but MW hasn't kept pace. Not only that, but due to the ACA, most kids only get 15-20 hours per week. So, that's 140 bucks per week, tops. Subtract 20 for gas/transit. That seems like a lot of money for a kid, but not if that's going partly or in full towards the household. Some kids work to help put food on the table.

Back when I made 6 per hour, ground beef was just over a dollar per pound, as gas was about the same per gallon.
 
radcen said:
Are you advocating an increase in MW? I agree it's not keeping up, and I believe it needs to be raised, but I'm not convinced about the !5/hr demands I keep seeing lately.
Click to expand...

15 an hour strikes me as a negotiating point. We say 15, planning to get negotiated down to 13.

But it needs to be tied to inflation/cost of living, to each state/region.


And even that is just a bandaid.
 
lurchadams said:
Some argue that investing in more police and imposing harsher sentences for all crime will help reduce it. Others say the problem in poverty and that investing in infrastructure nationwide, education, especially in impoverished areas is a better solution.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

There are countless places on the globe where poverty is far greater and education far worse, if it exists at all, that don't have anything like the crime problem we have here. So the solution obviously lies elsewhere.
 
lurchadams said:
Some argue that investing in more police and imposing harsher sentences for all crime will help reduce it. Others say the problem in poverty and that investing in infrastructure nationwide, education, especially in impoverished areas is a better solution.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

Best way to reduce crime is to end the war on drugs.
 
Harshaw said:
Legalize drugs. End the drug war.
Click to expand...

Definately agree with you here Harshaw.

The specifics of a full legalization of cocaine or heroin, I haven't exactly thought all the way through. But, I think our society would be better served if we treated drugs more like a health issue than a criminal one.
 
KevinKohler said:
No, the point I'm making is, the cost of living has doubled, but MW hasn't kept pace. Not only that, but due to the ACA, most kids only get 15-20 hours per week. So, that's 140 bucks per week, tops. Subtract 20 for gas/transit. That seems like a lot of money for a kid, but not if that's going partly or in full towards the household. Some kids work to help put food on the table.

Back when I made 6 per hour, ground beef was just over a dollar per pound, as gas was about the same per gallon.
Click to expand...

From what point (year?) has the cost of living doubled? That (bolded above) assertion is often made yet rarely backed up by any data. Most like to use the 1968 MW value (the historical high when adjusted for infaltion) and somehow justify that as the "proper" MW basis.

5 facts about the minimum wage | Pew Research Center
 
KevinKohler said:
And even young dumb kids know that 10-15 hours per week at 7 bucks an hour ain't worth their time. That won't even keep up with the amount that tuition goes UP by each year, let alone paying all of it.
Click to expand...

Many know the black market will make them more money.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
From what point (year?) has the cost of living doubled? That (bolded above) assertion is often made yet rarely backed up by any data. Most like to use the 1968 MW value (the historical high when adjusted for infaltion) and somehow justify that as the "proper" MW basis.

5 facts about the minimum wage | Pew Research Center
Click to expand...
The 90s. Food has doubled, and in some cases, tripled in price. Gas, tripled. Rent, doubled. Car prices, almost doubled. A brand new base model civic in 93-94 would set you back 12-14k, depending on state. Base civic now is over 20k.
 
KevinKohler said:
No, the point I'm making is, the cost of living has doubled, but MW hasn't kept pace. Not only that, but due to the ACA, most kids only get 15-20 hours per week. So, that's 140 bucks per week, tops. Subtract 20 for gas/transit. That seems like a lot of money for a kid, but not if that's going partly or in full towards the household. Some kids work to help put food on the table.

Back when I made 6 per hour, ground beef was just over a dollar per pound, as gas was about the same per gallon.
Click to expand...

Can't blame the ACA. That trend started long before the ACA was ever even conceived.
 
radcen said:
Can't blame the ACA. That trend started long before the ACA was ever even conceived.
Click to expand...

Not in retail. We have plenty of part timers doing 30-35 hours per week. Then the ACA hit, and that got changed to 27.5, max.
 
holbritter said:
Maybe if they knew that's what would happen, they wouldn't do it.
Click to expand...

By that logic, no one would murder.

The punishment has to fit the crime, which is why we afford judges a lot of leeway with sentencing. Someone busted for stealing a loaf of bread and some chicken thighs from the grocery store should get a lot less punishment than someone busted robbing the till of a quickie mart, or stealing electronics, etc.
 
Give people less of a reason to commit crime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom