Serious topic: how would you reduce violent crime?

[MKSheppard]

I read an article in the Washington Post or the Washington Times
a few years ago that covered Exile. The thing that stuck with me
was how gang members were saying "It's not worth it to be carrying
a gun, I'd be an old man by the time I got out of prison."

[Sr.mal]

Just remember a well armed society is a polite society

[MKSheppard]

Just remember a well armed society is a polite society

Oh god, you've gone and done it.

*dons flameproof suit*

[Howedar]

the 1997 media efforts carrying the message "An illegal gun will get you five years in federal prison"

They forgot the "pound-me-in-the-ass" part

[Sr.mal]

Just remember a well armed society is a polite society

Oh god, you've gone and done it.

*dons flameproof suit*

Tis my mistake for not reading all of the first post.

[Darth Wong]

Just remember a well armed society is a polite society

Oh god, you've gone and done it.

*dons flameproof suit*

Tis my mistake for not reading all of the first post.

Indeed. Simple solutions for complex problems were specifically discouraged.

PS. Your axiomatic statement might be sorely tested if you were to spend time in Mogadishu. Life is too complex for simple solutions.

[Solauren]

How I'd control violent crime


First, we need to raise education standards and requirements

I'd pass a law requiring everyone to stay in High School until they graduated. You also can not get a job until you have graduated high school. This will only affect current high school students. If you have a job right now and have not completed high school, this does not apply to you.

Now then, to really motivate everyone to learn, I'm paying the students.

At the end of the school year, you get money according to your final average
00% - 50%: You failed
50% - 60% you get nothing, but you passed
61% - 70%: $1,500
71% - 80%: $4,000
80% - 90%: $8,000
91% - 95%: $16,000
96% - 100%: $20,000

Note: In the states, these brackets might be different, I'm going by Ontario's education system's grade requirements for passing (50%, 60% to not have to write exams)

This would probably turn entire schools into packs of scholars. You get straight 'A's and you get $12,000+
Also, people that say "I can't afford College" newsflash: Get good grades and you can.

And to keep everyone behaving, instead of suspension, you also lose money off your final 'pay' and get detention. The more you skip or misbehave, the more you lose.

This should prevent the formation of more criminals.

If you are over 18 and have yet to graduate high school (regardless of age) and are not employed, you are required to go back to high school until you graduate. This would require adult education facilities to keep them away from the teen-agers. They get the same 'payrate'

Since you don't get paid if you fail or don't do well, this should prevent 'career' high school students.

Now, as for law enforcement:
Stop lenient sentencing on criminals. Put in harasher sentences in terms of length, and make them stick. I.e this is the MINIMUM, and the judge gets no leyway on the sentence.
Don't change the civil laws or the minor laws. I'm talking crimes that usually lead to more violent crimes, and so forth. (that definition is up to lawyers and legal experts)

I'd also make the military part of law enforcement in high crime areas. No tanks doing high-speed chases, but I think knowing the marines are helping the cops out would keep people more in line.
High crime would be defined by stats. The military would also be available should the police or government request its use. Also, anywhere the police say that don't want help, that's fine. However, if it's one of the higher crime areas (i.e Maryland) then the police chief is obviously incompetent and wold be removed (administrative leave)

I'd also authorize the police to use force if a suspect is armed or claims to be armed. Deadly force if they open fire or attack people with weapons

"I've got a gun!" gets a barrage of non-lethal amo (we have that now. It was in the news a few months ago. Usually wooden or rubber bullets) Firing on the cops or a bystander/hostage/civilian back gets you a barrage of armor piercing bullets. Failing to co-opearte (i.e "FREEZE!") gets non-lethal amo

Sure, this might cause a lot of criminal/suspect deaths, but it also prevents repeat offenders. I also think after a few months, there would be a psychological impact. Next time you hear a cop yell Freeze and you don't would get you fired upon should either have people stopping, or else the gene pool getting thinned out.

[Knife]

The whole problem is increadably complex and solving it would be a miracle, if you'll escuse the phrase.

Any way some things I would suggest;

Revamping education, though throwing money at it would not do IMO. Slashing the Department of Education and instead funnel the funds to the states for education based on complince with the departments new task of creating and enforceing education standards in public schools both in teachers and students.

If little Sussy and little Jeff can't point to Canada on a map by graduation, then the school losses federal funding. Things like that. This would greatly increase the education level of the people and help reduce crime.

I would stop the stupid banning of dope and tax the shit out of it as a sin tax. Money would go into education and social services such as drug rehab. I don't think I would legalize harder drugs, but if the druggies can smoke dope, then there should be a period of time where they are happy.

They'd still go to jail for driving while doped up and such but money and resources going into the war on drugs would be redistributed into other areas, mostly rehab.

I would implament project exile and other harsh mandatory sentences for gun related crimes. If you commit a crime with a weapon, you're fucked.

I would militarize the boarder effectively shutting down imergration for the time being. NO more illegal, nor legals until the situation calms down and then revamp the system for a worker programe. This will shut down the drug trade and have the legal pot grown by American farmers. It will also ease the social services of boarder states.

In a nut shell, give the people what they want in dope, give harsher treatment to those that do violent crime and increase the education in all schools to alleviate the over all problem.

[Perinquus]

How I'd control violent crime


First, we need to raise education standards and requirements

I'd pass a law requiring everyone to stay in High School until they graduated. You also can not get a job until you have graduated high school. This will only affect current high school students. If you have a job right now and have not completed high school, this does not apply to you.

Now then, to really motivate everyone to learn, I'm paying the students.

At the end of the school year, you get money according to your final average
00% - 50%: You failed
50% - 60% you get nothing, but you passed
61% - 70%: $1,500
71% - 80%: $4,000
80% - 90%: $8,000
91% - 95%: $16,000
96% - 100%: $20,000

Note: In the states, these brackets might be different, I'm going by Ontario's education system's grade requirements for passing (50%, 60% to not have to write exams)

This would probably turn entire schools into packs of scholars. You get straight 'A's and you get $12,000+
Also, people that say "I can't afford College" newsflash: Get good grades and you can.

And to keep everyone behaving, instead of suspension, you also lose money off your final 'pay' and get detention. The more you skip or misbehave, the more you lose.

This should prevent the formation of more criminals.

Where the hell is all this money going to come from? My taxes are high enough already thank you very much.

If you are over 18 and have yet to graduate high school (regardless of age) and are not employed, you are required to go back to high school until you graduate. This would require adult education facilities to keep them away from the teen-agers. They get the same 'payrate'

So now government is going to compel adults to go back to school, effectively criminalizing lack of education. What was that I just heard tear? Sounded like the Constitution. Hello Big Brother.

I'd also make the military part of law enforcement in high crime areas. No tanks doing high-speed chases, but I think knowing the marines are helping the cops out would keep people more in line.
High crime would be defined by stats. The military would also be available should the police or government request its use. Also, anywhere the police say that don't want help, that's fine. However, if it's one of the higher crime areas (i.e Maryland) then the police chief is obviously incompetent and wold be removed (administrative leave)

The military has a big enough job training for warfighting, I would not be in favor of taking them away to act as policemen in the absence of a real emergency, and martial law being declared. Also, police work is a very different sort of job than being a soldier, and speaking as an ex-US army infantry sergeant, and a current sworn police officer, I tell you frankly that not every soldier or marine is fit for police work.

I'd also authorize the police to use force if a suspect is armed or claims to be armed. Deadly force if they open fire or attack people with weapons

Uh... we can do all that already.

"I've got a gun!" gets a barrage of non-lethal amo (we have that now. It was in the news a few months ago. Usually wooden or rubber bullets) Firing on the cops or a bystander/hostage/civilian back gets you a barrage of armor piercing bullets. Failing to co-opearte (i.e "FREEZE!") gets non-lethal amo

Rubber bullets are used in very special circumstances, like riot situations, against crowds, and have to be used in a certain way or they can still kill you. They're not suitable on individual suspects in many situations. And what happens if you have some super duper non-lethal ammo loaded into your weapon and the suspect pulls a gun instead of just running? You gonna ask him nicely to stop and wait while you change out magazines and reload with lethal ammo?

Of course, you can always carry an extra weapon loaded with these nonlethal rounds (which won't be useful in most situations remember), but just how much shit do want to load your cops down with. I've already got over forty pounds of gear on my belt and uniform when I go on duty every day. You want to add more stuff and still expect my 34 year-old ass to chase down 18 year-olds?

[Bob McDob]

There aren't any easy answers. Here are some of the better ideas:

* Reform the prison system. This is a given; most prisons and penitentaries are breeding grounds for criminals. You're far more likely to go in clean and come out crooked than the other way around. As far as I can tell, the prison system seems to have a schitzophrenic outlook - rehabilitate and punish. I don't know which would work better, but I do know trying to apply contradictory measures will accomplish neither, and hinder both.

I agree with Wong; convicts must essentially be judged on their own merits. But doing so also means treating each prisoner individually, based on their own needs and circumstances. Not being able to do so at least to some extent is worse than not doing anything at all, because it wastes money and frustrates everyone.

If you think this sounds like I'm describing how to improve schools, you're right. I believe prisons and schools have a lot in common, except many prisons are much more posh. I'd reduce that; this isn't college, this is high school. There might be one television per cell block. I would definetly include a library and encourage reading. But while we're trying to punish, we're also not trying to deprive; punishment that drives the convict insane is no punishment at all. I'd encourage finding some sort of way to create a healthy society, tough but fair - and since we have much more control over prisons than, say, our cities, it could be done. It might seem bizarre to try to create an "ideal society" in a prison, but I'd argue that it's convicts that are in need of some society the most.

I'd also create a seperate prison system, a real rehabilitation center with lesser penalties for those that turn themselves in. Accomodations here would be more comfortable than in the mainstream prison system, although not the Waldorf Astoria. The idea is to encourage criminals to give themselves up, and while they wouldn't necessarily be in any longer, they'd be more comfortable while there.

* I'd like to say "improve the education system", but that seems like a cop-out to me, because there are so very many things wrong with the education system. What does education do? It makes it easier to get jobs. Except sometimes it doesn't! It also keeps you occupied ... if you give a shit about it! And of course there are people with college degrees out on the streets and intelligent people commiting crimes, bleh bleh bleh. (I shouldn't have to emphasise keeping white-collar criminals away from brutal murderers). To me, the school system should do one main thing: instill hope. People who have something to look forward to are less likely to commit violent crimes. Obviously, abstract ideals like hope cannot be force-fed (which would probably do the opposite) ... it should, however, emphasise life plans and goals much more than it does now. Which leads me to my next thing ...

* Reduce unemployment. The problem is, you usually can't do that without creating inflation ... but on the other hand, you can't have scores of unemployed people wrecking havok. Welfare works, sometimes, but it's not always enough to get people on their feet, and the more nihilistic are more apt to just blow it on drugs and cheap liquor.

That said, I'd like to try a more socialistic approach: communal employment. The unemployed and disfranchised would join small "communities", of people, basically pooling their resources and working as a group, living in the same house, etc. They would work together to get food and find jobs, essentially becoming a surrogate family. And this is where my ideal falls apart. I do believe that something along these lines, could work for some people.

* Public Housing. Most of the "projects" more or less suck ... but I'd say it has more to do with their monolithic, oppressive outlook. A wooden shack made out of timber may not be as comfortable as a giant grey apartment, but it is your shack, and you'll improve it if given half a chance. Often, though, out-of-touch municipal governments will tear down the ugly buildings and relocate the tenants to impersonal public housing, effectively turning them into refugees and destroying what little community the inhabitants managed to create. This is what Europeans did to Africa on a much larger scale. And with the loss of community comes the loss of hope. If the government simply helped the slum-dwellers to improve their meager shacks, providing decent water and infrastructure, maybe, just maybe, they'd be able to use the community to their advantage, instead of destroying it.

[RedImperator]

<snip>

Yet another solution that's far worse than the problem. Are you going to backpedal and say this was a joke, too?

[Solauren]

I will admit my knowledge of police procedure in the US is limited.

My recomendations were based on local (Ontario) law enforcement rules/procedures (last time I checked into them, a police officer had to write a report if he even drew his gun, let alone fired a warning shot).

I do like the fact that a former military officer (i apologize if I have your rank wrong) and current police officer pointed out the problems with using the military. If there training is that different, I agree on that grounds, bad idea.
Off course, expanding military training to include basic police training, and having them go with a regular police officer on patrol could offset that.
I'm no expert, so I'll differ on that. It's feasible, but would take alot of effort.

However, I do think paying students for good grades is a way to keep them in school. Problem is finding the money to fund this.

The numbers I tossed out for pay would motivate everyone. (Heck, if I was still in high school, saying I'd get a few grand would have had me studying 5 hours per night minimum, and probably skipping dinner to do so). Obviously, if it was going to cost to much, lower the pay rates. Dropping the second zero or dividing it in by 4.
[Off course, if it's not encouraging more kids to get better grades, scrap the program.]

Any effort to clean up violent crime is going to be expensive.

I.e Toss offenders in jail longer; you'll need to keep them in jail longer, which costs money. Toss people in jail for lesser crimes; you'll need more jails. Using execution might be cheaper (how much does a bullet cost vs keeping them in jail) but not a good solution or punishment for most offenses (Rapits and Murderers yes, a drunk man beating someone up, no)

But ask yourself something.
Which would be more benifical
The War in Iraq, which i believe President Bush just asked for ANOTHER 87 BILLION to spend overseas
Or 87 billion put towards paying kids to stay in school and get amazing grades so they can make something of themselves post high-school?

If the money could be found, in my view, paying people to get good grades so they can later get good jobs and make something for there life is the best way to start solving violent crime.

As for making people go back to high school to finish it before working.
Hell, most places (again, in Ontario) will not hire you unless you have graduated high school. So what's the difference?

[Perinquus]

But ask yourself something.
Which would be more benifical
The War in Iraq, which i believe President Bush just asked for ANOTHER 87 BILLION to spend overseas
Or 87 billion put towards paying kids to stay in school and get amazing grades so they can make something of themselves post high-school?

The implication being that we would be smarter to pull out of Iraq and use the money to finance something else like this?

Leaving aside everything else, now that we are in Iraq, it would be nothing short of disaster to pull out at this point. We made it our goal to replace the government of Saddam Hussein with one both les oppressive, and friendlier to the United States. That goal has not yet been accomplished, and we have Al Quaeda, and the yet-living supporters of the old Saddam regime doing everything they can possibly do to undermine it. If we just left right now it never would be, and the likeliest outcome would be the rise of yet another Islamic fundamentalist, terrorist-sponsoring government. Like it or not, we are committed, and it's going to be both an expensive, and long-term effort.

But if we walked away leaving the job half done, it would be worse than if we'd never started at all.

[Solauren]

The implication being that we would be smarter to pull out of Iraq and use the money to finance something else like this?

Actually, the implication is that the money will be there post-Iraq clean up. Poor word choice on my part.

Anyway.

I decided to figure out how much my idea would cost if everyone involved where to get max payment.

So, I found out how many people are in the United States approximately. Most websites and online information sources place it at about 282 million.

For my math, I'm rounding up to 285 million.
I couldn't find population by age information on the United States. (I lacked the ability to view PDF's at work today because of network problems, and I don't feel like looking the up now)
However, I could find it for Canada. I'll use Canadian percentages in place of the American one's, and round up to the nearest '10'

According to Stats Canada, the percentage of the population age 15 - 19 is 6.7% (rounded to 10%)
Unemployment rate is about 8% according to the latest news report on Yahoo.com. I'll round up to 10%

So, I want to send 20% of Americans to school, and in this case, they all earn 20,000 a year.

So, that's 57,000,000 people x $20,000
1,140,000,000,000
1.2 Trillion dollars.

Hmmm, perhaps I was being a bit, GENEROUS (okay, down right insanely expensive). (That averages out to $4000 per man woman and child in the US.)

I admit it right here and now. BAD idea with those numbers. It would only be a good idea if the United States can generate that kind of income without raising taxes.

So what about, post war in Iraq clean up, we take the money spent on it, and taxes that were going towards it, and put it into education.

That would let you pay everyone (including back to school adults) $2000 a year.

Hmmmm... that's still not a lot of motivation for a teenager, when they can get more money for stealing a few cars and selling them to a chop-shop.

Okay, how about paying Grade 11 and 12 (Half of 10%, so 5%) students that rate? (and NOT making adults go back to high school. Instead make high school a mandatory part of jail time for 1st time offenders of a serious nature) and pay them 10,000 instead

That would cost..... 285 million * 5% * 10,000 =
$142,500,000,000 ($142 billion dollars)

That's actually not to bad in terms of cost. Roughly twice the war on terror.

Off course, this might only prevent violent crime from increasing.
It would have to be study over a period first. Like 12 years in a high crime area to see if the violent crime rate amongst those under this system dropped.

As for preventing it now and fighting back, I can only think of a few methods that might work

Feasible: Stiffer minimum sentences, with no leeway for the judge in sentencing below the minimum.
This might require some re-working of proceedures.
Feasible: Repeat Violent offenders: Double sentence length, no parole
Feasible: Numerous minor offenses totalling more then 3 years in jail and then a serious offense: Same as repeat violent offenders.
Harass, but it gets them off the street to prevent repeat offenses for a while. Hopefully by the time they get out they'll be too old, or have learned an honest trade/job skill.
Re-Education while in prison would be mandatory. Enforcing it would be up to the courts and legal system to decide.

Feasible: Hire more cops! And I mean LOTS more.
Using the war on terror money I mentioned (remember, whenever I mention it, I mean POST Iraq clean up)
At $40,000 a year (if cops make more or less, adjust the math yourself), with 88 billion, you could hire 2,200,000 million cops. That's roughly 1% of the United States's TOTAL population. If you put 200 billion into more copes, you could hire 5,000,000. (2.5% of the population)

That should cut into violent crime. Would you try to steal a car knowing every block or two there was a cop with a high powered weapon with permission to kill you if you try something stupid?
(note: Give all cops body armor)

Feasible, but I'm not sure if it would be effective:
Parental accountablity for some offenses of younger kids (i.e stealing, other things). Make parents take responsiblity for there kids actions.
It couldn't hurt the situation very seriously.

Infeasible but would be effective
These are here for 'if the government starts considering this, it's time to being carpet bombing' reference

Brainwashing via TV, Radio and Movies.
i.e Watch a new movie, and there are subliminal messages to "obey all laws, do not steal or kill, do not use guns or knives" etc
I know this is illega, but if they ever consider it

Infeasible but would be effective
Drug everyone with drugs to make them ...passive... and... mellow man.
Ya know... so they just can't.... get the interest.... dude.
[/End Fake Hippie Channelling]

Plus the usual recommendations of legalizing drugs to make it safer to get them so people don't freak at busts.

Oh, one last recommendations
Tracking devices/GPS devices being made avialable to put installed in all cars that are attached to alarms etc you have to punch a code into to turn off when the car is started, and buried somewhere you can't disable quickly or easily.
This would cut down on car theft at least.
"Hey, someone is stealing my car!"
Call 911, and tell them you have a GPS device in the car. They start scanning for it.. bingo, stolen car.

[Stark]

Leaving aside the specifics of American legal initiatives (which I have pretty much zero knowledge of) I'd like to suggest that paying people not to commit crime (a deeply cynical view of welfare, that I don't share) and threatening to kill or imprision criminals (ie the justice system) is avoiding the *causes* of crime. Certainly, the whole 'gangsta' gig is motivated by drugs. But if that were all, there would be no more black drugdealers than white drug dealers in the same low-economic communities. The fact is these negative behaviours are the result of entire structures of emotional, social, and learning support. Take your average habitual weed smoker - regardless of everything else, because all his friends either smoke up or think its *cool* to smoke up, and he's got alot of friends who deal, and he deals a little to get by, and he feels good about his position because of his week smoking, he's not going to stop. Everyone *knows* about the penalties for committing a crime, but that doesn't stop them. I've read criminology textbooks in an amatuerish way, and it seemed to me that crime is far more a social or economic problem than can be solved by waving a big enough stick.
Crime decreases when you raise penalties... but it also decreases when you make a dark area well-lit. It decreases when you increase the local sense of community. It decreases when you remove the social, emotional or economical motiviations to do it.
To answer Mikes original question - give everyone a reason to feel good about themselves.

[Bob McDob]

I don't mean to sound egotistical, but - what about my ideas?