Cessna's response to negative feedback on Skycatcher being builtin China

Mxsmanic wrote:
Morgans writes:

Prisoners in the US are there
for good reason, and most all are multiple offenders, or else major felony
offenders.

Eighty percent of U.S. prisoners are in prison on drug charges.

That 80% number while technically either true or close to true also
include a metric-butt load of people that the drug offense was secondary
to another offense non-drug related offense. Which pretty much proves
the point that that drugs cause crime in general.

Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Morgans writes:

Prisoners in the US are there for good reason, and most all are
multiple offenders, or else major felony offenders.

Eighty percent of U.S. prisoners are in prison on drug charges.

That 80% number while technically either true or close to true also
include a metric-butt load of people that the drug offense was secondary
to another offense non-drug related offense. Which pretty much proves
the point that that drugs cause crime in general.

Hardly. Keep repeating this mantra: correlation does not prove causation.

Rich Ahrens wrote:
Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Morgans writes:

Prisoners in the US are there for good reason, and most all are
multiple offenders, or else major felony offenders.

Eighty percent of U.S. prisoners are in prison on drug charges.

That 80% number while technically either true or close to true also
include a metric-butt load of people that the drug offense was
secondary to another offense non-drug related offense. Which pretty
much proves the point that that drugs cause crime in general.

Hardly. Keep repeating this mantra: correlation does not prove causation.

But it doesn't disprove it either.

Gig601XLBuilder wrote in
:

Rich Ahrens wrote:
Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Morgans writes:

Prisoners in the US are there for good reason, and most all are
multiple offenders, or else major felony offenders.

Eighty percent of U.S. prisoners are in prison on drug charges.

That 80% number while technically either true or close to true also
include a metric-butt load of people that the drug offense was
secondary to another offense non-drug related offense. Which pretty
much proves the point that that drugs cause crime in general.

Hardly. Keep repeating this mantra: correlation does not prove
causation.

But it doesn't disprove it either.


You can't disprove that there isn't a giant walnut shell full of aliens who
all look like Barney Fife circling the earth with an eye towards conquest
either.
They couldn't do a worse job than Bush, BTW.

Bertie

"Rich Ahrens" wrote in message
use.com...
Gig601XLBuilder wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
Morgans writes:

Prisoners in the US are there for good reason, and most all are multiple offenders,
or else major felony offenders.

Eighty percent of U.S. prisoners are in prison on drug charges.

That 80% number while technically either true or close to true also include a
metric-butt load of people that the drug offense was secondary to another offense
non-drug related offense. Which pretty much proves the point that that drugs cause
crime in general.

Hardly. Keep repeating this mantra: correlation does not prove causation.

A significant portion of the drug offenders who got prison time were the result of the
"tough on crime and drugs" movement of the 1980s and the ensuing mandatory sentencing
laws. Addicts whose only crime was possession (and maybe a count of petty larceny) got
the book thrown at them, as if that would help them or scare drug abusers into stopping.
We're wasting millions by incarcerating people who neither deserve such harsh sentences
nor will benefit from them. Meanwhile, many prisons are bulging beyond capacity which in
turn means that they don't have the resources to provide internal security against crime,
clamp down on criminal gangs, or provide meaningful rehabilitation. They've become
warehouses keeping their inmates in cesspool conditions, much like the "insane asylums" of
the past. This in turn opened the door for private enterprise prisons because the goal no
longer is justice and rehabilitation, but warehousing all those perps at the lowest unit
cost.

"John Mazor" wrote
Addicts whose only crime was possession (and maybe a count of petty
larceny) got the book thrown at them,

If it was my house they robbed to feed their habit you're darn tootin the
book should be thrown at them!


as if that would help them

While locked up they would not be able to rob my place. Eventually they'd
get the idea that stealing is a bad idea.

Too simplistic?


David

--
It doesn't matter what temperature a room is; it's *always* room
temperature.

"dVaridel" wrote in
u:

"John Mazor" wrote
Addicts whose only crime was possession (and maybe a count of petty
larceny) got the book thrown at them,

If it was my house they robbed to feed their habit you're darn tootin
the book should be thrown at them!


as if that would help them

While locked up they would not be able to rob my place. Eventually
they'd get the idea that stealing is a bad idea.

Too simplistic?


Well, the first is true, the second is pretty unlikely..


Bertie

While locked up they would not be able to rob my place. Eventually they'd
get the idea that stealing is a bad idea.

Too simplistic?

Makes sense to me -- but I'd take it further. How's this for criminal
justice?:

Can we all agree that anyone convicted of four (4) felony crimes isn't
getting the message? Or maybe three? Perhaps five? I don't really care
where the threshold is set -- but it needs to be set.

Sentences double after each felony. Thus, if you're dumb enough to commit
the same crime twice, your 5 year sentence becomes 10 years. Third time?
It's 20.

Do it again? Anyone convicted of four felonies is executed. Call it four
strikes and you're out.

Recidivism is a terrible problem in our society. The majority of criminals
in federal prisons aren't there for the first time. Studies have shown
that the majority of serious crimes are being committed by repeat offenders.

We can quibble about the details, but I think this simple set of rules would
make our streets a lot safer, and solve prison over-crowding at the same
time.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:gKQgj.26990$Ux2.711@attbi_s22:

While locked up they would not be able to rob my place. Eventually
they'd get the idea that stealing is a bad idea.

Too simplistic?

Makes sense to me -- but I'd take it further. How's this for criminal
justice?:

Can we all agree that anyone convicted of four (4) felony crimes isn't
getting the message? Or maybe three? Perhaps five? I don't really
care where the threshold is set -- but it needs to be set.


To extend this argument, how many times do you have to be told that your
off topic posting is hypocritical when you whine about others doing it?


3? 4? 5? 6? 7? 8?


I propose a UDP for anyone dumb enough not to get this.


Bertie