America Hits Unfortunate Imprisonment Landmark

[PLC1]

I thought maybe drugs were behind most of the growth of prison populations, but that may not be.

According to this:

Three quarters of prison inmates are behind bars for violent crimes or had a violent crime in their past, he said.

We surely don't want to let violent offenders loose on the rest of society, do we?

The drug dealers and drug users who make up most of the rest of the inmate population generally had three or four chances before a judge finally gave up and sentenced them to prison, Suthers said.

Only one quarter, and those repeat offenders. I was surprised at that, are you?

But the single most identifying characteristic is that seven out of 10 of these inmates never at any point in their lives lived with their natural father," he said. "We're paying a high price for the level of dysfunctional families we've had for decades."

There is the key. Like most of society's ills, the burgeoning growth of prisons seems to be rooted in the decline of the family unit.

How sad.

Of course, that's only Colorado, but that state seems to be a microcosm of the rest of the country.

 

[Andy]

Andy, are you really that dense? legalization doesn't ever make a situation perfect, but it can make it better.

I guess my point was, it didn't make the situation better with alcohol. I would suggest it made the situation far worse. More broken homes, more children with alcoholic parents, more divorces, more families living under the economic burden of funding drinking habits, more wrecks and auto fatalities, and high insurance premiums due to paying for alcohol related accidents, lost jobs, domestic abuse and violence alcohol related and on and on and on...

Most people say it didn't work because of organized crime. Yet organized crime still exists, so how exactly did legalizing it 'work'? It's a bit difficult for me to accept the idea that legalizing will make things better when I meet members of AA, and see the shattered lives, ruined families, destroyed careers, all because of alcohol.

So I don't think I want to see the devastation of legalizing drugs. I've already met too many students in college spending every spare dollar on drugs. Those kids are in the gutter now. Perhaps the people you know are wonderful druggies that are still doing something with their lives. That hasn't been my experience.

 

[Andy]

I thought maybe drugs were behind most of the growth of prison populations, but that may not be.

According to this:

We surely don't want to let violent offenders loose on the rest of society, do we?

Only one quarter, and those repeat offenders. I was surprised at that, are you?

There is the key. Like most of society's ills, the burgeoning growth of prisons seems to be rooted in the decline of the family unit.

Good information. Sadly I am not surprised at all. Somehow I doubt family values are going to make a come back. The idea of waiting for marriage to have sex is laughed at. Further the idea of working through your problems with your mate, is a joke, ditch him/her and find another is the standard. And above all else, keeping your responsibility as a parent, despite the lip-service paid to children, is ignored.

One man at work told me about how he was going through is 3rd divorce when he said "well of course my biggest concern is the kids", to which I responded, it was not, because if it was, you wouldn't be getting a divorce. He didn't respond to that, only saying "well this is better for me. You just don't know."

 

[9sublime]

I guess my point was, it didn't make the situation better with alcohol. I would suggest it made the situation far worse. More broken homes, more children with alcoholic parents, more divorces, more families living under the economic burden of funding drinking habits, more wrecks and auto fatalities, and high insurance premiums due to paying for alcohol related accidents, lost jobs, domestic abuse and violence alcohol related and on and on and on...

Once again, you fail to understand my point. Legalisation makes the drinking safer - not legalising it doesn't stop the drinking, so all these problems would still exist and the alcohol would be extremeley dangerous to drink. Drinking habits, alcoholics and broken homes would still come about, just like it does from other illegal drugs.

Most people say it didn't work because of organized crime. Yet organized crime still exists, so how exactly did legalizing it 'work'? It's a bit difficult for me to accept the idea that legalizing will make things better when I meet members of AA, and see the shattered lives, ruined families, destroyed careers, all because of alcohol.

So alcohol is the only cause of organised crime and its an absoloute shock that it still exists? A MASSIVE amount of organised crime was killed off when alcohol was made legal again, so consider this:

If legalising alcohol stopped a lot of gangs, what would legalising other drugs do for organised crime?

So I don't think I want to see the devastation of legalizing drugs. I've already met too many students in college spending every spare dollar on drugs. Those kids are in the gutter now. Perhaps the people you know are wonderful druggies that are still doing something with their lives. That hasn't been my experience.

You still havn't explained how criminalising it stops the devesation - in fact you have only done the opposite. These kids are ruining their lives with these illegal drugs so criminalisation has done nothing to stop it!!! All it has done is create gangs and impure drugs on the streets.

 

[vyo476]

Good information. Sadly I am not surprised at all. Somehow I doubt family values are going to make a come back. The idea of waiting for marriage to have sex is laughed at.

Better sex education is a necessity no matter which side of the problem you look at. Abstinence-only education is a joke, and that's what I got in high school.

Further the idea of working through your problems with your mate, is a joke, ditch him/her and find another is the standard. And above all else, keeping your responsibility as a parent, despite the lip-service paid to children, is ignored.

True. I still believe in a sanctity for divorce, but it has gotten out of hand. The "way out" for people who get themselves into bad situations has become the cause of people getting into bad situations and not worrying about it.

One man at work told me about how he was going through is 3rd divorce when he said "well of course my biggest concern is the kids", to which I responded, it was not, because if it was, you wouldn't be getting a divorce. He didn't respond to that, only saying "well this is better for me. You just don't know."

It isn't so good for kids to live in a situation where Mom and Dad are constantly at each other's throats, either - tends to give a rather jaded look at relationships in general.

 

[PLC1]

Better sex education is a necessity no matter which side of the problem you look at. Abstinence-only education is a joke, and that's what I got in high school.



True. I still believe in a sanctity for divorce, but it has gotten out of hand. The "way out" for people who get themselves into bad situations has become the cause of people getting into bad situations and not worrying about it.



It isn't so good for kids to live in a situation where Mom and Dad are constantly at each other's throats, either - tends to give a rather jaded look at relationships in general.

If Mom and Dad weren't so self involved, then they would be less likely to be at each other's throats. Threre are exceptions, of course, but not as many as our divorce rate would suggest.

If every child born had two parents who cared more for each other than for themselves, and more for the child than anything else in their lives, then nearly all of our societal ills would disappear within a generation.

 

[Andy]

Once again, you fail to understand my point. Legalisation makes the drinking safer - not legalising it doesn't stop the drinking, so all these problems would still exist and the alcohol would be extremeley dangerous to drink. Drinking habits, alcoholics and broken homes would still come about, just like it does from other illegal drugs.

So alcohol is the only cause of organised crime and its an absoloute shock that it still exists? A MASSIVE amount of organised crime was killed off when alcohol was made legal again, so consider this:

If legalising alcohol stopped a lot of gangs, what would legalising other drugs do for organised crime?

You still havn't explained how criminalising it stops the devesation - in fact you have only done the opposite. These kids are ruining their lives with these illegal drugs so criminalisation has done nothing to stop it!!! All it has done is create gangs and impure drugs on the streets.

No understand what you are saying completely. I respectfully disagree.

As I said, when alcohol was illegal, all these things were greatly reduced. When it became legal again, all these things greatly increased.

No, making alcohol illegal does not eliminate domestic abuse. But it did reduce it by far. Do some research on domestic abuse that is alcohol related, you'll be shocked. Do some research on marriages that fail that are alcohol related, I know two couples right off the top of my head that I personally know divorced over one being a lazy drunk. In fact, go to the Darwin awards and check out the number of award winners that were drunk at the time.

The national institute for health said this "Alcohol use also contributes to approximately 500,000 injuries, 600,000 cases of assault and over 70,000 incidents of sexual abuse or date rape annually among college students aged 18 to 24".

This is what you call making drinking safer? Call me crazy, but let's make drinking less safe, and make living safer for students in college. Let's have a few hundred more deaths from drinking unsafe illegal beer, and have 70 thousand less rapes and abuses. 600 thousand less cases of assault.

Safe Drinking is nearly a joke, a joke that ended for Brad at 21 years of age. Again, no, making alcohol illegal will not eliminate all these problems completely. But I fully believe, without question, it will reduce these problems by far.

I believe the same for drugs. Legalizing them will cause millions more divorces, millions more in assaults and abuse and broken homes.

 

[Andy]

Better sex education is a necessity no matter which side of the problem you look at. Abstinence-only education is a joke, and that's what I got in high school.



True. I still believe in a sanctity for divorce, but it has gotten out of hand. The "way out" for people who get themselves into bad situations has become the cause of people getting into bad situations and not worrying about it.



It isn't so good for kids to live in a situation where Mom and Dad are constantly at each other's throats, either - tends to give a rather jaded look at relationships in general.

Abstinence works. You'll never believe me though. But research shows it works when people try it. In fact the chance of you having infidelity problems in your marriage, if you are not a virgin at the time of marriage, goes up 50X higher than those who are. So, something for you to consider.

Sanctity of divorce? I would submit that's impossible. Are you a man of your word? So when you marry and say "till death do us part"... were you lying? If you were, or if you just don't hold true to your word, there is nothing 'sacred' about it. You either keep your word, or you don't. You either follow through on your promise, or you don't. For better or for worse, in sickness and in health, means exactly what it means. Of course, no one follows through with what they say anymore, so it's expected that the word of most men is worthless. But there is nothing 'sacred' about being an untrustworthy liar.

I read an autobiography of a man named Alex Spanos. In the book he details the problems his mother and father had. But despite the fact they really didn't like each other, both of them made a choice. They choose to make family more important than their little issues. The result of that was Alex had a wonderful marriage, and instead of ending up in prison, is one of the largest real-estate developers in the US. In the end, being at each others throats is a choice. You either learn to live with that other person, or you selfishly choose to make what you want more important than the good of the family.

 

[vyo476]

Abstinence works. You'll never believe me though. But research shows it works when people try it. In fact the chance of you having infidelity problems in your marriage, if you are not a virgin at the time of marriage, goes up 50X higher than those who are. So, something for you to consider.

Abstinence does work and I'm not saying for a second that it should be downplayed; however, abstinence-only education does not work simply because it fails to really discourage kids from engaging in sexual activities.

Sanctity of divorce? I would submit that's impossible. Are you a man of your word? So when you marry and say "till death do us part"... were you lying? If you were, or if you just don't hold true to your word, there is nothing 'sacred' about it. You either keep your word, or you don't. You either follow through on your promise, or you don't. For better or for worse, in sickness and in health, means exactly what it means. Of course, no one follows through with what they say anymore, so it's expected that the word of most men is worthless. But there is nothing 'sacred' about being an untrustworthy liar.

The "sanctity" bit lies in allowing decent people to get out of marriages that were, for one reason or another, a big mistake. People change, sometimes drastically, and if that change is so colossal that the marriage is no longer working, the "you made a promise" argument holds little water.

A friend of mine's older sister got married about eight years ago. They lived together for about four years, and they were pretty happy. Then he lost his job right around the time she had their first child, which he claimed was "her fault" (he'd said he wasn't ready and he thinks she purposefully stopped taking birth control in order to get pregnant). He started hitting her. Eventually he got caught stealing cars and is currently in prison, having failed parole at least once already.

She may have made an oath to stand by him in sickness and in health, but which one of them broke that oath? Situations like this one are where divorce has sanctity.

I read an autobiography of a man named Alex Spanos. In the book he details the problems his mother and father had. But despite the fact they really didn't like each other, both of them made a choice. They choose to make family more important than their little issues. The result of that was Alex had a wonderful marriage, and instead of ending up in prison, is one of the largest real-estate developers in the US. In the end, being at each others throats is a choice. You either learn to live with that other person, or you selfishly choose to make what you want more important than the good of the family.

If you were in my friend's sister's position, what would you do? Grit your teeth and wait for your abusive spouse to get out of prison? He's due out when their kid will be in the fifth or sixth grade, I can't remember which.

 

[9sublime]

No understand what you are saying completely. I respectfully disagree.

Haha ok fair enough

As I said, when alcohol was illegal, all these things were greatly reduced. When it became legal again, all these things greatly increased.

No, making alcohol illegal does not eliminate domestic abuse. But it did reduce it by far. Do some research on domestic abuse that is alcohol related, you'll be shocked. Do some research on marriages that fail that are alcohol related, I know two couples right off the top of my head that I personally know divorced over one being a lazy drunk.

Can I see some figures please.
Also, I don't mean to seem rude or inconsiderate, but your personal experiences do not account to facts and figures.

In fact, go to the Darwin awards and check out the number of award winners that were drunk at the time.

Darwin awards is not a reliable source for deciding whether or not alcohol prohibition was a good idea.

The national institute for health said this "Alcohol use also contributes to approximately 500,000 injuries, 600,000 cases of assault and over 70,000 incidents of sexual abuse or date rape annually among college students aged 18 to 24".

This is what you call making drinking safer? Call me crazy, but let's make drinking less safe, and make living safer for students in college. Let's have a few hundred more deaths from drinking unsafe illegal beer, and have 70 thousand less rapes and abuses. 600 thousand less cases of assault.

It's everyones choice to drink. You don't have to drink because its legal, and drink doesn't MAKE you do stupid stuff. Making alcohol illegal would not cut out all of this either, because people would turn to other substances or just continue to drink alcohol. And chugging on moonshine is not safe.

Safe Drinking is nearly a joke, a joke that ended for Brad at 21 years of age. Again, no, making alcohol illegal will not eliminate all these problems completely. But I fully believe, without question, it will reduce these problems by far.

An appeal to my emotion again. One story is not a good reason to make such a sweeping change.

I believe the same for drugs. Legalizing them will cause millions more divorces, millions more in assaults and abuse and broken homes.

Just because they are legal doesn't mean everyone will take them, but it will stop the crime and danger that comes from them being illegal.

 

[Andy]

Abstinence does work and I'm not saying for a second that it should be downplayed; however, abstinence-only education does not work simply because it fails to really discourage kids from engaging in sexual activities.

A: I suggest upbringing plays more a part in that.
B: I suggest that supporting a system that works and having people reject it, is better than supporting a system that doesn't work and having people accept it. Always give out the right information. Whether people choose to follow good advice is on them, and the consequence of their actions are on them.

It has to do with personal responsibility. The idea that where you are, and the situation you are in, is largely due to the choices you have made.

The "sanctity" bit lies in allowing decent people to get out of marriages that were, for one reason or another, a big mistake. People change, sometimes drastically, and if that change is so colossal that the marriage is no longer working, the "you made a promise" argument holds little water.

A friend of mine's older sister got married about eight years ago. They lived together for about four years, and they were pretty happy. Then he lost his job right around the time she had their first child, which he claimed was "her fault" (he'd said he wasn't ready and he thinks she purposefully stopped taking birth control in order to get pregnant). He started hitting her. Eventually he got caught stealing cars and is currently in prison, having failed parole at least once already.

She may have made an oath to stand by him in sickness and in health, but which one of them broke that oath? Situations like this one are where divorce has sanctity.

If you were in my friend's sister's position, what would you do? Grit your teeth and wait for your abusive spouse to get out of prison? He's due out when their kid will be in the fifth or sixth grade, I can't remember which.

No, divorce never has sanctity. There is nothing holy about breaking up something that is supposed to last forever. You are never going to convince me of this. Being a lair is never sanctified. Never.

However, I do understand that this happens. Yes I understand why she got a divorce from this monster. Yes I would get away from him for her own protection. But that does not make it sanctified. There is nothing sanctified about divorce. Never.

But more to the point, most people do not divorce over an abusive spouse. Most of the time they divorce over "unreconcilable differences". But marriage is about that. Every male and female have huge unreconcilable differences. It's inherent. Marriage is about putting down your selfishness and doing things the way the other wants, for their benefit, not yours.

I was shocked a few years back to find a report that said happily married couples fight just as much as unhappy couples. The only difference between those that last a lifetime, and those that end in divorce, is forgiveness and working through it.

I hate taxes. There is nothing good about taxes, but I understand it must happen. I hate divorce. There is nothing good about divorce. However, I understand in specific situations, it must happen. That makes it neither good, nor holy.

Please inform your sister that when a man says that she must take birth control because he's not ready for kids, he's really saying he does not love her. Love is accepting the responsibility of the women and the consequences of loving the women. She should have been told that. Sadly parents fail to show their children what love is and is not. As such, she married a man that never loved her. Perhaps is she had known that him telling her to take birth control so he doesn't have to deal with any ramifications of sleeping with her, meant that he never loved her, she would not have married a monster.

 

[Andy]

Can I see some figures please.
Also, I don't mean to seem rude or inconsiderate, but your personal experiences do not account to facts and figures.

Darwin awards is not a reliable source for deciding whether or not alcohol prohibition was a good idea.

I understand. No Darwin is not a definitive source, but I do think it is at least an example of what I mean. I do not see sober people thinking a good way to get intoxicated is to mix milk and gasoline, and then throwing up in the fire place, burning down their house killing themselves and their wife. (true story)

Alcohol consumption declined dramatically during Prohibition--by 30 to 50 percent. Deaths from cirrhosis of the liver for men fell from 29.5 per 100,000 in 1911 to 10.7 per 100,000 in 1929.

The death rate from alcoholism was cut by 80 percent by 1921 from pre-war levels, while alcohol-related crime dropped markedly.

Andrew Furuseth a member of congress reported this:

When the prohibition amendment was passed and the Volstead Act was enacted, about three months after that I came through Portland, Oreg. Now there is a certain district in Portland Oreg. where there is the so-called employment district--- it is usually amongst the working people, called the "slave market"--- and I was the most astonished man you ever saw. Before that I had seen drunkenness there, dilapidated men, helpless, and in any condition that you do not want to see human beings. This time, three months after this act was passed there was an entire change. The men walked around from one place to another looking for employment, seamen and others. And they were sober. And they looked at the conditions, and they said, "No, we will wait a little." There was more independence amongst them than I had ever seen before. That very class which is the worst and lowest class that we know of amongst the seamen and workingmen. And I became an ardent advocate of the Volstead Act.

The real reason prohibition failed was because it was not enforced. Coruption in enforcemeant, and politicians that made laws hindering enforcement, cause prohibition to fail.

It's everyones choice to drink. You don't have to drink because its legal, and drink doesn't MAKE you do stupid stuff. Making alcohol illegal would not cut out all of this either, because people would turn to other substances or just continue to drink alcohol. And chugging on moonshine is not safe.

An appeal to my emotion again. One story is not a good reason to make such a sweeping change.

Just because they are legal doesn't mean everyone will take them, but it will stop the crime and danger that comes from them being illegal.

You miss my point. This thread is not about me supporting prohibition of alcohol. I am not trying to re-enact the 18th amendment.

You have to prove to me the benefits of legalizing drugs, and you pointed to prohibition as an example. To me, prohibition worked. Now there were some huge issues, like organized crime, but organized crime still exists and always will. Well more people died from bad beer. Well, how many millions die in alcohol related incidences?

Now I fully support personal responsibility. That has to do with the idea that whether you are drunk or not, you have to face the consequences of your actions. If you beat your wife, I don't care if you had a beer or not. You should get beaten and then tossed in jail.

But clearly the problems caused by alcohol are massive. And the idea of legalizing another potential cause of social devastation is going to be a hard sell for me. All the people I've met on drugs are absolutely worthless. People that could be great productive members of our nation, siting, doing nothing, staring into space, stoned out of their minds, wasting away in pointless stupor. You do not think this will be greatly increased nationwide by legalizing?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Good information. Sadly I am not surprised at all. Somehow I doubt family values are going to make a come back. The idea of waiting for marriage to have sex is laughed at. Further the idea of working through your problems with your mate, is a joke, ditch him/her and find another is the standard. And above all else, keeping your responsibility as a parent, despite the lip-service paid to children, is ignored.

One man at work told me about how he was going through is 3rd divorce when he said "well of course my biggest concern is the kids", to which I responded, it was not, because if it was, you wouldn't be getting a divorce. He didn't respond to that, only saying "well this is better for me. You just don't know."

Bluntly, if he and his wife hate each other, it's better for his children that they split. Staying together "for the children" is horrid. NOTHING is worse for a child than living in a cold-war zone.

As for drugs...a physician was a great man, but got addicted to cocaine, and later morphine. He tried everything (including several weeks of isolation with no access to the drug), but was never able to kick it, taking about 180mg of morphine daily. He was a drug addict for essentially his entire adult life.

The physician was William Stewart Halsted, a co-founder of Johns Hopkins and the father of modern surgery. Among other things, he pioneered the concept of a sterile operating room, the use of rubber gloves, and the concept of operating with minimal tissue damage.

Much of the hysteria is just that: hysteria.

 

[Andy]

Bluntly, if he and his wife hate each other, it's better for his children that they split. Staying together "for the children" is horrid. NOTHING is worse for a child than living in a cold-war zone.

(excluding an abusive dangerous spouse) Nothing is more devastating to children than divorce. You can go through research after research and study after study, and the answer is always the same, divorce is absolutely devastating.

The point about the book by Alex Spanos, was that his parents made a choice to stay together, and further, made a choice to make home a priority and make it peaceable. Moreover, Alex in the book remarked how much he loved his parents for doing that for him and his brothers. I've heard similar stories myself, and how the children appreciated their parents for sticking it out for their sake.

You are thinking of parents that are yelling and screaming at each other, but that is a choice itself. You can choose to live with someone you don't like, and do so in a peaceful way. If the home is a cold-war zone, it is because one or both the parents are selfish and putting their wants and needs above that of the family. A hostile home is a choice, just like a peaceful loving home is a choice.

I suggest it is similar to work. In every work place, there's always that one or two people that drive you crazy. I have never met someone in the work place that didn't have at least one person that they just couldn't stand, yet they MUST work with them. How do they keep their jobs? How is there not hostility and strife? They make a choice. They choose to make their job a higher priority than their pride.

So why can't more people choose to make the home a higher priority than selfishness and pride? They can. The people of the past generation did. The people of our generation choose not to. That my friend, is all there is to it.

 

[9sublime]

Weed being illegal doesn't work, so a new approach is needed as it being illegal only adds the element of crime into it. The government can take out the crime, regulate the supply and the quality of it, eliminating many of the risks that come from buying and smoking the stuff.

Personal responsibilty is the key - nobody makes you smoke the stuff do they?