Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oswald Mosley)
    Well that's just plain false. There is a lot more street crime/violence/stabbings today than ever before. And the people committing these crimes aren't the ones who have strict parents who may occasionally give them a slap for bad behavior, they are the ones whose parents don't give a damn.
    Yes there is more crime, but there are also more people. Is there more crime per capita or just more crime in numbers? Would be interested to see the stats if you have them.

    Also, crime is recorded differently now. Peasant crime was not recorded in the same way as crimes against the aristocracy, and some crimes were not even considered as such (eg matrimonial rape).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im1190)
    Who has the right to sentence someone else to death, even if they have killed another? Doesn't that make them a killer also?
    so are all people who kill other human beings morally equal?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    The Norway example isn't poor... It's an exact example of them actually helping criminals instead of punishing them, and their crime rates going down!
    It's clear evidence... You can't just dismiss it.

    What empirical evidence are you talking about? Becuase you haven't shown me any... Your america example isn't really very valid when they have "harsher" sentences and they still have a much higher crime rate (and it hasn't improved much over time at ALL).

    I'll explain AGAIN... Harsher sentences will not deter these people. This is because, most people commiting crimes like murder, rape and other violent crimes do not THINK about it logically before doing so. It's mostly crimes to do with psychological issues, and emotional responses... No matter what their sentence would be, they would still have these issues.


    i have been trying to explain that justice is not about the individual, but the deterrent effect of the sentences.

    weak sentences facilitate crime and tough sentences reduce crime-- the empirical evidence for that is simply not up for discussion. its a fact.

    your norway example is about rehabilitation. rehabilitation is tremendously expensive, tremendously prone to failure and ultimately tremendously dangerous to the public because it is impossible to guarantee safety.


    the issue is what reduces crime in society. the only thing proven to reduce crime is tough sentences. as is proved in the US.

    violent crime in the western world has exploded since the 60s and 70s, 'coincidently' at the same time as the west begun its permissive attitudes to violent crime.


    i think, you are a fantasist who has a quasi religious belief of the benefits and effectiveness of rehabilitation........it doesn't work, its expensive, and more importantly its does not guarantee public safety. as is proven in britain today.



    the equation is simple: lessen the consequences of crime and crime increases and human beings suffer,


    those who are permissive toward violent crime are human rights abusers.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by humanrights)
    i have been trying to explain that justice is not about the individual, but the deterrent effect of the sentences.

    weak sentences facilitate crime and tough sentences reduce crime-- the empirical evidence for that is simply not up for discussion. its a fact.

    your norway example is about rehabilitation. rehabilitation is tremendously expensive, tremendously prone to failure and ultimately tremendously dangerous to the public because it is impossible to guarantee safety.


    the issue is what reduces crime in society. the only thing proven to reduce crime is tough sentences. as is proved in the US.

    violent crime in the western world has exploded since the 60s and 70s, 'coincidently' at the same time as the west begun its permissive attitudes to violent crime.


    i think, you are a fantasist who has a quasi religious belief of the benefits and effectiveness of rehabilitation........it doesn't work, its expensive, and more importantly its does not guarantee public safety. as is proven in britain today.



    the equation is simple: lessen the consequences of crime and crime increases and human beings suffer,


    those who are permissive to violent crime are human rights abusers.
    You have provided no evidence that tough sentences reduce crime, where as I've provided some that they don't at all (I gave stats on the US, for example).
    Therefore, you fail at this argument.

    Crime in Norway is nothing like it is here, they rehabillitate rather than punish, and their economy is a whole lot better than ours in general.

    I think, you are seriously stupid.
    I'm not a fantasist, and I'm not religious at all :/ Seeing as all you do is repeat things that I've already proven wrong, and then try to insult me, I won't be debating with you any more. You clearly don't know how to.
    Good night.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I just wouldn't feel comfortable sentecing someone to death as has been previuosly suggested. But then I am christian who actually cares about all life whilst many remain oblivious to the sacrifing of lives else where in the world becuse it maintains our economic situation. But it is quite obviuos that life in general on this planet is not a primary concern unless ofcourse its projected heavily in the media. Example, at first we were all concerned about the Earthquake Haiti until the media stopped showing it and now even though haiti is far from healed we do nothing becuse the story has lost its appeal. Lastly I think if we start determining whether people should live or die it starts us on a slippery slope especially with the problems of the future.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You have provided no evidence that tough sentences reduce crime, where as I've provided some that they don't at all (I gave stats on the US, for example).
    Therefore, you fail at this argument.

    Crime in Norway is nothing like it is here, they rehabillitate rather than punish, and their economy is a whole lot better than ours in general.

    I think, you are seriously stupid.
    I'm not a fantasist, and I'm not religious at all :/ Seeing as all you do is repeat things that I've already proven wrong, and then try to insult me, I won't be debating with you any more. You clearly don't know how to.
    Good night.


    you haven't proven anything wrong.

    americas crime rate has dropped from peaks in the 80s/90s because america embarked on a massive incarceration programme. not because of a permissive weak rehabilitation programme.

    prove that wrong.....


    the crime rate in the western world has exploded since the 60s.........prove that wrong.

    it has exploded at the same time as weak permissive sentences begun to infect western societies.--

    prove that wrong.

    britain crime rate has gone up ever since abolition of the death penalty.

    prove that wrong......

    all of those points are pretty uncontroversial.

    you are fantasist. parroting the politically correct doctrines that have no grounding in reality.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by humanrights)
    you haven't proven anything wrong.

    americas crime rate has dropped from peaks in the 80s/90s because america embarked on a massive incarceration programme. not because of a permissive weak rehabilitation programme.

    prove that wrong.....


    the crime rate in the western world has exploded since the 60s.........prove that wrong.

    it has exploded at the same time as weak permissive sentences begun to infect western societies.--

    prove that wrong.

    britain crime rate has gone up ever since abolition of the death penalty.

    prove that wrong......

    all of those points are pretty uncontroversial.

    you are fantasist. parroting the politically correct doctrines that have no grounding in reality.
    You haven't given any evidence to support any of your points. I gave stats on the US - I proved my point.

    Crime rates rose since the 60s, and then fell again. Our rates have currently fallen in the last 10 years.
    The US homocide and violent crime rate is the same as it was in the 60s, having risen in the 90s too. The pattern of our rising and falling is actually the same... With the difference being that the US is higher in general.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States that'll give you a lot of the stats proving my point. It also lists a lot of OTHER reasons given for the rising and falling of crime rates, and it's definitely not just how harsh the sentences are.

    I don't think you can use the US as an example, when their crime rates are SO much higher than ours.

    The things you are listing actually don't prove your point at all.

    Stop calling me a fantasist. I prove my arguments with facts and figures... You just repeat yourself and provide no proof at all.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    You haven't given any evidence to support any of your points. I gave stats on the US - I proved my point.

    Crime rates rose since the 60s, and then fell again. Our rates have currently fallen in the last 10 years.
    The US homocide and violent crime rate is the same as it was in the 60s, having risen in the 90s too. The pattern of our rising and falling is actually the same... With the difference being that the US is higher in general.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States that'll give you a lot of the stats proving my point. It also lists a lot of OTHER reasons given for the rising and falling of crime rates, and it's definitely not just how harsh the sentences are.

    I don't think you can use the US as an example, when their crime rates are SO much higher than ours.

    The things you are listing actually don't prove your point at all.

    Stop calling me a fantasist. I prove my arguments with facts and figures... You just repeat yourself and provide no proof at all.



    i said that the crime rate all across the western world exploded since the 60s.-- especially violent crime.


    your links prove that since the 60s it has done just that in america. the patterns are the same for western europe also. prove that...errr.... right again?

    i also said that in the US the crime rate fell from peaks in the 90s. your link proves that as well.

    america got a lot tougher on criminals starting from the peaks in the 90s and 10 years later, just as your chart shows, the crime rate had dropped........i wonder why?

    that is called empirical evidence.


    what it does not show however, is your assertion that crime is back down to 60s levels. it is not.


    crime is directly related to the severity of sentences. permissive sentencing facilities crime, tough sentencing reduces crime.


    america always had higher crime rates than europe in the 60s. the point is that since the 60s both americas and europes crime rate rose dramatically because of permissive liberal attitudes to justice.


    and in america, they fell only after they got tough.

    in europe, crime rates are not falling in any significant way. if at all. the broad trend is up.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by humanrights)
    i said that the crime rate all across the western world exploded since the 60s.-- especially violent crime.


    your links prove that since the 60s it has done just that in america. the patterns are the same for western europe also. prove that...errr.... right again?

    i also said that in the US the crime rate fell from peaks in the 90s. your link proves that as well.

    america got a lot tougher on criminals starting from the peaks in the 90s and 10 years later, just as your chart shows, the crime rate had dropped........i wonder why?

    that is called empirical evidence.


    what it does not show however, is your assertion that crime is back down to 60s levels. it is not.


    crime is directly related to the severity of sentences. permissive sentencing facilities crime, tough sentencing reduces crime.


    america always had higher crime rates than europe in the 60s. the point is that since the 60s both americas and europes crime rate rose dramatically because of permissive liberal attitudes to justice.


    and in america, they fell only after they got tough.

    in europe, crime rates are not falling in any significant way. if at all. the broad trend is up.
    Ok you've missed everything I've said.

    Firstly, there's no evidence saying that the crime rates rose because of "permissive attitudes"... My links explain MANY other reasons that are considered the answers...
    Secondly... You say crime rates have dropped recently in America because of their laws getting tougher... Their laws haven't got tougher, and crime rates have dropped JUST as much in the UK. I've given evidence for this already.

    So my points still remain.
    I'm not going to repeat them again just because you don't get it.
    (You seem to argue this way in general, because we're having a discussion somewhere else it seems, where you just keep repeating things I've disproved)...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    your points, whatever they are, are convoluted. they make no sense.

    you are not proven that the uks crime rate dropped at the same rate as americas in the 90s because they did not, so now, you are lying.


    other that that, i get the impression that you are not even reading the posts anymore. just wildly attempting to justify your ideological beliefs on compassion for violence.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by humanrights)
    your points, whatever they are, are convoluted. they make no sense.

    you are not proven that the uks crime rate dropped at the same rate as americas in the 90s because they did not, so now, you are lying.


    other that that, i get the impression that you are not even reading the posts anymore. just wildly attempting to justify your ideological beliefs on compassion for violence.
    Why is your username humanrights you authoritarian b*stard
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by humanrights)
    your points, whatever they are, are convoluted. they make no sense.

    you are not proven that the uks crime rate dropped at the same rate as americas in the 90s because they did not, so now, you are lying.


    other that that, i get the impression that you are not even reading the posts anymore. just wildly attempting to justify your ideological beliefs on compassion for violence.
    ^ No, that's what you're doing.

    I showed you a link about homocide and violent crime rates by country... This shows the rise and drop, and that it occured in both the UK and the USA. Here are the homocide rates, for example:
    The USA went from 5.5 per capita, up to 5.7 in the 90s, and down to 5.0 today.
    The UK went from 1.7 per capita, up to 2.0 in the 90s, and down to 1.28 today. I think you'll find those are very similar, and actually there was more of a drop here than in the USA.
    Kinda proves your point wrong.

    Other than that... Even if your trend WAS right (which it's not), the trend doesn't prove the cause... And I gave you more than one link that gave many other reasons for the rise and fall of crime rates, not just the one you've decided to put against it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tpowertj)
    Why is your username humanrights you authoritarian b*stard

    because i support real human rights. not the human rights of those who take other peoples human rights away.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    ^ No, that's what you're doing.

    I showed you a link about homocide and violent crime rates by country... This shows the rise and drop, and that it occured in both the UK and the USA. Here are the homocide rates, for example:
    The USA went from 5.5 per capita, up to 5.7 in the 90s, and down to 5.0 today.
    The UK went from 1.7 per capita, up to 2.0 in the 90s, and down to 1.28 today. I think you'll find those are very similar, and actually there was more of a drop here than in the USA.
    Kinda proves your point wrong.

    Other than that... Even if your trend WAS right (which it's not), the trend doesn't prove the cause... And I gave you more than one link that gave many other reasons for the rise and fall of crime rates, not just the one you've decided to put against it.



    are you saying that in the 60s. US murder rate was 5.5. 90s 5.7 and today it is 1.7?


    i know for a fact that that is false , link me specifically to the charts. same for britain.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by humanrights)
    are you saying that in the 60s. US murder rate was 5.5. 90s 5.7 and today it is 1.7?


    i know for a fact that that is false , link me specifically to the charts. same for britain.
    thats not being said at all, you're mixing up the lines
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by humanrights)
    are you saying that in the 60s. US murder rate was 5.5. 90s 5.7 and today it is 1.7?


    i know for a fact that that is false , link me specifically to the charts. same for britain.
    Can't you read?
    US - 5.5, 5.7, 5.0 (not 1.7 as you wrong)

    It's on wikipedia, easiest place to look. Google it.

    But again... Even if you want to dispute my figures... My point about WHAT MADE the rates rise and fall still remains.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SebMurphy)
    thats not being said at all, you're mixing up the lines
    well, that what i have been saying for ages now. so i assume those figures relate to my point that crime increased dramatically since the 60s, and fell since the 90s.

    otherwise, why post the figures?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by humanrights)
    well, that what i have been saying for ages now. so i assume those figures relate to my point that crime increased dramatically since the 60s, and fell since the 90s.

    otherwise, why post the figures?
    Do you actually not understand? Seriously?
    My point is, I just showed how it rose and fell very similarly in BOTH the UK and the USA, so the USA's laws clearly aren't the answer to why that is.
    Go back to the links I gave you, and you'll see there are many possible related reasons for the rise and fall of crime rate in both countries... And it's not just "permissive attitudes"
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    Can't you read?
    US - 5.5, 5.7, 5.0 (not 1.7 as you wrong)

    It's on wikipedia, easiest place to look. Google it.

    But again... Even if you want to dispute my figures... My point about WHAT MADE the rates rise and fall still remains.


    ok, sorry, 1.7 was my typo.

    point is, those figures do not prove that US crime rates are the same as they were in the 60s.



    they rose because of weak justice policies, they fell again in the US because of tough justice policies.


    of course there are other variables-- drugs, desegregation, mass immigration-- but, you have to work pretty hard to deny the link between severity of sentence and level of crime.


    i asked ages ago, if your theory was true, then why lock anyone up? surely if crime was independent of sentences, then prison itself is useless?


    and if so, why did crime increase since permissive attitudes infected the justice system?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    Do you actually not understand? Seriously?
    My point is, I just showed how it rose and fell very similarly in BOTH the UK and the USA, so the USA's laws clearly aren't the answer to why that is.
    Go back to the links I gave you, and you'll see there are many possible related reasons for the rise and fall of crime rate in both countries... And it's not just "permissive attitudes"




    they didn't fall similarly at all though did they.

    violent crime rose in britain from around 95.


    just give me the specific link.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.