I would favor splitting crimes into three categories:
1. "Victimless" crimes--prostitution, simple drug possession, etc.--slap em on the wrist and let em go, focus on rehab over punishment if anything
2. Crimes against property--theft, burglary, etc.--make them pay restitution to the victim, plus additional damages, plus fines to the state, again favor rehab over incarceration
3. Crimes against people--murder, assualt, battery, rape, etc.--lock em up and leave em there for a long time

(12-31-2008 10:51 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-31-2008 09:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  IMO we need to make restitution a bigger part of our criminal justice system. This would be a good place to start.

Amen.

When I was in Houston over the holidays there was a piece in the Chronicle about 90% of the parolees not paying the restitution ordered by the Court.

And there is not a thing you can do to them (such as revocation) since the Supreme Court said you cannot imprison someone for a debt.

(01-01-2009 12:24 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  

(12-31-2008 10:51 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-31-2008 09:54 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  IMO we need to make restitution a bigger part of our criminal justice system. This would be a good place to start.

Amen.

When I was in Houston over the holidays there was a piece in the Chronicle about 90% of the parolees not paying the restitution ordered by the Court.
And there is not a thing you can do to them (such as revocation) since the Supreme Court said you cannot imprison someone for a debt.

You might be able to get around that by how you craft the statute. If not, we just amend the constitution to address the specific issue of restitution debts. We've certainly had worse amendments.

(12-30-2008 10:33 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Fo, are you intentionally trying to ruin my New Year's holiday????

He's just trying to help you drink!

As I mentioned in previous posts I was against the bank bailout from the beginning. When you have an ex Goldman Sachs golden parachute holder running the treasury, you had to know this thing was going to be f'ed up.

They'd have been better off putting the $ directly into the hands of citizens and allowing them to do with it as they choose then give it to these robber barrons.

What should have been done is that the CRA program should have been government-guaranteed loans from day one. Charge a quarter percent as an insurance premium and adjust the rate for experience as time goes by. Then these things would have remained freely tradeable at something approaching par.

The other thing that would have helped is a rule that if you originate a loan, you can't sell off more than 75% of it. You have to keep at least 25%, which means you have enough skin in the game to do the due diligence right.

Those were my ideas in 1991, after working on the Southwest Plan S&L bailout, and after all these years I still don't see a reason why we shouldn't have done both of them.

My guess is that those two provisions would have been enough to prevent the meltdown.

The other thing that would have helped would be changes to the tax laws and other rules and regulations to spur the creation of investment capital. If private investors were pumping money into the market, the banks would have gotten their liquidity there and been able to ride things out.

(01-01-2009 11:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I would favor splitting crimes into three categories:
1. "Victimless" crimes--prostitution, simple drug possession, etc.--slap em on the wrist and let em go, focus on rehab over punishment if anything
2. Crimes against property--theft, burglary, etc.--make them pay restitution to the victim, plus additional damages, plus fines to the state, again favor rehab over incarceration
3. Crimes against people--murder, assualt, battery, rape, etc.--lock em up and leave em there for a long time

Most states adopted different definitions of your '3' Levels of Crime, while still trying to keep the deterrent of "3 Strikes Your Out" intact.

They are failing miserably at it.

In my state, "the State Pays a Portion of the Parole/Probation Officer's Salary", from the "Monthly Court mandated Parole/Probation Fees" the Convicted, but early released individual has to pay to the PO.

It is like a "Continuous Bonus" and the more Convicts you keep on the streets, the Bigger Your Bonus is.

Now come on !!!!!

How many Convicted Parolee's, does anyone think these "PO's" are going to allow to slip back into the system, when they are making a killing off these Mandated Monthly Fee's ???

Can we say "Foxes Pwn'ing Tyson Chicken Corporation" ????

We actually have PO's "getting clean urine for these guys" and not reporting "Major Conditions Violations"... !!

For a supposedly Intelligent Society, we surely can F'ck things up in a most gruesome way.

.

Overcrowding is such a problem that many convicts are opting to fulfill their sentences instead of going on parole. They are then released early because of the overcrowding problem. Scamming the system even in prison.

When half the inmates at TDC are there on non-violent drug charges, the problem should be obvious.

.

It isn't even that good here .. (non-violent drug offenders).

We can't lock up Murderer's because our Jails and Prisons are Filled with "DEADBEAT DAD's" !!!!!!!!

..........................

Now let me make the hard choice of WHO DO I WANT MOVING IN NEXT DOOR .... Jeffrey Dahmer or Mr. Dead Beat Dad .......

DUH ..... give me a while on that one folks ......

.