The general consensus seems to be that money spent on prisons is
a cost. This is wrong for so many reasons I'm amazed that so
many otherwise rational people seem to believe it to be true.

Its like say building a house without a roof, and when the rain
comes saying, "Oh, we can't put a roof on because that would
cost. Better to renew the furniture and carpet after every
downpour on an ongoing basis because of the prohibitive capital
cost of a roof." Nuts.

Crime has a cost in the community that runs far greater than wet
furniture. Crime costs billions. So when you spend money on
criminals and lock them up, you don't spend that money
elsewhere. Like if you build a roof to your house, you don't
have to replace the furniture when it gets wet, when you build
prisons and lock criminals away, you put a roof over society.

You don't have to pay so much for insurance, security, Police
and policing, courts, lawyers, judges, or the extremely costly
but unproductive rehabilitation industry. When the message is
out there that if you commit crime you'll get locked up, its the
best motivation to rehabilitate that criminals will ever have.

(Here brainwashed dreamworld progressives will chip in with the
off topic comment that penalties don't deter, but that's another
issue, and a belief that flies in the face of frequent
government moves to increase prison sentences for certain
offences, or the simple fact that there is much less drug
activity in Singapore, where the death penalty applies, than
places without the death penalty.)

Crimes true costs are seldom accurately evaluated. A useful
guideline for the calculation of crime’s financial toll is
provided by a 1996 US Department of Justice (DOJ) study titled
"Victim Costs and Consequences," one of the most comprehensive
assessments ever made of the costs associated with personal and
property crime. The report and other facts on crime costs are
summarised below.

These figures if divided by say 75 on a per head of population
basis would become roughly comparative to NZ without conversion
to NZ dollar rates.

Add all these costs together, and the price of building a few
jails and stuffing them full of habitual criminals is sweet fuck
all by comparison. Anyone who wants to argue against more
prisons on the grounds that they are "unaffordable" better have
some damn good maths to back it up.

-------------------------------------------

"In recent years the total monetary value of property losses and
immediate medical expenses incurred by crime victims has hovered
around $18 billion annually.

After additionally factoring in long-term medical and mental
health care costs, legal fees, lost earnings due to work time
missed, and the cost of public victim-assistance programs, this
$18 billion figure swells to $105 billion. In other words, the
real, tangible costs of violent and personal crimes are about
5.83 times higher than the bare-bones figure.

But even this figure tells only a portion of the story, for it
does not consider the values of pain, suffering, and diminished
quality of life that criminals inflict upon their victims. To
quantify the values of these variables, the research team
analyzed jury awards given in recent years to survivors of
violent crimes. The punitive damage portions of these awards
were ignored, making the sole consideration the dollar amount
designated to "compensate" the victims for their suffering and
lost quality of life.

With regard to fatal crimes, the researchers found no reliable
figures estimating medical costs specifically for homicide
victims, and thus based their calculations on the average
medical costs associated with fatal workers’ compensation cases.
They then faced the cold and difficult task of assigning a
monetary value to what would have been the remaining portions of
the lives prematurely terminated by crime.

In an exhaustive review of the literature on this subject, the
DOJ team took the average of nearly fifty previously published
values – which were adjusted for the expected life spans of the
deceased people involved – and arrived at a figure of $2.7
million per life. After adding these quality-of-life and
premature-death considerations to the mix, the DOJ study
estimates that the aggregate costs resulting from crime in
America rise by another $345 billion, to $450 billion annually.

But the DOJ report does not go far enough. The aggregate value
of all property and money stolen or obtained through fraud is
$603 billion annually. Americans also allocate huge sums to the
purchase of goods and services whose express purpose is to
prevent or deter crime. For example, each year they spend $4.3
billion for locks and safes, $1.5 billion for surveillance
cameras, another $1.5 billion for safety lighting, $1.1 billion
for protective fences and gates, $6.5 billion for alarm systems,
and $17.9 billion for private security guards.

In a 1999 Journal of Law and Economics study, Centre College
professor David Anderson quantifies what he calls crime’s
"opportunity costs;" I.e., the value of potential opportunities
for productivity lost to criminal activity. Because criminals
are sitting idly behind bars rather than being productive
members of the economy, society is deprived of the goods and
services they could otherwise have produced in the time they
devoted to crime and its planning. Anderson calculates that the
lost workdays that all inmates spend executing their crimes and
serving their prison sentences cost society $39.206 billion
annually.

Another opportunity cost imposed by crime is based on the
National Crime Victimization Survey’s estimate that each year
1.8 million victims lose a combined 6.1 million workdays because
of crime, which result in lost wages of $876 million per year.
Additionally, a similar formula estimates that the "lost
opportunity" value of the hours people devote every year to our
nation’s 20,000 Neighborhood Watch programs is $655 million; in
other words, the 100,000 person-hours dedicated to these
programs each day represent time that otherwise could have been
spent on business pursuits or similarly valued leisure
activities.

--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding,
ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a
philosophy of sniveling brats." PJ O'Rourke

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:14:56 +1300

"Redbaiter" wrote in message
news:35g051F4cisibU2@individual.net...
>
> The general consensus seems to be that money spent on prisons is
> a cost. This is wrong for so many reasons I'm amazed that so
> many otherwise rational people seem to believe it to be true.
>
> Its like say building a house without a roof, and when the rain
> comes saying, "Oh, we can't put a roof on because that would
> cost. Better to renew the furniture and carpet after every
> downpour on an ongoing basis because of the prohibitive capital
> cost of a roof." Nuts.
>
> Crime has a cost in the community that runs far greater than wet
> furniture. Crime costs billions. So when you spend money on
> criminals and lock them up, you don't spend that money
> elsewhere. Like if you build a roof to your house, you don't
> have to replace the furniture when it gets wet, when you build
> prisons and lock criminals away, you put a roof over society.
>
> You don't have to pay so much for insurance, security, Police
> and policing, courts, lawyers, judges, or the extremely costly
> but unproductive rehabilitation industry. When the message is
> out there that if you commit crime you'll get locked up, its the
> best motivation to rehabilitate that criminals will ever have.
>
> (Here brainwashed dreamworld progressives will chip in with the
> off topic comment that penalties don't deter, but that's another
> issue, and a belief that flies in the face of frequent
> government moves to increase prison sentences for certain
> offences, or the simple fact that there is much less drug
> activity in Singapore, where the death penalty applies, than
> places without the death penalty.)
>
> Crimes true costs are seldom accurately evaluated. A useful
> guideline for the calculation of crime’s financial toll is
> provided by a 1996 US Department of Justice (DOJ) study titled
> "Victim Costs and Consequences," one of the most comprehensive
> assessments ever made of the costs associated with personal and
> property crime. The report and other facts on crime costs are
> summarised below.
>
> These figures if divided by say 75 on a per head of population
> basis would become roughly comparative to NZ without conversion
> to NZ dollar rates.
>
> Add all these costs together, and the price of building a few
> jails and stuffing them full of habitual criminals is sweet fuck
> all by comparison. Anyone who wants to argue against more
> prisons on the grounds that they are "unaffordable" better have
> some damn good maths to back it up.
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
> "In recent years the total monetary value of property losses and
> immediate medical expenses incurred by crime victims has hovered
> around $18 billion annually.
>
> After additionally factoring in long-term medical and mental
> health care costs, legal fees, lost earnings due to work time
> missed, and the cost of public victim-assistance programs, this
> $18 billion figure swells to $105 billion. In other words, the
> real, tangible costs of violent and personal crimes are about
> 5.83 times higher than the bare-bones figure.
>
> But even this figure tells only a portion of the story, for it
> does not consider the values of pain, suffering, and diminished
> quality of life that criminals inflict upon their victims. To
> quantify the values of these variables, the research team
> analyzed jury awards given in recent years to survivors of
> violent crimes. The punitive damage portions of these awards
> were ignored, making the sole consideration the dollar amount
> designated to "compensate" the victims for their suffering and
> lost quality of life.
>
> With regard to fatal crimes, the researchers found no reliable
> figures estimating medical costs specifically for homicide
> victims, and thus based their calculations on the average
> medical costs associated with fatal workers’ compensation cases.
> They then faced the cold and difficult task of assigning a
> monetary value to what would have been the remaining portions of
> the lives prematurely terminated by crime.
>
> In an exhaustive review of the literature on this subject, the
> DOJ team took the average of nearly fifty previously published
> values – which were adjusted for the expected life spans of the
> deceased people involved – and arrived at a figure of $2.7
> million per life. After adding these quality-of-life and
> premature-death considerations to the mix, the DOJ study
> estimates that the aggregate costs resulting from crime in
> America rise by another $345 billion, to $450 billion annually.
>
> But the DOJ report does not go far enough. The aggregate value
> of all property and money stolen or obtained through fraud is
> $603 billion annually. Americans also allocate huge sums to the
> purchase of goods and services whose express purpose is to
> prevent or deter crime. For example, each year they spend $4.3
> billion for locks and safes, $1.5 billion for surveillance
> cameras, another $1.5 billion for safety lighting, $1.1 billion
> for protective fences and gates, $6.5 billion for alarm systems,
> and $17.9 billion for private security guards.
>
> In a 1999 Journal of Law and Economics study, Centre College
> professor David Anderson quantifies what he calls crime’s
> "opportunity costs;" I.e., the value of potential opportunities
> for productivity lost to criminal activity. Because criminals
> are sitting idly behind bars rather than being productive
> members of the economy, society is deprived of the goods and
> services they could otherwise have produced in the time they
> devoted to crime and its planning. Anderson calculates that the
> lost workdays that all inmates spend executing their crimes and
> serving their prison sentences cost society $39.206 billion
> annually.
>
> Another opportunity cost imposed by crime is based on the
> National Crime Victimization Survey’s estimate that each year
> 1.8 million victims lose a combined 6.1 million workdays because
> of crime, which result in lost wages of $876 million per year.
> Additionally, a similar formula estimates that the "lost
> opportunity" value of the hours people devote every year to our
> nation’s 20,000 Neighborhood Watch programs is $655 million; in
> other words, the 100,000 person-hours dedicated to these
> programs each day represent time that otherwise could have been
> spent on business pursuits or similarly valued leisure
> activities.
>
> --
> Redbaiter
> In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low
>
> "At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child -
> miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding,
> ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a
> philosophy of sniveling brats." PJ O'Rourke

I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one. Let's see how
many there are.

I bet they can be counted on less than one toe.

--
John B

From:	Warwick
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 12:14:06 +1300

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:14:56 +1300, John B wrote:

>
> I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one. Let's see how
> many there are.
>
> I bet they can be counted on less than one toe.

Piece of fucking cake.

> Crimes true costs are seldom accurately evaluated. A useful
> guideline for the calculation of crime¢s financial toll is
> provided by a 1996 US Department of Justice (DOJ) study titled
> "Victim Costs and Consequences," one of the most comprehensive
> assessments ever made of the costs associated with personal and
> property crime. The report and other facts on crime costs are
> summarised below.

Sentences have gone up dramatically, and 'true costs' remain the same or
increase. End of that fucking story aint it?

The fact is you could release 90% of our prisoners tomorrow and nobody
would notice the difference.

The attempt to pre-empt the certainty of detection argument is hopeless,
and typical of the 'head in the sand' approach pinky is famous for.

From:	Redbaiter
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 12:17:42 +1300

Warwick says
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:14:56 +1300, John B wrote:
>
>
> >
> > I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one. Let's see how
> > many there are.
> >
> > I bet they can be counted on less than one toe.
>
> Piece of fucking cake.
>
> > Crimes true costs are seldom accurately evaluated. A useful
> > guideline for the calculation of crime¢s financial toll is
> > provided by a 1996 US Department of Justice (DOJ) study titled
> > "Victim Costs and Consequences," one of the most comprehensive
> > assessments ever made of the costs associated with personal and
> > property crime. The report and other facts on crime costs are
> > summarised below.
>
> Sentences have gone up dramatically, and 'true costs' remain the same or
> increase. End of that fucking story aint it?
>

Fuck off with your worthless unsubstantiated assertions you
unintelligent bandwidth wasting bore. Leave this discussion for
people with a brain.

--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding,
ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a
philosophy of sniveling brats." PJ O'Rourke

From:	Warwick
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 12:36:19 +1300

On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 12:17:42 +1300, Redbaiter wrote:

> Fuck off with your worthless unsubstantiated assertions you
> unintelligent bandwidth wasting bore. Leave this discussion for
> people with a brain.

Excellent rebuttal from the champion of ng free speech!

I shall steal from Morrisey, since he probably writes better than anyone
else here. That was 'splendidly amusing' pinky :)

From:	Redbaiter
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 13:50:33 +1300

Warwick says
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 12:17:42 +1300, Redbaiter wrote:
>
> > Fuck off with your worthless unsubstantiated assertions you
> > unintelligent bandwidth wasting bore. Leave this discussion for
> > people with a brain.
>
> Excellent rebuttal from the champion of ng free speech!

Only an unrealising fuckwit like you would expect serious
rebuttal to weak unsubstantiated assertions.
>
> I shall steal from Morrisey, since he probably writes better than anyone
> else here. That was 'splendidly amusing' pinky :)
>
Fuck off dumbfuck bore.

--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding,
ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a
philosophy of sniveling brats." PJ O'Rourke

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:08:35 +1300

"Warwick" wrote in message
news:1lejirx3ly8ct.1lyjb0hmksvfm.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 12:17:42 +1300, Redbaiter wrote:
>
> > Fuck off with your worthless unsubstantiated assertions you
> > unintelligent bandwidth wasting bore. Leave this discussion for
> > people with a brain.
>
> Excellent rebuttal from the champion of ng free speech!
>
> I shall steal from Morrisey, since he probably writes better than anyone
> else here. That was 'splendidly amusing' pinky :)

Toe -2

--
John B

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 15:07:13 +1300

"Redbaiter" wrote in message
news:35g58dF4cisibU7@individual.net...
> Warwick says
> > On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:14:56 +1300, John B wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one. Let's
see how
> > > many there are.
> > >
> > > I bet they can be counted on less than one toe.
> >
> > Piece of fucking cake.
> >
> > > Crimes true costs are seldom accurately evaluated. A useful
> > > guideline for the calculation of crime¢s financial toll is
> > > provided by a 1996 US Department of Justice (DOJ) study titled
> > > "Victim Costs and Consequences," one of the most comprehensive
> > > assessments ever made of the costs associated with personal and
> > > property crime. The report and other facts on crime costs are
> > > summarised below.
> >
> > Sentences have gone up dramatically, and 'true costs' remain the same or
> > increase. End of that fucking story aint it?
> >
>
> Fuck off with your worthless unsubstantiated assertions you
> unintelligent bandwidth wasting bore. Leave this discussion for
> people with a brain.
>

Toes -1

--
John B

From:	JD
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 04:48:16 GMT

John B wrote:
>
> I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one.

I'm eagerly awaiting the day you learn to trim a fucking post.

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 18:18:51 +1300

"JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
news:k0GId.130291$K7.95856@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> John B wrote:
> >
> > I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one.
>
> I'm eagerly awaiting the day you learn to trim a fucking post.

Is that all? You're easy to please... except I won't be, unless you'd care to
enlighten me.

--
John B

From:	Redbaiter
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 19:31:41 +1300

John B says
> "JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
> news:k0GId.130291$K7.95856@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> > John B wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one.
> >
> > I'm eagerly awaiting the day you learn to trim a fucking post.
>
> Is that all? You're easy to please... except I won't be, unless you'd care to
> enlighten me.
>

That's another toe....

--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding,
ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a
philosophy of sniveling brats." PJ O'Rourke

From:	JD
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 11:00:20 GMT

John B wrote:
> "JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
> news:k0GId.130291$K7.95856@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>>John B wrote:
>>
>>>I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one.
>>
>>I'm eagerly awaiting the day you learn to trim a fucking post.
>
> Is that all?

We shall start with that and see if you're capable of more.

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:18:12 +1300

"JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
news:8tLId.130700$K7.44322@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> John B wrote:
> > "JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
> > news:k0GId.130291$K7.95856@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >
> >>John B wrote:
> >>
> >>>I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one.
> >>
> >>I'm eagerly awaiting the day you learn to trim a fucking post.
> >
> > Is that all?
>
> We shall start with that and see if you're capable of more.

Oh, and don't complain then if you aren't prepared to enlighten me after I asked
so nicely.

--
John B

From:	JD
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 23:58:42 GMT

John B wrote:
>
> Oh, and don't complain then if you aren't prepared to enlighten me after I asked
> so nicely.

Which bit of trim a post don't you understand?

From:	Redbaiter
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:34:50 +1300

JD says
> John B wrote:
> >
> > Oh, and don't complain then if you aren't prepared to enlighten me after I asked
> > so nicely.
>
> Which bit of trim a post don't you understand?
>
Fuck off you flaming child. This kind of senseless crap is all
you can ever amount to.

--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding,
ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a
philosophy of sniveling brats." PJ O'Rourke

From:	JD
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 06:03:56 GMT

Redbaiter wrote:
> JD says
>>John B wrote:
>>
>>>Oh, and don't complain then if you aren't prepared to enlighten me after I asked
>>>so nicely.
>>
>>Which bit of trim a post don't you understand?
>
> Fuck off you flaming child.

The hypocrite is at it again.

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:49:28 +1300

"JD"

> > Fuck off you flaming child.
>
> The hypocrite is at it again.

There. Nicely trimmed for you.. hypocrite!

--
John B

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:27:37 +1300

"JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
news:SSWId.131401$K7.122810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> John B wrote:
> >
> > Oh, and don't complain then if you aren't prepared to enlighten me after I
asked
> > so nicely.
>
> Which bit of trim a post don't you understand?

Well if I trim bits out of a post that are irrelevant, do you mean I should say
snip everytime? Is that it?

Otherwise I don't have a clue what you're on about. And if you won't enlighten
me, you then can't keep complaining can you?

There are too many useless arseholes like you just crying people down without
offering solutions. A dime a dozen around here. So either help, or fuck off and
stop bitching.

--
John B

From:	JD
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 06:03:31 GMT

John B wrote:
> "JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
> news:SSWId.131401$K7.122810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>Which bit of trim a post don't you understand?
>
> Well if I trim bits out of a post that are irrelevant, do you mean I should say
> snip everytime? Is that it?

You left in Bedwtter's entire post to add 'I'm eagerly awaiting the
rational "leftist" responses on this one. Let's see how many there are.'

The point being, was it all necessary?

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:48:20 +1300

"JD"

> The point being, was it all necessary?

Is that all? Well, considering it was a new post, I thought it best if it was
left in for context.

Sorry if doing that upset you, but that's really your responsibility, not mine.

Also, why didn't you tell me that when I first asked, you could have saved some
bandwidth by avoiding these to and fro's between you and I.

So, that means I see your snipe at me rather hypocritical.

--
John B

From:	JD
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:33:01 GMT

John B wrote:

> Also, why didn't you tell me that when I first asked, you could have saved some
> bandwidth by avoiding these to and fro's between you and I.

My mistake was in assuming that you understood English.

> So, that means I see your snipe at me rather hypocritical.

See it as you want.

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:17:22 +1300

"JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
news:8tLId.130700$K7.44322@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> John B wrote:
> > "JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
> > news:k0GId.130291$K7.95856@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >
> >>John B wrote:
> >>
> >>>I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one.
> >>
> >>I'm eagerly awaiting the day you learn to trim a fucking post.
> >
> > Is that all?
>
> We shall start with that and see if you're capable of more.

Who is "we" pray tell? Certainly not me, for sure.

--
John B

From:	JD
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Sun, 23 Jan 2005 23:58:11 GMT

John B wrote:
> "JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
> news:8tLId.130700$K7.44322@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>John B wrote:
>>>"JD" <_antipodean_@ubique.com> wrote in message
>>>news:k0GId.130291$K7.95856@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>>John B wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I'm eagerly awaiting the rational "leftist" responses on this one.
>>>>
>>>>I'm eagerly awaiting the day you learn to trim a fucking post.
>>>
>>>Is that all?
>>
>>We shall start with that and see if you're capable of more.
>
> Who is "we" pray tell? Certainly not me, for sure.

Then carry on being an arse.

From:	lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	23 Jan 2005 17:29:22 -0800

Redbaiter wrote:
> The general consensus seems to be that money spent on prisons is
> a cost. This is wrong for so many reasons I'm amazed that so
> many otherwise rational people seem to believe it to be true.
>
> Its like say building a house without a roof, and when the rain
> comes saying, "Oh, we can't put a roof on because that would
> cost. Better to renew the furniture and carpet after every
> downpour on an ongoing basis because of the prohibitive capital
> cost of a roof." Nuts.

No, that's the wrong metaphor. Because the fact is that prisons do not
_prevent_ crime, whereas a roof (assuming it is in working order),
prevents the entry of water).

Prisons are a means of punishment which may, in some cases, prevent
some crime among some individuals (as a more extreme version of how
fines deter some behaviour... or taxes deter smoking and drinking).
However there is also a lot of evidence that prisons _cause_ crime,
i.e., it provides a place where the minor criminal learns to become a
major criminal and where criminals can form networks, liaisons and
share skills. Recidivism among imprisoned people is greater than
non-imprisoned people.

On a simple financial level, each and every prisoner costs (in the US)
$20,000 per inmate per year. Are the net savings better than the net
costs? That's the question that has to be answered.

I would suggest that you get at least a basic backgrounding in
criminology and in particular the criminology of prisons before
postings more nonsense in the future. Here's some recommended reading;

http://www.crimrehab.com/index.shtml
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/rel/icps/alternatives_to_prison.html
http://www.willanpublishing.co.uk/alternpr.html
http://www.alternatives2prison.ik.com/
http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/950119/prison.shtml
http://www.thenewpress.com/books/sensible.htm
http://www.rethinking.org.uk/informed/ pdf/alternatives_to_prison.pdf
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/lrb/pubs/wb/04wb10.pdf

From:	Redbaiter
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:53:51 +1300

lev_lafayette@yahoo.com.au says
>
> Redbaiter wrote:
> > The general consensus seems to be that money spent on prisons is
> > a cost. This is wrong for so many reasons I'm amazed that so
> > many otherwise rational people seem to believe it to be true.
> >
> > Its like say building a house without a roof, and when the rain
> > comes saying, "Oh, we can't put a roof on because that would
> > cost. Better to renew the furniture and carpet after every
> > downpour on an ongoing basis because of the prohibitive capital
> > cost of a roof." Nuts.
>
> No, that's the wrong metaphor. Because the fact is that prisons do not
> _prevent_ crime, whereas a roof (assuming it is in working order),
> prevents the entry of water).

Hey Lev, here's a message for you.

FUCK OFF.

I am not going to waste my time arguing with a leftist half wit
who would so glibly post such a worthless assertion, leaving
aside the issue that you do not even attempt to substantiate it
except for a bunch of websites I'm not interested in looking at.
You've got an argument, post the fucken thing here, short and
precise as you can make it..

Prisons prevent crime you fuckwit because when criminals are
locked up inside them, they're not outside committing crime.
Just like when rain hits the roof, it doesn't come inside. Now
fuck off and stop wasting bandwidth you dumbarse. You want to
debate things with me 1) substantiate your assertions and 2)
grow a fucken brain first. In almost every exchange I've had
with you (Cuban stats for example) you've duck shoved around
like a true Marxist black is really white dimwit.

> On a simple financial level, each and every prisoner costs
> (in the US) $20,000 per inmate per year. Are the net
> savings better than the net costs? That's the question
> that has to be answered.

If you'd bothered to read what was written below instead of
being in such a mad haste to write the usual compassionate
leftist psycho garbage on this issue, and done the maths, you
would see that your bloody stupid question is answered well
enough. You're wasting my time Lev.

--
Redbaiter
In the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low

"At the core of modern liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding,
ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a
philosophy of sniveling brats." PJ O'Rourke

From:	John B
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:58:33 +1300

wrote in message
news:1106530162.133783.245300@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Redbaiter wrote:
> > The general consensus seems to be that money spent on prisons is
> > a cost. This is wrong for so many reasons I'm amazed that so
> > many otherwise rational people seem to believe it to be true.
> >
> > Its like say building a house without a roof, and when the rain
> > comes saying, "Oh, we can't put a roof on because that would
> > cost. Better to renew the furniture and carpet after every
> > downpour on an ongoing basis because of the prohibitive capital
> > cost of a roof." Nuts.
>
> No, that's the wrong metaphor. Because the fact is that prisons do not
> _prevent_ crime, whereas a roof (assuming it is in working order),
> prevents the entry of water).

Absolute and utter bollocks! Prisons prevent criminals perpetrating their crime
on innocent citizens on the outside. Prison is the same as ostracising someone
from your midst where they'll do no more damage.

> Prisons are a means of punishment which may, in some cases, prevent
> some crime among some individuals (as a more extreme version of how
> fines deter some behaviour... or taxes deter smoking and drinking).
> However there is also a lot of evidence that prisons _cause_ crime,
> i.e., it provides a place where the minor criminal learns to become a
> major criminal and where criminals can form networks, liaisons and
> share skills. Recidivism among imprisoned people is greater than
> non-imprisoned people.

While they are locked up, they can't commit crimes on the outside! What part of
that *don't* you understand?

>
> On a simple financial level, each and every prisoner costs (in the US)
> $20,000 per inmate per year. Are the net savings better than the net
> costs? That's the question that has to be answered.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

--
John B

From:	John Cawston
Subject:	Re: Prisons cost money..?? Bullshit..!!!
Date:	Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:06:00 +1300

lev_lafayette@yahoo.com.au wrote:
> Redbaiter wrote:
>
>>The general consensus seems to be that money spent on prisons is
>>a cost. This is wrong for so many reasons I'm amazed that so
>>many otherwise rational people seem to believe it to be true.
>>
>>Its like say building a house without a roof, and when the rain
>>comes saying, "Oh, we can't put a roof on because that would
>>cost. Better to renew the furniture and carpet after every
>>downpour on an ongoing basis because of the prohibitive capital
>>cost of a roof." Nuts.
>
>
> No, that's the wrong metaphor. Because the fact is that prisons do not
> _prevent_ crime, whereas a roof (assuming it is in working order),
> prevents the entry of water).
>
> Prisons are a means of punishment which may, in some cases, prevent
> some crime among some individuals (as a more extreme version of how
> fines deter some behaviour... or taxes deter smoking and drinking).
> However there is also a lot of evidence that prisons _cause_ crime,
> i.e., it provides a place where the minor criminal learns to become a
> major criminal and where criminals can form networks, liaisons and
> share skills. Recidivism among imprisoned people is greater than
> non-imprisoned people.
>
> On a simple financial level, each and every prisoner costs (in the US)
> $20,000 per inmate per year. Are the net savings better than the net
> costs? That's the question that has to be answered.

As people occasionally point out here, there are two
statistics that excite interest. One is the high rate of
imprisonment in NZ and the other is the Govt boast that
crime is going down.

Hello? Connect the dots. Thats what they did in the US as
well. There are demographic reasons for less crime, but the
get tough approach is an obvious one.

Put a baddy in jail and he'll often become badder, but at a
recidivist rate of 80% or more, they are only out of jail a
short time compared to earlier times.

The recidivists may commit worse or more violent crime, and
that shows in the stats, but we no longer have quite the
slow erosion of rampant petty crime and burglaries because
they are off the street faster. As our knowledge of the real
effect petty crime and theft has on families and single or
older folk grows, we now have little choice but to imprison
faster and with less tolerance.

JC