quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

I think murderers are eligible for parole after 7 years, although I'm not entirely certain of that.

Here, they receive a sentence of up to 21 years, out of which 14 would be served as the minimum, with the last 4 years or so including a sort of layover programme to reacclimatize them to society (which may or may not include time in normal society in the daytime), and the option of retaining them indefinitely if they're considered to be at high risk of recidivism. The parole arrangement you're talking about seems counterintuitive to me.

quote:


In any case, it doesn't quite answer the question of what the average time to release is.

quote:


Also, I'm curious as to the actual crime rate for serious crime, as opposed to the incarceration rate.

quote:

quote:

As I recall, the Three Strikes law was designed to keep habitual criminals in prison, as opposed to the "revolving door" of recidivism.

If you want to reduce recidivism, look into the Scandinavian model instead. The numbers speak for themselves.

Also, abandon the War on Drugs, which breeds crime and quite directly fuels the Mexican civil war.

IWYW,
— Aswad.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

How much plainer do his words have to be ? Largest drop in violent crime

Edits to add......Your 2-5% drop is per annum. So in ten years thats a 20-50% drop, so lets not play stupid with maths unless its your strong point.

It really doesn't matter how plain his words are if you're just going to ignore them anyway. Case in point:

There is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate—as more people obtain permits there is a greater decline in violent crime rates... The analysis is based on data for all 3,054 counties in the United States during 18 years from 1977 to 1994

Lott's data is from 1977-1994. The OP refers to the last two decades. And, he's not talking about the national crime rate. He's talking about an inverse correlation between CCW permits and crime rates on a county by county basis.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:


No more drive by than your normal drivel. Try this from the line about John Lotts book. Its the first line so even you should be able to spot it.

John R. Lott, Jr.: States with the largest increases in gun ownership also have the largest drops in violent crimes. << Implicit enough

Unfortunatly he then followes it up with facts.
He only claims a 2-5%% difference which in no way takes credit for the 50% crime reduction we have seen.
Saying somthing helps is not the same as claiming that it is the sole determining factor.

How much plainer do his words have to be ? Largest drop in violent crime


Edits to add......Your 2-5% drop is per annum. So in ten years thats a 20-50% drop, so lets not play stupid with maths unless its your strong point.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

No he does not claim a 2-5 % annual drop read the whole book and you will see.

quote:

Question: It just seems to defy common sense that crimes likely to involve guns would be reduced by allowing more people to carry guns. How do you explain the results?

Lott: Criminals are deterred by higher penalties. Just as higher arrest and conviction rates deter crime, so does the risk that someone committing a crime will confront someone able to defend him or herself. There is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate—as more people obtain permits there is a greater decline in violent crime rates. For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent, and robberies by over 2 percent.

quote:

Something I also tell my fellow gunnies, is we need to really focus on the suicide problem involving guns. More than half of all gun related deaths are suicides, and while that isn't a big deal to gunnies, it's a big deal to lefties and it's simply more fodder they have for their campaign.

quote:

bow to the "state" bow to liberalism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Either you are totally stupid or didnt read the link

What would you call lifting a quote out of a context wherein it applies to findings obtained from county data on CCW permits versus crime rates between 1977-1995 in order to misrepresent it as a claim about national crime rates 20 years later?

Would that be stupid, or something else?

K.