http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_pri_per_cap-crime-prisoners-per-capita

6/9/2006 11:49:16 AM

Land of the free?
But the skin I'm in identifies me
So the people around me
Energize me
Callin' all aboard this train ride
Talkin' 'bout raw hardcore
Leavin' frauds on the outside
But the bad thing is anyone can ride the train
And the reason
For that is 'cause we look the same
Lookin' all around at my so called friend
Light skin to the brown
The black
Here we go again
Homey over there knows Keith an
But he be thiefin'
I don't trust him
Rather bust 'em
Up out goes his hand and I cough
He once stole from me
Yeah I wanna cut it off
The black thing is a ride I call the nighttrain
It rides the good and the bad
We call the monkey trained
Trained to attack the black it's true
'Cause some of them look just like you

[Edited on June 9, 2006 at 11:51 AM. Reason : PE > RAGE]

6/9/2006 11:49:37 AM

Land of the free, home of the brave, too afraid
To stop fuckers with box cutters from jackin planes

6/9/2006 12:11:28 PM

Huh!
Yeah, we're comin' back then with another bombtrack
Think ya know what it's all about
Huh!
Hey yo, so check this out
Yeah!
Know your enemy!

Come on!

Born with insight and a raised fist
A witness to the slit wrist, that's with
As we move into '92
Still in a room without a view
Ya got to know
Ya got to know
That when I say go, go, go
Amp up and amplify
Defy
I'm a brother with a furious mind
Action must be taken
We don't need the key
We'll break in

Something must be done
About vengeance, a badge and a gun
'Cause I'll rip the mike, rip the stage, rip the system
I was born to rage against 'em

Fist in ya face, in the place
And I'll drop the style clearly
Know your enemy...Know your enemy!
Yeah!

Hey yo, and dick with this...uggh!
Word is born
Fight the war, fuck the norm
Now I got no patience
So sick of complacence
With the D the E the F the I the A the N the C the E
Mind of a revolutionary
So clear the lane
The finger to the land of the chains
What? The land of the free?
Whoever told you that is your enemy

Now something must be done
About vengeance, a badge and a gun
'Cause I'll rip the mike, rip the stage, rip the system
I was born to rage against 'em

Now action must be taken
We don't need the key
We'll break in

I've got no patience now
So sick of complacence now
I've got no patience now
So sick of complacence now
Sick of sick of sick of sick of you
Time has come to pay...
Know your enemy!

Come on!
Yes I know my enemies
They're the teachers who taught me to fight me
Compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission
Ignorance, hypocrisy, brutality, the elite
All of which are American dreams
All of which are American dreams
All of which are American dreams
All of which are American dreams
All of which are American dreams
All of which are American dreams
All of which are American dreams
All of which are American dreams


[Edited on June 9, 2006 at 12:19 PM. Reason : ']

6/9/2006 12:17:52 PM

Quote :

"The 1st max security prison in the US was in Phila. in the late 1800's. It was not what you might think it was. Standardss involved no talking,solitary confinement, beating for breaking the rules, and the only thing to read was the bible. Some required labor was preformed with no pay. Meals were in groups with the above rules in force."

Can we go back to ropes and beatings?

p.s. I am not fact checking that quote at all.

6/9/2006 12:27:20 PM

can we put child molesters in the general population instead of solitary

6/9/2006 12:28:51 PM

^ Only if they have to get tattoos on their foreheads proclaiming such. And if "general population" means somewhere in Texas.

6/9/2006 12:30:08 PM

So...no one has any thoughts about our prisoners per capita being so much higher than the rest of the world's?

6/9/2006 12:31:11 PM

stfu nOOb

6/9/2006 12:33:40 PM

Maybe we just have a more efficient criminal justice program than the rest of the world

Maybe it's our overly strict drug laws.

BAN GRAND THEFT AUTO

6/9/2006 12:36:59 PM

6/9/2006 12:46:51 PM

Quote :

"So...no one has any thoughts about our prisoners per capita being so much higher than the rest of the world's?"

Yea, the war on drugs has turned a lot of otherwise innocent people into criminals. So what? We know how to fix it: replace the current "criminal ban" on illegal drugs with a very high tax.

We can set many of these prisoners free, eliminate the gang-land warfare by eliminating its funding, and hopefully bring a gradual end to gangster culture.

We will need to deal with increased drug use and the problems associated with it, but I think these problems can more easily be dealt with than the "war" we are currently waging.

6/9/2006 1:51:35 PM

Quote :

"We can set many of these prisoners free, eliminate the gang-land warfare by eliminating its funding, and hopefully bring a gradual end to gangster culture."

Tell me how this can be accomplished? And what exactly is "Gangster culture"?

[Edited on June 9, 2006 at 4:25 PM. Reason : .]

6/9/2006 4:22:20 PM

sorry salisbury, he meant "EDOMITE CULTURE"

ftfy

6/9/2006 4:28:04 PM

whoever told you that is your enemy.

6/9/2006 7:35:13 PM

padoburyboy, I already did. Legalize the sale of drugs with heavy regulation and a hefty tax.

6/10/2006 12:05:28 AM

what about the "gangster culture" part?

and the padoburyboy thing...I mean c'mon dude..so old, but thats just the quality of this place now!

6/10/2006 12:15:07 AM

I see he dosn't answer questions^^

6/10/2006 12:30:35 AM

^^ What do you want to know? Go do a google search, I'm sure a wikipedia article will come up.

6/10/2006 9:28:32 AM

nevermind man. I assumed you were more mature than that. But whatever.

6/10/2006 10:45:37 AM

home of the wolfpack.

6/10/2006 11:20:26 AM

good thread. definitely soap box worthy.

6/10/2006 11:31:49 PM

i bet it has nothing to do with the fact that some of these places arent developed enough for a national prison system and also i bet none of them are corrupt enough to have unreported prisoners

6/11/2006 5:00:35 PM

There's an easy solution here.

From http://www.drugwarfacts.org/prison.htm:

Quote :

"Prisoners sentenced for drug offenses constituted the largest group of Federal inmates (55%) in 2003, down from 60% in 1995"

Quote :

"In 2002, drug law violators comprised 21.4% of all adults serving time in State prisons - 265,000 out of 1,237,500 State prison inmates"

If not for the war on drugs, we would not be #1. Legalize pot.

6/11/2006 7:16:58 PM

Quote :

"^^ What do you want to know? Go do a google search, I'm sure a wikipedia article will come up."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=gangster+culture&go=Go

sorry LoneSnark, wikipedia can't help me. Why don't you elaborate for us? How can we bring a gradual end to something im assuming is subjective?

I know what a ganster is, but what is "gangster culture"? And would your remedy even bring a gradual end to gangsters?

[Edited on June 12, 2006 at 11:33 PM. Reason : .]

6/12/2006 11:30:38 PM

Well, ok, so wiki didn't have anything. Did you try google? It also can go by hip-hop culture, or rap culture, or ghetto culture, etc. etc.
http://www.fradical.com/Rap_contributes_to_Toronto_violence.htm

John McWhorter writes about this subject occasionally, check it out, he has his own website

6/13/2006 12:38:41 AM

funny thing about prohibition.

it doesn't work.

6/13/2006 1:06:35 AM

Quote :

"hip-hop culture, or rap culture, or ghetto culture, etc. etc. "

This is a bit of a stretch. You can't blame criminal activity on this. Let alone, bring it to an end.

And these are social, how can you mix economics?

[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 1:42 AM. Reason : .]

6/13/2006 1:41:02 AM

Quote :

"You can't blame criminal activity on this."

Well, you can't blame it on this alone. Its silly to think that creating a culture of violence would not be one of a number of factors, the foremost being poverty.

6/13/2006 2:02:40 AM

I just don't think that an economic action such as legalization of drugs could sort out a main social issue. I see that creating more social issues and more ultimately more problematic in the long run.

^I agree with you, i was just attacking his vague claim and its fallacies. He wants to put prisoners back on the streets and legalized selective drugs. To solve issues...?

initially the war on drugs imprisioned alot of poor uneducated individuals, back in the latter 70's early 80's. It solely targeted them (which was the wrong begining). Now we're dealing with the larger wave effects from that. There are multiple factors now, that continue to feed that cycle. Socially AND ecomically. I think that the war on drugs needs to be revised heavily.

Ive read many biased articles such as the one liked above me. That to me, overall is an attempt to indulge a heavily insatiable society(the usa) with reasons to why we have so much crime. Rap is an easy target, along with video games. But they are not the reasons solely.



[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 2:26 AM. Reason : .]

6/13/2006 2:10:04 AM

What makes economic reasons so different from social reasons?

In today's ghetto, the richest man around is the drug lord. Obviously, joining a gang "can" get you rich, which is better than grinding poverty, so people are more likely to join drug gangs.

At the same time drug lords develop a persona of flamboyance, independence, sucess, bling if you will.

It is not a sole factor but it does tap into peoples perceptions about what a successful people looks like if the only one they ever met was a gang-banger.

If there is any validity to this argument then the surest way to end it is to bankrupt the drug lords, something legalization will do very quickly.

Since there would no longer be any profit to be had by operating a drug gang this institution will become less common and more marginallized. The gang warfare will die down and thus the perceived excitement and success associated with gang-life.

I also recommend freakanomics for a more in-depth look into the economics of drug gangs.

But for you to argue that the prevalence of drug gangs in American cities has not had an effect upon American social issues is preposterous. Gangster rappers could not look like street gang drug dealers if no one knew what one was. Blacks have developed a persona of being rebels and criminals that hate the police, something easy to do with such a large percentage of the population in jail for drug posession or drug gang related violence. Legalize drugs and wait 30 years, lets see if our culture is still celebrating the drug lord.

[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 2:27 AM. Reason : .,.]

6/13/2006 2:26:05 AM

Quote :

"It is not a sole factor but it does tap into peoples perceptions about what a successful people looks like if the only one they ever met was a gang-banger."

I agree with you on this. Success is percieved through false means. And this misleads youth.

Quote :

"If there is any validity to this argument then the surest way to end it is to bankrupt the drug lords, something legalization will do very quickly."

Now this is the tricky part. The drug lords that you speak of, are not in ghettos'. They maily are the rich upperclass individuals who prey on the ghettos'. They are the ones protected through wealth, and hard to reach. I read your argument as if the suspect is the ghetto? The ghetto is the victim, and so is the culture.

Quote :

"Blacks have developed a persona of being rebels and criminals that hate the police, something easy to do with such a large percentage of the population in jail for drug posession or drug gang related violence."

Stereotype much. Alot of blacks are in jail for discrimination also and unjust laws. The cocaine-to-crack argument is the perfect example.

The drug lord that you speak of, is not in the ghetto. What you see is the "middle man". And then, the lower clas would suffer the most if you were to legalize this. A lower class would not be able to withstand. You shouldn't cross econ and soc.

Quote :

"What makes economic reasons so different from social reasons?"

To answer this, economic prosperity does not mean social happiness.

[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 2:45 AM. Reason : .]

6/13/2006 2:36:59 AM

Quote :

"The drug lord that you speak of, is not in the ghetto. What you see is the "middle man""

Not according to the information I have read. Yes, the main operators of the gang (the money men) are elsewhere living in big houses. Most street punks don't know about these guys. All they see is the boss and his enforcers, all of which are well paid and prosperous.

Actual drug dealers don't earn much, about $3 an hour, they work because they want to become enforcers or, maybe, the local boss.

Quote :

"And then, the lower clas would suffer the most if you were to legalize this. A lower class would not be able to withstand."

Why? What's the worst that can happen? People that are on drugs don't go to jail. They sit on the street high until they run out of money then they crash, either ending up homeless or in jail for theft. If you want to flood the ghetto with free drug treatment centers that's fine, you can fund it through the new "Reefer and crack tax."

6/13/2006 2:47:30 AM

Quote :

"People that are on drugs don't go to jail. They sit on the street high until they run out of money then they crash, either ending up homeless or in jail for theft."

You heavily undermine the psychological effects drugs have on people in that statement. Truth is, people get "high" and committ various kinds of violence etc. My case for the lower class is simple. If the gap wasn't so large between the rich and poor, you might have a valid case. You can't assume that just b/c our country is so rich, we can afford to solve all these social issues that will arise.

To make a long story short, there is no direct link between economic prosperity and social health. You cant have the attitude that “the economy’s doing fine, it’s just the people that aren’t.”

Quote :

"you can fund it through the new "Reefer and crack tax.""

Thats more incentive for people to use drugs??!?!?! Our addiction will pay for itself...

[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 3:06 AM. Reason : .]

6/13/2006 2:59:46 AM

Quote :

"Truth is, people get "high" and committ various kinds of violence etc."

What does it matter WHY they went to jail? If all drug addicts commit violent crimes then legallizing drugs won't keep them out of jail. We have laws against theft and assault, I'm sure you noticed.

Quote :

"To make a long story short, there is no direct link between economic prosperity and social health."

Who said there was? I don't understand what leap you have made. How does "legalizing drugs bankrupts drug lords and thus eliminates the correlation between crime and success" turn into "legallizing drugs breeds wealth and we all love wealth!" ???

^ If too many people are using drugs then just raise the tax.

[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 3:10 AM. Reason : .,.]

6/13/2006 3:09:35 AM

I went on a tangent, my bad. But when you legalize, you make it an economic issue. Thats why I started talking about social v economics. But you want to create a society of drug abusers just to "bankrupt" druglords. B/c that will happen if it is legalized. I seriously don't understand that.

Quote :

"^ If too many people are using drugs then just raise the tax. "

People will then find a way to circumvent this!!

Quote :

"If all drug addicts commit violent crimes then legallizing drugs won't keep them out of jail."

I never said ALL drug addicts commit violent crimes. I made a counter to your claim that they just sit around and do nothing.


[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 3:20 AM. Reason : .]

6/13/2006 3:15:28 AM

Quote :

"B/c that will happen if it is legalized."

Odd, drugs were legal before they were illegal, yet their use was rare. This is an assumption you have made, perhaps you could explain WHY the whole of humanity is incapable of NOT becoming a drug addict once drugs are legalized?

I don't know about you, but I know I won't be using drugs, and I suspect most if not all of my friends wont. We have been brainwashed by adults to fear drugs, legality has had nothing to do with it since, legal or not, drugs are readily accessible. The war on drugs has failed, drugs can be had even here in the bible belt, yet a very small percentage of the population uses them...

6/13/2006 3:21:28 AM

Quote :

"Odd, drugs were legal before they were illegal, yet their use was rare."

And we lived in a veryyyy different world than today.

Quote :

"WHY the whole of humanity is incapable of NOT becoming a drug addict once drugs are legalized? "

I never said the whole humanity, why must you keep doing this? I said the lower-class would suffer the most. They were initially targeted in the 80's and haven't rebounded since.

Quote :

"I don't know about you, but I know I won't be using drugs, and I suspect most if not all of my friends wont."

We are sitting here now, having this conversation as a result of privilege. Try explaing this to someone who dont have these privileges from poverty.

Quote :

"yet a very small percentage of the population uses them... "

When you look at those percentages, do you see more than #s'? Its easy to sit back and guage #s', thats why I continued to bring up economics v social. Numbers don't explain social issues.



[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 3:31 AM. Reason : i respect your argument tho']

6/13/2006 3:29:38 AM

Quote :

"I said the lower-class would suffer the most"

God, why do you keep doing this? Fine, I shall rephrase:
Why is the the whole of [the lower-class] incapable of NOT becoming a drug addict once drugs are legalized?

Drugs are already on every street corner in every ghetto in America. Legalization won't change shit for these people beyond the elimination of the drug lords. Yes, the price will fall somewhat, but never enough to make it affordable. So, again, WHY will drug use suddenly sky-rocket when very little has changed?

6/13/2006 3:33:52 AM

Quote :

"Yes, the price will fall somewhat, but never enough to make it affordable."

How much do you think they cost kid? In order to compete with drug lords, you have to lower "the obviously already affordable" price to nearly nothing. People will buy crack like cigs then. They will then be everywhere just b/c they're more affordable. People can support their habbits more, usage will grow more. Because IT WILL BE MORE AVAILABE!!!

Like I said. The lower class was already hit the hardest when crack was introduced. Has never rebounded since, no signs at all. This move will not favor the lower class. It will keep them low however.

Answer me this, how would the lower class grow after this move? Free "reefer and crack clinics" is not the answer!! and not realistic in EVERY hood.


[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 3:45 AM. Reason : .]

6/13/2006 3:38:16 AM

Quote :

"LoneSnark : a persona of flamboyance, independence, sucess, bling if you will"

gee, Wally, how come you're so white?

sincerely,

The Beav.




[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 3:44 AM. Reason : ]

6/13/2006 3:43:58 AM

^ I'm glad someone appreciates my humor.

Well, it's been fun, thanks for playing, but the drugs are wearing off and I should be to bed.

6/13/2006 3:52:37 AM

Quote :

"LoneSnark: Actual drug dealers don't earn much, about $3 an hour, they work because they want to become enforcers or, maybe, the local boss. ... I also recommend freakanomics for a more in-depth look into the economics of drug gangs. "

thats nice that you read one chapter, from one book, for your indepth lookin into the "economics of gang bangers"

considering that its a one-sided narrative about the unique experience of one Chicago grad student who was hanging out with one Chicago chapter of one regional Vice Lords gang. the whole thing, while amusing and entertaining, was self-serving and politically motivated.

no one with half a brain would formulate a drug policy based on subjective experience and hearsay, although it seems that you are trying pretty hard.

I have lived in several mid to large cities on both coasts, and all up and down the middle, and ive been "lucky" enough to at times come into contact with your generic drug-dealing "gang-bangers". i didnt hang out with them, and i wasnt "embedded" with their gang, but i can definitely say those cats had some major fucking cash to throw around at whatever they felt like. and they were NOT by any stretch considered to be the leaders of whichever flavor of gang they were in.

6/13/2006 3:53:31 AM

yeah im out to guys. its been real.

6/13/2006 3:54:16 AM

Quote :

"People can support their habbits more, usage will grow more. Because IT WILL BE MORE AVAILABE!!!"

Assuming for a moment that we legalize even the hard drugs that you seem to be talking about and that they become "more available" (which I think is an incorrect assumption), you're making a jump from the people who already do drugs being able to "support their habits more" to "usage will grow more". This assumes that there is a great number of people out there that want to do drugs but don't simply because they are illegal. Why do you think that? Do you know anyone, let alone enough people to make any tangible difference, that sits around pining for a hit of crack but refrains because Johnny Law frowns on it?

6/13/2006 10:54:29 AM

Quote :

"but i can definitely say those cats had some major fucking cash to throw around at whatever they felt like."

Well, as an undercover economist I could have easily predicted that eventuality. In the book they were embedded in a gang that was operating in perhaps the poorest ghetto in North America. Even drug gangs are not immune to the forces of the labor market.

You see, I suspect you were in contact with a gang that operated in a much wealthier area and the only workers available had options. Do I work at circuit city or sell cocaine? It only makes sense given the greater risk associated with selling cocaine (arrest, death) that it would need to pay far better than circuit city.

However, in a poverty stricken ghetto where the average wage-earner is unemployed and no legitimate businesses exist to compete for labor it is only natural for wages to be dismally low, especially for the least employable.

6/13/2006 12:33:23 PM

I just can't believe that you guys would be okay with your local "crack-heroin mart" in a nearby shopping center. From a moral and decency standpoint. And then counter it with a "free crack clinic". The whole ideology is counter visceral.

I would like to keep drugs out, as much as possible. This whole idea is "I can't beat em', so im gonna join em' to beat em'". I firmly believe that usage will increase. Prohibition is the perfect case. You lift the laws, people do it more freely and openly, you are then presented with another whole slew of problems (ie; from alcohol-drunk driving/alcohol related deaths, spose abuse, disease etc) just to combat one problem. So, no im not in favor of legalization.

Yeah, you might underbid the local drug lord. But look what you've created in the process. Then, if we were to legalize drugs, what drugs would there be? Do you think this would be a magnet for other (immigrants) to come here b/c of this?



[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 2:11 PM. Reason : .]

6/13/2006 1:56:20 PM

Quote :

"You lift the laws, people do it more freely and openly, you are then presented with another whole slew of problems"

You just aren't getting the argument. Even during prohibition alcohol use was rampant and widespread, leading to "alcohol-drunk driving/alcohol related deaths, spouse abuse, disease etc." Prohibition didn't fix the alcohol related problems, it isn't like winos became uncommon. What prohibition DID do was conjure up a massive criminal buildup which turned most major cities into war zones and flung a huge portion of the population into prison. Not to mention the death's that resulted from the consumption of toxic prohibition alcohol.

Legalization might even lessen the social problems (not likely, but possible). With research someone might develop drugs that have similar effects but without the addictive effects. Such drugs probably already exist but their production is more difficult and, of course, just as illegal.

6/13/2006 3:25:54 PM

I hope my internet's working when I get home. I've got a nice long response to that^^.

6/13/2006 3:37:05 PM

And you are missing MY point. The alcohol era was very different from the crack era. For the proposed legalization of drugs to have its much vaunted beneficial effect on the rate of criminality, such drugs would have to be both cheap and readily available. The "legalizers" assume that there is a natural limit to the demand for these drugs, and that if their consumption were legalized, the demand would not increase substantially. FALSE. Those psychologically unstable persons currently taking drugs would continue to do so, with the necessity to commit crimes removed, while psychologically stabler people (such as you and I and or children) would not be enticed to take drugs by their new legal status and cheapness. But price and availability, I need hardly say, exert a profound effect on consumption: the cheaper alcohol becomes, for example, the more of it is consumed, at least within quite wide limits, is that worth arguing?

If people can afford a "cheap high" without facing harsh penalties, they would do so more often. On another note, crack is not as abundant as alcohol. So its very difficult to gauge from an economic standpoint, and manage on an open market. Nearly everyone consumed alcohol during the temperance movement era, you can't say that about cocaine now. We have no idea the percentage of cocain/crack and other drug consumers in our population.

Quote :

"What prohibition DID do was conjure up a massive criminal buildup which turned most major cities into war zones and flung a huge portion of the population into prison."

So do unjust laws/systems and discrimination. You have no point!

even if drugs are legalized, there will still be a black market for them. And even if legalization eliminated the black market, does this mean we legalize everything to avoid a black market? Let's legalize stealing - after all, then these poor robbers won't have to sneak around, and possible harm someone out of fright. See, we can cut down on deaths by legalizing robbery! Sound silly?

http://www.gargaro.com/drugs.html

^great article about not legalizing drugs

[Edited on June 13, 2006 at 5:57 PM. Reason : .]

6/13/2006 5:38:05 PM