Mad Max RW, on 22 May 2011 - 09:39 AM, said:
What country do you live in? Here in the US we have a problem with SEVERAL HUNDRED totally empty brand new multi-million dollar maximum security prisons. The problem isn't overcrowding or under-building. The problem is Congress doesn't want to pay to operate these things. Two words: budget cuts.
I live in the US. I know what you mean... a company I work for has built many prisons around the US.
I agree completely... can't change that though. Its still all about money. I would rather taxes be used to protect law abiding citizens than many other things our taxes are abused for.
This is boiling down from moral and legal issues of piracy into an "inefficient government" discussion making it even more idealistic than my own point of view. They are related of course.
Hank, on 22 May 2011 - 11:03 AM, said:
No way. If there is a market, there is one filling it, no matter what the risks.
deleted; since this is now a sticky
But that would suggest that crime can't be stopped, then why do we have laws in the first place?
With monetary crimes like Drug Dealing I would agree. With stealing music MP3's if people knew the odds were even 1 in 5 they would go to jail for a time, stealing music would then only be done by the crazy. Especially if prison was enough of a deterrent, which is a separate issue.
Violence is also a deterrent for crime. Screw prisons then, give beatings.
(hehe, hey it works on me!)
Because you stated the above...
I can honestly say... if you believe what you just stated above, what I just quoted, my understanding of your view is dramatically altered. If I believe that risk was not a factor, then yes I would definitely agree with you on most of your points relative to this subject. A beating would keep me from pirating a game if I believed I would get caught... (if that were my motivation not to pirate). Maybe our views on how many people are crazy vs sane is dramatically different. Not sure.
I see why our views are quite different.
ReaperMan, on 22 May 2011 - 06:25 PM, said:
Using common sense to decide that stealing a car is not as bad a pirating games is not ignorant. Although i guess you could say i was ignorant because i believed that "common sense" meant that everyone has it, i guess that isn't true.
Hehehe. Sorry ReaperMan for using that word... I really wasn't trying to be a jerk though. I didn't mean it in a disparaging way.
What I am trying to say that I believe the principles are what should be enforced, not just "this crime deserves this punishment" kind of thinking. Stealing is stealing... today gum, tomorrow the car. Proven, but I digress as this is another issue. (repeat offenders crime progression)
Like the Toe licking guy (look it up) Because there is no "top end" to his crime, he still runs amok licking womens toes on beaches. (yeah, makes me vomit to imagine) Though he has been arrested multiple times and fined, that is ok with him... so he is never stopped. I think he should be stopped... and I could stop him. That is what I mean really. Because there is no "top end" on stealing music, it doesn't stop. I think the focus should be on stopping it with disregard to "seriousness". Stealing is stealing, in my mind.
So again... my point isn't that the crimes are the same, just that they should be stopped with whatever it takes to stop them. I agree with many crimes... lets say, "Starting points" (e.g. Grand Theft Auto) but if the behavior is too frequent, increase the punishment until it stops or is reduced to only the "crazy" people. The "rational" people will stop when it becomes undesirable to commit the crime.
So, a bit more evolved now... What do you think of that as an idealistic concept?
DN4EVR, on 22 May 2011 - 07:12 PM, said:
1. No, it wouldn't....regardless of punishment people will still commit crimes, either because they don't care for some reason, they are insane(literally), or for some other reason.
Why do so few people jump off cliffs then? Because they know the consequences. They learned that impact is not very fun no matter how much fun falling actually is. (ask a skydiver)
If they are unreasonable. Then we have jails for just them.
I agree that SOME people will still commit crimes.
If a speeding ticket was $5000 or a tazing, would you still speed? Of COURSE anyone reasonable would not... and prisons are made for the rest of them... the unreasonable.
DN4EVR said:
2. Prisons are full because of, as others said, budget cuts to maximize profits for prison owners & because alot of victimless crime criminals are sent there to run the industrial complex for the prisons and make more money for all the people involved in the chain. Also, no.....FEAR based prisons will just create public outcry and loathing for the system and it wouldn't be long before the system was put back to the way it was.
Nope, it's mostly overcrowding. Closed older prisons abandoned for various reasons(like health codes/etc) don't count in the figures, as well as unfinished ones. And there's nowhere near that many empty prisons, btw.
Getting too far into poorly run governments here really. I was talking about the ethics of stealing the hard work of others... but I agree with most of what you stated here.
It is interesting you point out the realistic side (because I know I am discussing it more idealistically) in saying that this "public outcry". This is a problem... sheeple want behaviors stopped, but want to be nice about it... that is why the system is failing. Anyone who has fought in close combat can explain this actual reality which lies under the sugar coated society of today. So again, I completely agree with this realistic side to trying to make the world a better place, so to speak. Sheeple will never allow that to happen.
I am a proud supported of Tent City by the way. It works as best you can ask of a prison. Yep... I personally know someone in it, right now. As stated above, even this prison can't change everyone, but the ones that can be changed, get changed in this hell hole. Few prisons work this well. (and yes, I do actually know this)
===============
I realize we have ended up typing about multiple issues at this point. In closing I just want to say the the point of stopping crimes, I believe punishments should be great enough to deter the "sane" people. I think that is common sense. The all those others are actually "crazy" then operated more prisons. I will gladly pay for that with my taxes if it protects "us"
Is that not a reasonable expectation?
So the other main focal point would be what is a crime and maybe how to put a price on it. I will always see piracy, from an MP3 to a video game, as wrong... regardless definition or the punishment our society and government choose for it. There are many legal things that are wrong in my opinion. There are many illegal things that are not wrong in most any of our opinions.
I accept that my wishing that our governments would ever choose to view it that way, is unrealistic.
MrBlackCat