Thread: Reasonable Gun restrictions - need some help here...

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

I'll ask you again, You're Pro For-Profit Prisons? If you can't Answer that simple question I'll assume a Myriad of things about you none of which a flattering.

I literally have no opinion on private prisons, except that I would expect them to adhere to the same standards and guidelines that state and federal prisons do. So I'll ask you - are they held to the same standard for care and treatment, and staffing? if not, then hell yeah I'll join your hippie kum-ba-ya party and actively speak out against that.

However, if you're hinting that Judges are working in league with private prisons to keep people in jail or convict innocent people, well... That would be a conspiracy of epic proportions, wouldn't it? I don't believe that could possibly happen if that's what you mean.

Still waiting for you to give us a clue as to how this has anything to do with anything though, seriously.

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

So why does the US have such a high firearm death rate for a developed country?

List of countries by firearm-related death rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How does that correlate to a current lack of stiff mandatory sentences for gun crime? And why are you quoting the firearm related death rate instead of gun crimes statistics? Because they artificially make your position stronger? Mmmkay.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

I literally have no opinion on private prisons, except that I would expect them to adhere to the same standards and guidelines that state and federal prisons do. So I'll ask you - are they held to the same standard for care and treatment, and staffing? if not, then hell yeah I'll join your hippie kum-ba-ya party and actively speak out against that.

However, if you're hinting that Judges are working in league with private prisons to keep people in jail or convict innocent people, well... That would be a conspiracy of epic proportions, wouldn't it? I don't believe that could possibly happen if that's what you mean.

Still waiting for you to give us a clue as to how this has anything to do with anything though, seriously.

Mandatory sentences work in correlation to keep people in Prisons, and For Profit Private prisons are reaping the benefits.
Mandatory sentences take little into account when they are used. Bringing the question our judicial system (why have it).

Also For Profit Prisons have shown to increase state budgets in states that use them, But the FPP Lobby claims they reduce the state budget. The For Profit Prison Standards are a huge deal as well. Sub par Prisoner treatment and borderline cruelty due to lack of Gov't oversight run rampant.

Private prisons and the profit motive

Continued:

https://www.aclu.org/prisoners-rights/private-prisons

Private prison companies, however, essentially admit that their business model depends on locking up more and more people. For example, in a 2010 Annual Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) stated: “The demand for our facilities and services could be adversely affected by . . . leniency in conviction or parole standards and sentencing practices . . . .” As incarceration rates skyrocket, the private prison industry expands at exponential rates, holding ever more people in its prisons and jails, and generating massive profits.

BOLD added.

In Florida, Minimum Mandatory Sentencing Laws Fuel Push for Private Prisons

One of the biggest pressures to privatize Florida prisons is because of its rigid mandatory sentencing laws; it will have an almost guaranteed expanding prison population. According to a Pew Center Study as reported by The Associated Press, Florida already leads the nation for the longest prison terms and has a "whopping 166 percent increase in the estimated average time that released prisoners spent behind bars over a 19-year span." The Pew report also found that in 2009, Florida spent an extra $1.4 billion on prisons because of the longer prison terms. The study concludes that Florida's mandatory sentencing laws, especially their "10-20-Life" law, were a major factor for the longest prison terms.
....This law, passed in 1999, inflicts increasingly severe mandatory sentences for crimes involving guns. As the State of Florida explains it:
Mandates a minimum 10 year prison term for certain felonies, or attempted felonies in which the offender possesses a firearm or destructive device
Mandates a minimum 20 year prison term when the firearm is discharged
Mandates a minimum 25 years to LIFE if someone is injured or killed
Mandates a minimum 3 year prison term for possession of a firearm by a felon
Mandates that the minimum prison term is to be served consecutively to any other term of imprisonment imposed

Most Importantly Mandatory Sentencing eliminates the leniency of the courts and juries. Like the unfortunate lady in FL. who went to her car to get her gun when facing her estranged ex-husband in a domestic dispute. Yeah she ran to get her gun to come back but does that make her guilty of assault? She merely discharged her weapon as a warning shot, but due to mandatory laws She faces 20 years, as quoted above.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

How does that correlate to a current lack of stiff mandatory sentences for gun crime? And why are you quoting the firearm related death rate instead of gun crimes statistics? Because they artificially make your position stronger? Mmmkay.

Then look at the firearm murder rate.

Originally Posted by triggerhappy2005

Then look at the firearm murder rate.

Ok now what? We don't currently have tough mandatory sentencing for crimes committed with guns. So what is your point?

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

Continued:

https://www.aclu.org/prisoners-rights/private-prisons
BOLD added.

In Florida, Minimum Mandatory Sentencing Laws Fuel Push for Private Prisons



Most Importantly Mandatory Sentencing eliminates the leniency of the courts and juries. Like the unfortunate lady in FL. who went to her car to get her gun when facing her estranged ex-husband in a domestic dispute. Yeah she ran to get her gun to come back but does that make her guilty of assault? She merely discharged her weapon as a warning shot, but due to mandatory laws She faces 20 years, as quoted above.

If you go somewhere to get a deadly weapon and then go back to try and shoot someone in cold blood that is called attempted murder. I could give two shits what the situation was. "This poor woman"... Really? Do you really believe that?

I don't want leniency from courts or juries regarding people who commit crimes with guns. I want them to be guaranteed 20 years in fuck-you-in-the-ass federal prison on top of whatever other sentence they may get.

This other storyline you are trying to pursue is just ridiculous. Ok so there are prisons that need to fix their shit. Ok let's hold them accountable. Fine. Has not one thing to do with criminals deserving punishment.

The answer is not laws that treat every citizen like a criminal. It is to focus on the criminals. Mandatory prison sentencing accomplishes that just fine, private or public. The two are not connected. At all.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

Ok now what? We don't currently have tough mandatory sentencing for crimes committed with guns. So what is your point?

They don't work.

http://ann.sagepub.com/content/455/1/150