Post by BAL on Oct 12, 2006 22:36:46 GMT -5
Crime rates go down when offenders must compensate their victims and responsible citizens are permitted to carry concealed weapons. Privatizing police gives them incentive to emphasize prevention and focus on violent, rather than victimless, crimes."
Violence seems to be a hallmark of our society. Our homicide rate is higher than most European nations; our children are even gunned down in their schools, often by other students.
Politicians need to "get tough" on crime with more gun control laws, longer prison sentences, and larger police forces. Yet robberies, rapes, and homicides go down when states permit civilians to carry concealed weapons. Studies show that longer prison sentences, although costly for the taxpayer, won't deter criminals. Still others show that prohibition, whether of alcohol or of drugs, doubles the homicide rate by empowering organized crime.
Politicians can't stop crime because they haven't asked the tough questions: "What crime prevention measures actually work?"
Only one industrialized nation has succeeded in consistently lowering its crime rates since World War II. Japan emphasizes restitution to the victim, rather than punishment of the criminal. Once caught, offenders must formally apologize to their victims and enter into a compensation agreement in order to get leniency from the court. They learn the extent of the damage they do and the cost of rectifying it.
Such restitution is the most effective rehabilitation known. Further crime is discouraged when young perpetrators must compensate their victims. If offenders had to pay the cost of their apprehension and trial as well, this justice system might even become self-supporting.
Criminals without the work skills to compensate victims could receive training and its cost could be recovered from the perpetrator's increased earnings. Imprisonment, which costs taxpayers about $25,000 per inmate per year, would be reserved only for unreformed violent criminals or offenders who refused to compensate their victims. Most criminals will likely choose to right their wrongs rather than lose their freedom.
For victim compensation to discourage criminals, they need to know that they probably will be caught. The first lines of defense are the victims themselves. Criminals go out of their way to avoid preying on those who might be armed; consequently, crime plummets 30-50% when states enact laws making it easy for responsible citizens to carry a concealed weapon.
Won't all these guns make our society more dangerous? Just the opposite! In 1999, 824 people died from firearm accidents, while the defensive use of guns saved approximately 400,000 lives, in most cases without even wounding the aggressor. Gun bans disarm victims, putting them at the mercy of murderers (or terrorists) who think nothing of breaking the gun laws.
If you can't quite grasp the concept of guns saving lives, consider how criminals would react to a sign on your lawn saying, "This home is a gun-free zone." Recall that, in "right-to-carry" states, the primary targets of gun-toting crazies were schools posted as "gun-free." Such signs advertise that our children are defenseless prey for the wolves among us.
Criminals are further discouraged when our tax-supported police forces are converted to private ones. For-profit police forces have great incentive to prevent crime, since apprehending criminals is costly and cuts into profits. Consequently, when Oro Valley, Arizona, brought in private police from Rural/Metro, their burglary rate dropped 95%!
Private security will do things that public police just won't do, such as checking homes when residents are out of town. Because of their focus on prevention, fewer officers are needed, and costs are less.
Crime can be prevented.
Violence seems to be a hallmark of our society. Our homicide rate is higher than most European nations; our children are even gunned down in their schools, often by other students.
Politicians need to "get tough" on crime with more gun control laws, longer prison sentences, and larger police forces. Yet robberies, rapes, and homicides go down when states permit civilians to carry concealed weapons. Studies show that longer prison sentences, although costly for the taxpayer, won't deter criminals. Still others show that prohibition, whether of alcohol or of drugs, doubles the homicide rate by empowering organized crime.
Politicians can't stop crime because they haven't asked the tough questions: "What crime prevention measures actually work?"
Only one industrialized nation has succeeded in consistently lowering its crime rates since World War II. Japan emphasizes restitution to the victim, rather than punishment of the criminal. Once caught, offenders must formally apologize to their victims and enter into a compensation agreement in order to get leniency from the court. They learn the extent of the damage they do and the cost of rectifying it.
Such restitution is the most effective rehabilitation known. Further crime is discouraged when young perpetrators must compensate their victims. If offenders had to pay the cost of their apprehension and trial as well, this justice system might even become self-supporting.
Criminals without the work skills to compensate victims could receive training and its cost could be recovered from the perpetrator's increased earnings. Imprisonment, which costs taxpayers about $25,000 per inmate per year, would be reserved only for unreformed violent criminals or offenders who refused to compensate their victims. Most criminals will likely choose to right their wrongs rather than lose their freedom.
For victim compensation to discourage criminals, they need to know that they probably will be caught. The first lines of defense are the victims themselves. Criminals go out of their way to avoid preying on those who might be armed; consequently, crime plummets 30-50% when states enact laws making it easy for responsible citizens to carry a concealed weapon.
Won't all these guns make our society more dangerous? Just the opposite! In 1999, 824 people died from firearm accidents, while the defensive use of guns saved approximately 400,000 lives, in most cases without even wounding the aggressor. Gun bans disarm victims, putting them at the mercy of murderers (or terrorists) who think nothing of breaking the gun laws.
If you can't quite grasp the concept of guns saving lives, consider how criminals would react to a sign on your lawn saying, "This home is a gun-free zone." Recall that, in "right-to-carry" states, the primary targets of gun-toting crazies were schools posted as "gun-free." Such signs advertise that our children are defenseless prey for the wolves among us.
Criminals are further discouraged when our tax-supported police forces are converted to private ones. For-profit police forces have great incentive to prevent crime, since apprehending criminals is costly and cuts into profits. Consequently, when Oro Valley, Arizona, brought in private police from Rural/Metro, their burglary rate dropped 95%!
Private security will do things that public police just won't do, such as checking homes when residents are out of town. Because of their focus on prevention, fewer officers are needed, and costs are less.
Crime can be prevented.
