cybercoma Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 You are right, look at China, lower homicide rate per 100,000 people than Canada. That's if their statistics are kept as accurately as Canada. It's generally accepted that Chinese criminal record keeping is so inaccurate that it's pointless in comparing their statistics with other countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 That's if their statistics are kept as accurately as Canada. It's generally accepted that Chinese criminal record keeping is so inaccurate that it's pointless in comparing their statistics with other countries. If you have proof I would like to see it, because how it seems to me is that you can point at the US and say that harsher sentences do not reduce violent crime, and then when someone points out that harsher sentences DO reduce violent crime you state its because of bad record keeping. Anything that proves your point is right, anything that disproves your point is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 If you have proof I would like to see it, because how it seems to me is that you can point at the US and say that harsher sentences do not reduce violent crime, and then when someone points out that harsher sentences DO reduce violent crime you state its because of bad record keeping. Anything that proves your point is right, anything that disproves your point is wrong.It's not "anything that disproves [my] point is wrong." Chinese criminal record keeping is a mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 It's not "anything that disproves [my] point is wrong." Chinese criminal record keeping is a mess. Depends on wether or not it proves your point, if it showed high violent crime rate and proved your argument then you would be singing a different tune. For the moment since you are not presenting much in the way of evidence to support your claims, I am sticking to the statistics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Are you really trying to suggest that the criminal justice system in China, one of the biggest human rights violators and most secretive governments on the planet, is as similar to Canada's as the US's system? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Are you really trying to suggest that the criminal justice system in China, one of the biggest human rights violators and most secretive governments on the planet, is as similar to Canada's as the US's system? You are making an assumption, and you know what they say about assumptions right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 You're the one assuming that China keeps accurate records on crime and their definition of violent crime is as similar to Canada's as the US's definition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 You're the one assuming that China keeps accurate records on crime and their definition of violent crime is as similar to Canada's as the US's definition. I am using statistics from a legitimate organization, whereas you are telling me those statistics are useless because you assume China is disorganized and dishonest, until you present facts to disprove the statistics and/or support your claims I will stick to my position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 You don't get charged with murder for threatening to murder someone. You get charged with threatening to murder them. It's also an aggravating factor if you're carrying a gun and further aggravating if it's an illegal firearm. nowhere in this thread have posted people should be charged with murder for threatening, I did throw out my opinion that possession of an illegal handgun should put them away for 20yrs...now if you want to suggest 15yrs for possession of an illegal handgun and an extra 5 for using it in a crime I'd be good with that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 So you're saying that those knives got up and stabbed someone all on their own? Or was it that people used them to stab someone? Which again proves that people are the problem, not the weapons. you related to shady or kis? twin brother perhaps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Its working then? Good to know, how hip deep would we be in murderers if it wasn't for basketball? It's funny, i didn't know that gang members don't play. awesome reading comprehension skills you've got there... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 If you have proof I would like to see it, because how it seems to me is that you can point at the US and say that harsher sentences do not reduce violent crime, and then when someone points out that harsher sentences DO reduce violent crime you state its because of bad record keeping. Anything that proves your point is right, anything that disproves your point is wrong. nah cyber is right find another country to use as your example, china has a lot of issues with "face" and a really really dodgy legal system...china won't even admit Tiananmen Square massacre occurred and you expect anyone to trust their criminal stats? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 nowhere in this thread have posted people should be charged with murder for threatening, I did throw out my opinion that possession of an illegal handgun should put them away for 20yrs...now if you want to suggest 15yrs for possession of an illegal handgun and an extra 5 for using it in a crime I'd be good with that... Do you really not see how silly that is?Murder someone and you get 5 years for the murder. Possess a gun and you get three times that sentence. How about we keep the total sentence the same: 20 years. Except we flip your other numbers. You get 5 years for possession of an illegal firearm and 15 tacked onto it for murdering someone (if not more). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 nah cyber is right find another country to use as your example, china has a lot of issues with "face" and a really really dodgy legal system...china won't even admit Tiananmen Square massacre occurred and you expect anyone to trust their criminal stats? How about Saudi Arabia? I don't think it gets tougher than that, yet they have lower homicide rate than Canada. What about Poland? I don't think their laws are too lenient and they have a low homicide rate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Do you really not see how silly that is? Murder someone and you get 5 years for the murder. Possess a gun and you get three times that sentence. How about we keep the total sentence the same: 20 years. Except we flip your other numbers. You get 5 years for possession of an illegal firearm and 15 tacked onto it for murdering someone (if not more). 15 years for possessing an illegal weapon, 5 years for using said weapon in a crime... then and only then do we start discussing the actual crime, if its murder add another 20 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 15 years for possessing an illegal weapon, 5 years for using said weapon in a crime... then and only then do we start discussing the actual crime, if its murder add another 20 years. murder is 25...sometimes longer in special cases... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 How about Saudi Arabia? I don't think it gets tougher than that, yet they have lower homicide rate than Canada. What about Poland? I don't think their laws are too lenient and they have a low homicide rate. or Norway, it has very lenient sentencing and a much lower crime rate...but you need to be careful there too Norway has a very different culture, cultural characteristics can really effect stats...to compare to Canada you'll need to look at similar countries, maybe Australia or New Zealand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Do you really not see how silly that is? Murder someone and you get 5 years for the murder. Possess a gun and you get three times that sentence. How about we keep the total sentence the same: 20 years. Except we flip your other numbers. You get 5 years for possession of an illegal firearm and 15 tacked onto it for murdering someone (if not more). aah now we're negotiating...10 possession, 15 for use in a crime, 20 for firing(attempted murder), 25 for murder...I'm giving up 10yrs from my original 20 here cyber :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Sorry. I read it earlier, but I'm still chuckling about Saudi Arabia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 I am using statistics from a legitimate organization, whereas you are telling me those statistics are useless because you assume China is disorganized and dishonest, until you present facts to disprove the statistics and/or support your claims I will stick to my position. Let’s see those statistics……….And to what “legitimate organization” do you speak? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 murder is 25...sometimes longer in special cases... Tag on 20 years for possessing and using an illegal weapon, and 20 years for each additional murder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 or Norway, it has very lenient sentencing and a much lower crime rate...but you need to be careful there too Norway has a very different culture, cultural characteristics can really effect stats...to compare to Canada you'll need to look at similar countries, maybe Australia or New Zealand Yeah, and some people always point to the US when someone suggest tougher punishment, one countries results will not necessarily mean the same results for another. Every time someone says we need tougher laws, it always comes back that " it hasn't worked for the US" ignoring and playing down that it has worked for other countries without understanding or bothering to see that there are more dimensions to lowering crime than just the punishment or rehabilitation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Let’s see those statistics……….And to what “legitimate organization” do you speak? http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=UNODC&f=tableCode%3A1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mentalfloss Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 YOU trying to make out like I"M the one who lacks concern! Unbelievable! If you want to wrongly interpret it that way, that's fine. I was simply questioning your Utilitarian motive. In this case, a Utilitarian would likely think this is an isolated event that has no reflection on the level of crime in the city. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 If you want to wrongly interpret it that way, that's fine. I was simply questioning your Utilitarian motive. In this case, a Utilitarian would likely think this is an isolated event that has no reflection on the level of crime in the city. Why on earth would he think such a thing? The papers are full of reports of such shootings! Why do you think all the politicos and talking heads are lining up for the cameras? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.