How to Reduce the Budget Deficit in Three Easy Steps
 

1) Find all prisoners convicted of murder, rape, and child molestation.
2) Drag them out behind the prison.
3) Shoot them all.

Why don't we do this already? The cost of a box of ammo? $50 for a good box of 250 full metal jacket .45 cal rounds. That averages to 20 cents a prisoner, as opposed to over a million to keep them in prison for life (since most people in prison are repeat offenders or lifers anyways). In case you're wondering, I'm absolutely serious. The US has the highest prison population by far of any country in the world. That's definately a problem. I think we could all agree that the world would be a better place if rapists, murderers, and child molesters were dead.

And what about innocents, one-time commiters and people who got convicted even though they had a reason?

Think about it

Why don't we do this?
Because we're civil.

If you want to be a "flusher" for those people, then go right ahead. But you'd have to "flush" yourself, since you'd be a murderer too.

I think it's better that they're sent to the military, with an electroshock color around their neck just in case.

Dude, that's seriously a good idea...

I'll really comment once I get over my hangover...

Probably because you're supposed to be a step up from Syria or Bangladesh.

Shit, man, you know how many innocent people are serving time for such serious crimes? It's bad enough - though unfortunate effect of the justice system - that innocents end up behind bars. Compounding the situation by killing a bunch of them is hardly an improvement.

Sounds like a good idea to me :)

I believe in caning. In a case of murder and rape, we should use the death penalty. In cases of the death penalty, the guilty party / family has to buy the bullet for the gun (none of the electric chair, gas etc…).

While we're on the subject of overly-simple solutions to the deficit problems, here's my 3 step plan:

1) Every schmoe who honestly earns their money have a big meeting and unite...
2) Go find every rich person whose fortune is built upon the exploitation of others...
3) Kick them out of their homes and liquidate their assets!

Wow, I'd LOVE to hear your definition of "exploitation."

I'm currently reading Robert Heinlein's For Us, the Living. In that book, he outlines a very interesting economic view of the role of government. I'm not going to try to explain it here...I'm trying to mull it over to the point where I actually understand it.

I'd recommend it for an interesting read, at least.

Here's the easy one... stop spending it all on war toys and invasions.

Well.... to be honest I haven't really thought it through. I just posted 3 easy steps to solving the deficit... nobody told me I'd actually have to think it through!
:)

Wouldn't that kind of simplify down to becoming socialist rather than capitalist?

Ummm, that was the tongue and cheek point, no?

well I'm sticking my sweet warm hands on this.
What is exploitation you ask? Anyone who exists from the labour of others by owning a business is an exploiter, whether they are small or large.
Yeah right just wait for the Republication or any major US party to stand for stopping exploitation since they are the exploiters themselves.
Like asking for a school bully to beat themselves up :|

Communist revolution in America, anyone? I don't think this is such a good idea, but it sounds a whole heck of a lot better than the 3-step plan that began this thread.
Let me propose another plan:

1) Put someone in charge that understands the word "deficit" and will plan government programs around dissolving it, even if it means getting rid of programs or altering our tax system.

's all you need, folks.

Exactly, but my point was rather to show how ridiculous a three step process to eradicating the deficit really is. Especially if it is done thoughtlessly.

Besides, IMHO, there are people just as bad as those in prison, who walk free.

I think too many people are missing the tongue-in-cheek aspect of these ideas and getting riled up ready to shoot their keyboards for not responding fast enough as the sweat pours down their faces and their teeth erode away from all the gritting.

To further demonstrate that the "3 Step Plan..." is entirely facetious, I'll give you mine.

1. Take everyone ever convicted of a white collar crime.
2. Send them to southeast Asia.
3. Force them to make Kathy Lee Gifford's clothing and Nike's shoes for free.

I say congratulations to spike for coming up with this inspired idea - I just don't think it goes far enough. Why only limit ourselves to only killing murderers and sex offenders?

In fact, why limit ourselves to killing people <b>after</b> they've committed a crime? Some people are statistically more likely to be criminals based on their upbringing, it would be far more economical to test them at school to see if they are starting to exhibit criminal, anti-social, or anti-American behaviour, and if they don't pass, we could execute them before they start causing trouble.

It would save so much money in prison fees, police fees and prevented property damage, which would result in much lower insurance costs for the rest of us, plus it would be a positive encouragement for all children from more troubled areas to sort themselves out and start behaving properly.

Because it's against the US law to execute for child molestation ain't it?

Also I'm an unpublished (haha you laugh) novelist of mainly sci fi fantasy.

Having the death penalty works excellently in my fav novel I wrote for every bad reason you can imagine.

Once the hero of the book kills his very first enemy. He knows it's the death penalty when/if he is caught. So he carrys a gun at all times, he will never be taken alive, he will kill anyone who tries to arrest him.
The death penalty has thereby encouraged fanatical resistance by him and every person like him. Also endless revenge upon the state officials who carry out the death penalty.
Welcome to a hellish word of mass murder, killing of innocents and infamous reistance towards the Police and State forces

Actually the US has more prisoners because of our mandatory drug sentencing rules.

Many of the convicted rapists in prison were actually exonerated because of DNA evidence. If our system is just -then wouldn't shooting prisoners be an act of murder?

it must have been said before here many times, the stupid joke of legal use of alcohol and cigarettes (I know you are cracking down on the latter in the US). The deaths from these legal narocites and pollutants.

While weed is illegal.
I don't take any drugs myself (and have about one glass of alcohol a week).
Legalising drugs is a truly sane policy.

Instead of shooting the prisoners, couldn't we save the bullet budget and just stop feeding them while they're locked in their cells?

Can't we just let the cops that catch em shoot them on the spot?

Saves alot of paperwork, gas, and use of prisoncells.

I agree with Zen_Tom... we need to take steps to stop this sort of crime *before* it happens.

We need a preemtive strike against those who are statistically likely to commit these crimes.

This will save us billions in dollars.

Up with Preemtive Actions!

Step 1: Achieve a balanced budget that allows for debt forgiveness to the third world.

Step 2: Legalize cannabis; Use the government distribution centres that deal with alcohol to regulate them. Have government stamped wrapping papers that are red and white striped. You can buy a joint at the liquor and smoke store for 7.50. Or you can buy a government approved wrapping paper to store your own for 3.75. Cops can't do shit, as long as your pot is in the approved paper. Tax the shit out of the stuff, and tax the shit out of foreigners trying to visit (read Americans).

Step 3: Pour money into infrastructure, to promote business growth.


Ladies and gentlemen, there are few things in this world that are given. People like to have sex, and people like to get drunk/high. If the government could tax sex, we would be debt free. Instead, we have to tax beer and cannabis.

Don't get me wrong, I am a pro legalist when it comes to drugs. Tons of money for our government (especially in the first few years) if we can tax the shit. If you need medical attention because of drugs, you gotta pay for it, or you get turned away. It won't take long for people to start private organizations to start clinics for this sort of thing.

As for innocent people getting shot, we could just implement a policy that requires DNA evidence for the death penalty. That'll still thin 'em out pretty well.

Bingo.

Whenever people hear 'legalise cannabis' all they think about is a bunch of drug dealers selling pot to kids at school while the police can't do squat. Thats bollocks. Legeslate the same way you do alcohol, if you bring it in illegially, thats smuggling, you can grow it yourself, but you can't sell it, you can only buy it from approved stores if your the right age. Don't get stoned at work the same way you wouldn't get drunk.

Sorry about the threadjack there, but i like making that point.

I think Tspikes51 idea about DNA evidence is good. Thats pretty much a no-brainer if your DNA was there, it's off to the gallows with you!

All government employees should get a wage cut in relation to the cost of living in their area.

I've heard plenty of highly overpaid senators and other government officials who are living HIGH off social security once they have retired. What more do they do than the average businessman really? Paperwork, dealing with criticism, negotiating, and meetings. I know of sanitation workers that work harder and longer days beyond their retirement age and can barely live off what social security gives them when they try to retire. Where's the fairness in this?

EDIT: 'Wage cut' not 'tax cut' - I dunno how I managed that one.

yeah, great idea. Inflict the scum of society on the group that's charged with protecting it.

Just make sure their training ground is especially harsh and nasty and you will have a military to rival the Saudaukar...

according to Holiday Inn Express.. one of us could just stay there and fix the budget after they get out of the shower



hotel party anyone? :p


yeah it's a mild hijack.. reason being I find the OP pretty laughable and stupid.. joke or not.

Am I the only one who kept reading "legalize cannibals" in the drug posts? It was confusing to think that I was about to get a Swift reference, especially given the nature of the OP, then have the rest of the post be about drugs.

I think we need to look to Star Trek: TNG episode for a proper solution here.

Simplify the penal code to eliminate prisons altogether. Instead, make every crime punishible by summary execution.

Think of the problems this would solve!

No prisons, no prison guards, no courts. An entire third of our government could be dismantled. In addition, think of how orderly society would be. Nobody would ever park in handicapped spots if they knew the penalty was death!

Good god, it's a utopia in the making.

Gilda

Goddammit people, I'm not a totalitarianist, as a matter of fact my favorite book is 1984 because of it's warning against becoming that. I hate getting parking tickets and also hate dumbass zero tolerance rules for stupid shit (like parking, drugs, and knives) because it perverts justice. I think we can all agree that there should be zero tolerance for murderers (the intentional kind) and child molesters, and at least for repeat rape offenders. The best part about my system would be that police forces would keep the same numbers, but there would be a bigger investigative force because we can convert parole officers and such. This would cut down on court costs while providing a more in-depth and thorough trial. Therefore, justice can be served, once and for all.

No. How many are there? I'd like to see actual stats, not activist website links for people who were "wrongly convicted."

Do you have any actual stats? I'm not referring to stats of people who won on appeal based on some technicallity either. I mean actual exonerations based on DNA evidence. I think your claim of "many" will be reduced to "very few" if you actually find them.

OK, I'll give you 2 sources. One you'll hate, because it does come from activists - but that does not change the fact situation. Here is a list of a bunch of people wrongly convicted, whose sentences were later over turned with new DNA evidence:

http://www.innocenceproject.org/case...ar_exoneration

The second, you can look up yourself, state by state, nation by nation - but every time someone has a case overturned on appeal, it's a wrongful conviction. There are varying degrees - some of these people are 100% innocent, some perhaps were not - but the conviction is overturned. Here are some British stats:

http://www.radstats.org.uk/no076/naughtont1.htm

I assume the Justice Department at state or federal levels has similar info.

In Canada, we've had 3 high profile cases - David Milgaard, Guy Paul Morin and Donald Marshall - all convicted of murder, all would have faced the death penalty had our nation still used that punishment, all were freed after years of imprisonment and/or numerous trials. I'm glad no one put a bullet in these poor buggers.

If we were more willing to execute those who were seen committing murder by more than one person. If we did not leave them sitting on death row after they've already been convicted, I'm sure we'd save a bundle. What's the point of leaving them sit and paying for their room and board when we're certain they ARE guilty.

That's an acceptable link (to me). I'll accept anything that give the facts as evidence. :thumbsup: Unfortunately, it does nothing to answer the question of how many wrongly convicted are in prison.

Making a claim and telling me to look it up when challenged does nothing to bolster your position.

I gave you the stats for Great Britain. How many other jurisdictions would you like me to research for you? I think they should be representative enough of modern justice systems practiced in industrialized nations but I invite you to seek out Pennsylvania's numbers yourself.

The problem we face is one of definition. Some would say every conviction overturned on appeal represents the freeing of an innocent. Others would argue only things like DNA evidence that results in complete exoneration represents the freeing of an innocent. And there are those who say "Yeah, the DNA shows he didn't rape that girl, but he boosted a TV set 3 years before that so he's not innocent at all, he just didn't do that particular crime".

Personally, I view the "overturned on appeal" to be sufficient, hence the British numbers.

Probably not the only person to see that, but it is a good point :lol:

As for that episode, damn captain picard! We could have been free of weasly crusher!