How NOT to get robbed

[WobblyGoblin]

That's not even close to what s/he said...

 

[mralexosborn]

It was a joke. He was talking about how the gov't can't even pave roads. Get it? I was implying the gov't runs inefficiently. 

 

[maverickronin]

I was saying we shouldn't have the death penalty at all.  The concept is fine, but the stakes are far too high to do it all if we can't do it perfectly.

 

[melomaniac]

Well, this thread has drifted, but I've walked around "dangerous" cities both in countries where there is, and where there isn't, a death penalty on the books. It doesn't really dent the crime statistics in such a way that you would draw conclusions for the safety of citizens or tourists. Examples would include certain notorious areas of sprawling places like Johannesburg, Rome, Palermo, Amsterdam, Manhattan, Los Angeles, Chicago, New Orleans, Paris, Prague, Berlin, London, Hamburg, Shanghai - don't misunderstand me, mostly those are glamorous and safe metropolitan destinations, they just all have shadier areas too. In each of these I know someone who has been robbed, and luckily I've never myself encountered any real trouble of the sort myself. It's neither simply that I'm 6'3", nor that I'm timid. My point is that I don't believe there is a proven correlation between the death penalty as an "ultimate deterrent" and being robbed anywhere.
 
What's more, in the United States the ideological battle rages on completely oblivious of facts. In this country, an average capital-eligible case in which prosecutors did not seek the death penalty will cost approximately $1.1 million over the lifetime of the case. A capital-eligible case in which prosecutors unsuccessfully sought the death penalty will cost $1.8 million and a capital-eligible case resulting in a death sentence will cost approximately $3 million. That's a really consequential difference! Why do people in the US ignore such budgetary reality? In addition, it's interesting to note that these days, I read often of victims or their relatives requesting that the penalty be life without parole, or a long prison sentence anyway, rather than a death penalty which seems to them too lenient, a quick way out, a punishment that is over too soon...

 

[Jonnip]

Not read through all the posts but someone got it on the first page its all about being aware of your surroundings.
I travel alot and i work nights often im in foreign countries walking back to my hotel at night  - not ideal but sometimes it cant be helped.
 
Most of these guys are just after an Easy Target, if you look like you will put up some resistance they wont bother.
 
Im no expert my my own personal experience is:
 
1. Be aware of your surroundings, the people who are around you. If you feel unsafe take those precious headphones off so you can hear whats going on around you!
 
2. Walk proud, head up (again this helps with being aware), back straight. no need to swagger or have ya hood up.
 
3. If you see a group of suspicious or intimidating looking people coming towards you the worst thing you can do is cross the road! then they know you are scared of them and thus a easy target.
 
4. maybe take some self defence classes? even if it is just to inspire some self confidence. there are loads of methods out there for practicle self defence. i wont recommend any because i then everyone will start saying x is better than y etc.
 
you can live life without getting robbed, just be sensible dont take stupid risks.
 
Jonni

 

[yepimonfire]

HAHAHAHAHAHA the tanks and camels part of this thread is just freaking awesome and made my day

 

[marvin]

Quote:

My point is that I don't believe there is a proven correlation between the death penalty as an "ultimate deterrent" and being robbed anywhere.

 
A bit of a strawman there. No one argues that there's a correlation between the death penalty and being robbed in the United States. Any deterrence effect, if one exists at all, would be limited to the very narrow list of crimes eligible for the death penalty.

 
Quote:

What's more, in the United States the ideological battle rages on completely oblivious of facts. In this country, an average capital-eligible case in which prosecutors did not seek the death penalty will cost approximately $1.1 million over the lifetime of the case. A capital-eligible case in which prosecutors unsuccessfully sought the death penalty will cost $1.8 million and a capital-eligible case resulting in a death sentence will cost approximately $3 million. That's a really consequential difference! Why do people in the US ignore such budgetary reality?

It's not a consequential difference. There are so few death penalty prosecutions that they don't make up a significant portion of state budgets. California's analysis of the death penalty in 2008 estimated that the savings from eliminating the death penalty equaled about a tenth of a percent of the state budget. Not saying that $100 million or so isn't real money, but there are plenty of ideological policy decisions that cost the state more than the death penalty and the elimination of the death penalty would not make a significant dent in California's budgetary issues.
 
 
Quote:

In addition, it's interesting to note that these days, I read often of victims or their relatives requesting that the penalty be life without parole, or a long prison sentence anyway, rather than a death penalty which seems to them too lenient, a quick way out, a punishment that is over too soon...

 
Looking at the preferences of criminals, the "death penalty is a lighter punishment than life without parole" sentiment is a touch nonsensical. I submit that they would know better than the victim's (or victims') relatives (since the victims in US death penalty cases are quite dead) as it's their ass on the line.

Criminals with death penalty sentences will generally pull every last legal lever available in an attempt to avoid the needle. This is not the case for prisoners with life without parole sentences and a major reason why death penalty cases are so much more expensive than life without parole cases. Criminals will also plea bargain with prosecutors for a reduction from the death penalty to life without parole. Not so much the other way round.

Other than the (extremely) rare case where someone is looking for suicide by death penalty, criminals clearly prefer life without parole over the death penalty.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Without getting too much into politics, Congress has the power to create new courts and alter jurisdiction. They could create a court solely to handle capital appeals. It would be more efficient and consistent.

Right now, my problem with capital punishment is that it is grossly inefficient and unevenly applied. If we were to stay with the current system, it would make more sense to go to life without parole as the maximum punishment.

Reminds me a lot of when I used to take criminal cases out in Grant County, Oregon. I'd usually stop in at the Grant County Museum in Canyon City. In the display cases there are two skulls. One of them is labeled "first man hanged in Grant County." The other is labeled, "second man hanged in Grant County." Times certainly have changed.

By the way, the Grant County Museum is absolutely worth a visit if you're ever in the area. In addition to the skulls, there's a variety of taxidermied mutant livestock in the back. Two-headed calves and that sort of thing, as well as other oddities. I've been to and love places like the Getty, Norton Simon and other major (and excellent) musuems. But not one of them has the visceral punch like this place does.