If it were up to you, what laws would you create?

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

I would do away with the "Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag" and replace it with a "Pledge of Allegiance to the US Constitution".

Why pledge allegiance to a piece of cloth?

I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the Republic which it guides, one Nation, indivisable, seeking liberty and justice for all.

[nolagirl2 0]

Oops...have to disagree with this one. My husband was in the (passenger) airline industry for 35+ years. They test randomly and regularly for drugs/alcohol. As a crew chief, my husband would get the list and give the guys the word - you gotta go pee in a cup. MANY times he heard, "I can't pass the test. I'm gonna go home and I'll be back in two days".

I don't know about you, but I wish they tested pilots and airline mechanics every day for drugs/alcohol.

With the burden of public safety... I can budge. But marijuana shouldn't count, because it can stay in your system for up to a month.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

I was an airline mechanic for 35 years. I was tested randomly. Less than 1/10 of one percent of the tested mechanics came back positive. The vast majority of that was for marijuana which like most people is prejudiced against overweight people. The more fat in your body, the longer it will be that the test will give a positive reading. Someone like me could test positive 2 months after smoking once. Theatrically, I could go to a country where smoking pot is legal for a vacation, smoke only on the first day of the two week vacation and then 6 six later be fired for pot turning up in a random drug test.

A guy who worked with me drank every night and reeked of it every day at shift start time (2pm). He was not drunk, but he was so hung over, that he was lazy and lackadaisical. I doubled checked his work quite often. He would pass the random tests.

Fact: No commercial US airliner has ever crashed because of a mistake caused by a mechanic 's drug use.

Many employers use a $6 pre-employment screening test to weed out drug users. The airlines use a test that costs over $400. It can not be beaten and has no false positives except for poppy seeds testing positive for heroine. But that is not really a false positive, because heroine is made from poppies.

The airlines have spent billions doing worthless testing, while all it would take would be supervisors keeping an eye on the demeanor of the workers.

How about drug testing for cab drivers and bus drivers and train engineers, school crossing guards, policeman, fireman, pharmacists, surgeons, teachers, lawyers, judges, baby-sitters, nannies, etc? A case can be made for almost any profession. Yet besides airline workers, we only test professional athletes, who can not harm the public. Are our priorities screwed up or what?

[Carlene 12]

Less than 1/10 of one percent of the tested mechanics came back positive. quote]

I don't doubt that you are correct. They often don't take the test, if they know they won't pass. They duck out the back door and call in sick for a couple of days. The fact that marijuana stays in your system so much longer would explain why most positive results are for pot. It would be hard to stay off work for a month and claim sickness.

I also agree that alcohol is a big problem in the industry. I have been to parties where pilots were drinking, even though they were scheduled to fly in less than two hours. And I mean drinking a LOT. It's scary.

One of my husband's best friends failed the drug/alcohol test and went to rehab. It was his second or third time. He's been an alcoholic for years and years. He retired right out of rehab. Otherwise, he would have lost his job and forfeited his retirement because he knew he wasn't gonna stay clean and sober.

I don't think there has ever been a crash that was traced to mechanic error period - drugs or no drugs. At least, that's what my husband keeps telling me. I'm a white knuckle flyer and he HATES traveling with me.

As for monitoring the employee's demeanor, I don't know about that. My husband has never done drugs of any kind and never hung around with druggies. I don't think he could tell if a person was high. Even if they were totally wasted, half those guys were always off somewhere sleeping anyway(we're talking 3rd shift).

I have mixed feelings about the decriminalization of marijuana. I'm from the hippie generation - wore hot pants and boots just like Nancy Sinatra. I smoked my share of marijuana when I was young and thought it was great stuff. My perspective has changed with age, parenthood, social awareness, etc.

[MickeyScott 0]

I am new to the board and cannot figure out how to post a new message. Can someone help me?:help:

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

I am new to the board and cannot figure out how to post a new message. Can someone help me?:help:

You just did.:confused::faint:

Seriously, if you mean start a new discussion, you just click on a forum and then about 1/4 to 1/3 of the way down the page on the left, there will be a bubble saying "New Thread". Click on that.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

Less than 1/10 of one percent of the tested mechanics came back positive.

I don't doubt that you are correct. They often don't take the test, if they know they won't pass. They duck out the back door and call in sick for a couple of days.

I don't know what airline your husband works for or what procedures they use, but where I worked, management handled the testing notification and failure to take the test meant "goodbye" just like failure to submit to a breathtest after a car accident. Attendance was taken before test notification and if someone decided he was too sick to take the test, then he was too sick to work for my company. I have spoken to many mechanics at other airlines and it was the same way there.

I was so busy one day on a major problem that I wound up getting paid overtime to take the test prior to going home.

[JMO 0]

Make sure we execute them before we find out that they were innocent.

I didn't say they didn't have the right to appeal, just not for fifteen years.. And if they are guilty of murder then yes I think they should be given the same rights they gave their victim NONE!

80% of all violent criminals are illiterate. Educating them protects the community. During a pilot program in the 1980's only one of 200 maximum security convicts who received a college education and then were released after serving their full sentence was re-arrested, but 78% of those who did not get schooling were re-arrested. Think of all the extra victims and all the extra money it took to prosecute and re-incarcerate those people.

What were these peoples crime? Murder, rape, ect.... goes back to eye for eye...

Being illiterate is not an excuse for crime.. so if i want to go to school just go rob a store.. why not use that money to eduacate the illiterate that OBEY THE LAWS.. Just my thoughts I guess My views are not agreed with but we can agree to disagree... :nervous

[JMO 0]

It is! I just wanted to point out that we should not disagree with people's pet peeves. they are so personal. :cool:

maybe there were not enough smiles in the post. :) :) :)

I see where you are comming from but if I am big enough to put out how I feel I should be big enough to see that they just disagree .. no biggie

:biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1: :biggrin1:

I am all smiles.... PROMISE>>>

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

What were these peoples crime? Murder, rape, ect.... goes back to eye for eye...

Being illiterate is not an excuse for crime.. so if i want to go to school just go rob a store.. why not use that money to eduacate the illiterate that OBEY THE LAWS.. Just my thoughts I guess My views are not agreed with but we can agree to disagree... :nervous

No one said being illiterate was an excuse for crime, however illiterate people commit violent crime at about 5 times the rate as literate people. Forget (for a moment) what benefits the criminals are getting. Let's only look at the benefits to the non-criminal population.

#1. Less crime committed on the non-criminal population

A. In a Massachusetts pilot program, x-cons who received a college education in prison only had one out of 200 commit a violent crime compared with 167 out of 200 who did not get an education in prison. That means there were at least 166 less victims among US because of the program. Benefit for US

B. There may have been more than 166 less victims. If each non-educated criminal was caught on his first crime, then there were only 166 extra victims compared to not having the program, but if some committed 2 or 3 crimes, the number of victims could be 300, 400 or 500. Benefit for US.

C. When someone kills me, not only am I a victim, but so is my wife, my children, my grandchildren, etc. One person killed actually incurs many victims. This could bring the number of extra victims to 2000 to 3000 or more. Benefit to US.

D. Look at the cost to the tax-payer of the arrest, prosecution and incarceration of the extra 166 x-cons who were not educated in prison. It will cost about $300,000 to put the criminal back behind bars and over $30,000 per year to keep him there. That comes out to $50,000,000 to convict and $5,000,000 a year to keep them in jail. If the average sentence is 10 years, the total savings to the tax-payer for educating the 200 convicts is 100 million dollars. Benefit to US.

E. Lower crime rates mean lower insurance rates for homes and cars (fire & theft). Benefit to US.

#2. X-cons with educations get jobs

A. They pay taxes while they work. And because they get better jobs, they pay higher taxes. Benefit to US.

B. They get jobs helping prospective criminals go straight. Who knows more about stopping crime than an x-criminal. Benefit to US.

#3. Intangibles

A. Do you remember the stories we have seen in the last couple of years about conjoined twins. Well one of the leading doctors on these cases was a criminal in his early years. He was turned around from being a gang member who would have led a violent life of crime, hurt many victims and been a drain on the criminal justice system and instead is performing surgery bordering on the miraculous. How many more people who can make a real contribution to society are there among these uneducated people? Benefit to US.

B. It makes better people out of the x-cons.

History: The program I described was killed because the Republican candidate for governor used the same arguments that you have used. He was elected and killed the program. But the people who ran the program have continued to follow the x-cons who were educated and they have been a benefit to society rather than the drain that the x-cons who did not take part in the program have been. The conservatives said the program was a waste of money although they can not refute the results.

But now, some states including Florida have opened faith-based prisons where convicts are given an education as long as they join the religious program. The results are similar. The conservatives there (and in other states) do not mind giving an education to criminals for free as long as they can have their souls too. In at least one state, a judge has ruled it unconstitutional to use tax-payer's money for religious training. The sponsors of the faith-based prison's educational system contend that without religion, education is worthless, but the Massachusetts pilot program showed equal results.

[JMO 0]

Tired old man,

You make a very valid point.. Education for non violent prisoners would probley help in the long run. The problem I have with our system is that we house murderers, child sex offender, rapest, who have been found guilty (they were tried in a fair court), and we give them luxeries that our poverty law abiding citizens can't afford. And I PAY FOR IT! Then They give them an education that I can't afford and say they are reabilitated so they can go rape someone else. Like you said it cost the us millions to house people, who I believe, don't deserve a second chance.. Again I say it , eye for eye.. Again this is just my 2 cents

[Wheetsin 714]

The sponsors of the faith-based prison's educational system contend that without religion, education is worthless, but the Massachusetts pilot program showed equal results.

That's an interesting perspective, I had never heard that before. I guess there's no sense in starting my PhD program next year afterall. :cool: I have so many issues with government located faith-based initiatives it's not even funny (see previous "rule" on maintaing separation of church and state).

There's a strong dichotomy here.

1) This man killed my child, and now the money I work hard to earn, and that I pay in taxes, is being used to give him a free education, when I can't even afford to educate myself.

2) This man killed my child, but if we use his sentence time to educate him, he is less like to repeat offend, and more likely to become a productive and contributing member of our society, so I will indirectly see a small benefit by educating him.

So by that rationale, if someone is serving a life sentence with no chance of parole, it's pointless to educate him for "our" benefit, so he should not have the same educational opportunities as someone who committed a lesser crime or is serving a lesser sentence.

Slippery slope from an ethical standpoint -- how do you deny the same education to two people, who committed the exact same crime, and just happened to receive different sentences. Or -- would there be a cut-off involved? Do we apply age valuation? Can you receive an education if you'll be released when you're 40 or younger, but not if you'll be older? Is there any point in giving the same educational opportunities to someone who will be 95 when they get out of prison, as someone who will be 25? Interesting!

What about offering education in lieu of - say - weight on the grounds. Get an education, be less likely to commit a crime. Lift weights - be as likely (if not more, by nature of incarceration) to commit a crime, but now you can be a lot stronger/more intimidating when you do it.

Or we could say, "Forget education. Forget leisure time. Forget air conditioning. The best thing to prevent criminals from being repeat offenders is to make prison the single-most unpleasant experience they've ever had." You only put your hand into the fire once or twice before you realize - "Hey! That's not fun!" and don't do it anymore.

But then - if you have a population that has learned that robbery is the only way to put food on the table, and you do nothing to provide them with another means of putting food on the table, what can you possibly expect other than they rob again?

I'll stop, b/c I could go on, and on...

[JMO 0]

Or we could say, "Forget education. Forget leisure time. Forget air conditioning. The best thing to prevent criminals from being repeat offenders is to make prison the single-most unpleasant experience they've ever had." You only put your hand into the fire once or twice before you realize - "Hey! That's not fun!" and don't do it anymore.

I couln't have said it better myself!!! oh wait I didn't lol :cool:

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

It is really a shame that the Massachusetts pilot program was terminated in the mid-1980's. If it wasn't we might have crime rates to compare between Massachusetts and the states with the harshest forms of incarceration.

For all those who think that incarceration is much too easy on the convicts and that the convicts get things that they can't afford, I ask, "Why don't you commit a crime to take advantage of their easy life and benefits?"

For those that think that harsh prisons are a deterrent to people with criminal minds, then realize that you believe that people with criminal minds think the same way as you do, but if they did think the same way as you do, they wouldn't be criminal. Giving them an education gives then a mind similar to yours and deters recidivism.

As far as our judicial system being fair, I went to college with a man who founded a group that has gotten over 30 death row inmates out of prison. No! Not on technicalities, but because they were totally innocent. And let's not forget that a group of Northwestern college students got 13 of the 25 Illinois death row inmates released and found the real killers (who each confessed when confronted) for a class project in 1999 or 2000.

The added cost of education for convicts is minimal compared with the total cost of incarceration. I would allow all convicts to participate. My argument about the benefits to the public was not a way of separating the inmates, but a way to prove that it is a worthwhile goal. The prison violence would go down if all, including lifers were given an education, which would be a benefit to the correctional officers.

Do you think Christ would have wanted the most downtrodden of our society to be treated like animals? I believe in Love, compassion and forgiveness. I believe that is why Christ died on the cross. Do not only quote “an eye for and eye', try quoting some of the Beatitudes of Jesus.

[Wheetsin 714]

Do you think Christ would have wanted the most downtrodden of our society to be treated like animals? I believe in Love, compassion and forgiveness. I believe that is why Christ died on the cross. Do not only quote “an eye for and eye', try quoting some of the Beatitudes of Jesus.

You're asking me this question? Or someone else?

As for "Why don't you commit a crime to take advantage of their easy life and benefits?" - because I don't need to. Were my situation different, I don't know that I wouldn't. No one can know until they're in the position. And relatively few people can rationalize the impact that their personality would have on such a situation. You can say you'd never eat a cockroach, but starvation really hurts, and it wouldn't take too long before that cockroach started looking pretty tasty. You can say you'd never kill another human, but until someone else is trying to cut your baby's throat, you have no idea what you're truly capable of. When the reptilian brain kicks in, some amazing things can happen.

I do believe that harsher prisons would deter more ciminals, but I absolutely do not think criminal minds think the same way I do. I have to believe this based on several factors, not the least of which is their own testimony -- and not the least of which is that we've been subjected to totally different conditioning (enter my belief that there is no free will). So - have to disagree with your claim. I believe that when you're talking about the types of behavioral (much more so than cognitive) processes of criminals, you can't disregard the behavioral aspect in preference of trying to build new schemata.

Maybe don't focus on trying to "prove". Just sit back and enjoy the fact that everyone has different perspectives.