On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 04:05:09 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 22:05:44 -0500, Frank Krygowski
><frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>On 2/21/2024 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:48:14 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:36:56 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Explain why criminals are penalized by imprisonment.
>>>>>
>>>>> The usual answers are 1) To teach the criminal to obey laws in the
>>>>> future, and 2) to protect people from those who have not (yet?) learned
>>>>> to obey laws.
>>>>
>>>>> But our system of imprisonment doesn't seem to achieve those goals. See
>>>>> below.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/ranking/murder-homicide-rate
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Murder Rate- Canada (2017) 1.819
>>>>>> U.S. - 5.244
>>>>> So the U.S. has a much higher imprisonment rate than Canada. If
>>>>> imprisoning so many people taught criminals to obey laws and protected
>>>>> people from crime, the U.S. would have much lower crime rates.
>>>>
>>>>> It isn't working. Doing the same thing over and over despite failure is
>>>>> insanity.
>>>>
>>> Like ,many "not very intelligent" people Frank keeps repeating the
>>> same thing over and over ...
>>
>>:-) That's funny coming from you, John!
>>
>>> "it don't work". So tell us Frank what is
>>> your solution?
>>
>>You won't like it, because it's not simplistic, and it's longer than a
>>sound bite. But I'd begin by examining countries with similar economic
>>prosperity and evaluating what they do differently than the U.S.
>
>
>In other words, he has no solution.

"Well, so it's not simplistic and requires the study of other
countries are doing" .

Certainly proof that Frankie doesn't know what he is talking about as
about every law enforcement agency in the U.S. knows. The FBI even
publishes statistics.

But then, that's Frankly all over. When he doesn't know what is going
on just mumble a bunch of garbage and hope the other guy won't know
either.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 04:05:51 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 22:07:58 -0500, Frank Krygowski
><frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>On 2/21/2024 8:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 14:55:04 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:18:35 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We
>>>>> imprison more than anybody, and still suffer much higher crime rates
>>>>> than similar countries.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>
>>>> Because we have more criminals.
>>>
>>> An interesting comparison of crime in Canada and the U,S
>>> https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime
>>>
>>> It is rather simple to explain the incarceration rates between the
>>> U.S. and Canada.
>>
>>That page is evidence that the U.S. system of crime prevention is a
>>failure compared to Canada. That should be obvious.
>
>
>Assumes "facts" not in evidence.

More Frankie make believe. The page in references portrays the numbers
of criminal acts in Canada compare with the U.S. and has nothing to do
with cause.

But that's Frankie all over. When you don't know just throw a few lies
in the game and hope that someone will change the subject.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>> On 2/21/2024 3:04 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>> On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:04:33 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/20/2024 5:08 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri Feb 2 12:03:13 2024 Frank Krygowski  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not condoning every release of every accused person. But the
>>>>>>> U.S.
>>>>>>> already sets records among prosperous countries for incarceration.
>>>>>>> Apparently many other countries get better results using different
>>>>>>> strategies.
>>>>>
>>>>> I( wonder... did Frank ever stop to think. Perhaps the reason the U.S.
>>>>> has so many incarcerated is because they have so many criminals?
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure I've thought about this more than you, John.
>>>>
>>>> Did you ever ask "_Why_ would the U.S. have so many more criminals than
>>>> comparable nations? And what could be done to improve that situation?"
>>>>
>>>> For a fairly simple comparison, I'd look at data for the two sides of
>>>> the U.S./Canada border. The human beings on the two sides are not
>>>> different species. But both crime rates and incarceration rates are
>>>> far,
>>>> far better in Canada. Ditto for most European countries.
>>>>
>>>> One thing seems sure: America incarcerating a record proportion of its
>>>> citizens is _not_ making it into a low crime country. So at what point
>>>> should we look at alternative solutions?
>>>>
>>>> "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results
>>>> is a
>>>> definition of insanity."
>>>
>>> One reason is that the USA has had a government policy of paying women
>>> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
>>> their home.
>>  wow...talk about straw men.....OF course we should expect that a
>> proudly and willfully ignorant dumbass from the dumbshine state would
>> parrot right-wing pabulum from his masters
>>
>>>
>>> In spite of all the hype about how terrible we heterosexual males are
>>> (especially "white" heterosexual "biological" males),
>>
>> aww....is the poor wittle tricycle rider being victimized again?
>>
>>> having fathers
>>> in the home is an important part of raising children.
>>
>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is paying women
>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are kicked out of
>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for the dumbass
>> course.
>>
>
> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>
> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/

Funny how neither of those links support the strawman "the USA has had a
government policy of paying women to have babies and paying them more if
the kick any adult males out of their home."

--
Add xx to reply

On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>
>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is paying women
>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are kicked out of
>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for the dumbass
>>>> course.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>
>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>
>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information proving women are
>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>
>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple who did divorce
>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman should stay in a
>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are lower? Really?
>
> Another Krygowski strawman...

<eyeroll>
Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful ignorance. The
strawman is "the USA has had a government policy of paying women
to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
their home. "

>
> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>
<snipped-cut-n-paste>
<eyeroll>
ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand

--
Add xx to reply

On 2/21/2024 10:48 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:36:56 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2/21/2024 5:50 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>
>>> But Frank gets it wrong. The purpose of imprisonment is to penalize
>>> the criminal.
>>
>> Again, you seem to not have thought about this very deeply.
>>
>> Explain why criminals are penalized by imprisonment.
>>
>> The usual answers are 1) To teach the criminal to obey laws in the
>> future, and 2) to protect people from those who have not (yet?) learned
>> to obey laws.
>
> To make potential criminals more fearful of committing a crime.
>
>> But our system of imprisonment doesn't seem to achieve those goals. See
>> below.
>>
>>>
>>> https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/ranking/murder-homicide-rate
>>>
>>> Murder Rate- Canada (2017) 1.819
>>> U.S. - 5.244
>> So the U.S. has a much higher imprisonment rate than Canada. If
>> imprisoning so many people taught criminals to obey laws and protected
>> people from crime, the U.S. would have much lower crime rates.
>
> Assumes "facts" not in evidence.
>
>> It isn't working. Doing the same thing over and over despite failure is
>> insanity.
>
> Says the guy who repeated the same antigun nonsense for weeks and
> weeks.

Floriduh dumbass spouts nonsense irrelevant to the discussion....taking
kunich lessons, are we?

--
Add xx to reply

On 2/21/2024 2:22 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/21/2024 12:10 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:18:35 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:36 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Again, you seem to not have thought about this very deeply.
>>>>>
>>>>> Explain why criminals are penalized by imprisonment.
>>>>>
>>>>> The usual answers are 1) To teach the criminal to obey laws in the
>>>>> future, and 2) to protect people from those who have not (yet?)
>>>>> learned to obey laws.
>>>>>
>>>>> But our system of imprisonment doesn't seem to achieve those goals.
>>>>> See below.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/ranking/murder-homicide-rate
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Murder Rate- Canada (2017) 1.819
>>>>>> U.S. - 5.244
>>>>> So the U.S. has a much higher imprisonment rate than Canada. If
>>>>> imprisoning so many people taught criminals to obey laws and protected
>>>>> people from crime, the U.S. would have much lower crime rates.
>>>>>
>>>>> It isn't working. Doing the same thing over and over despite failure
>>>>> is insanity.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This morning, the reconstruction of the KC parade mayhem shows a bunch
>>>> of armed idiots who began with "F you!" and F you too!" and quickly
>>>> descended into multidirectional negligent discharges.  Who thinks like
>>>> that?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.myarklamiss.com/news/morning-show/fox-14-your-morning-news-kansas-city-chiefs-super-bowl-parade-shooting-update/
>>>
>>> Yes. Wow, who would have imagined that letting every yahoo in America
>>> carry a gun everywhere might lead to so many mass shootings, right?
>>>
>>> And did you note the firing rate heard from about 0:13 to 0:15 in that
>>> video? "Let's make sure the idiots can empty a magazine in two seconds!"
>>>
>>>> Regarding public policy, the current laxity has real costs too:
>>>> https://cwbchicago.com/2024/02/cta-chicago-sentenced-two-shootings-on-felony-bail.html
>>>
>>> As discussed over and over, there are well established legal and
>>> financial reasons for our bail system - like "No new taxes!!!" for
>>> example.
>>>
>>> You've presented nothing but individual anecdotes about shootings by
>>> those out on bail. I suspect those particular perps are a very small
>>> percentage of the problem.
>>>
>>> But as always, you're welcome to present systemic solutions. Perhaps "As
>>> soon as anyone is arrested, imprison him or her until trial. We'll raise
>>> taxes to build the jail capacity. We'll do away with 'Innocent until
>>> proven guilty' and remove judges' discretion."
>>>
>>> And perhaps "All convicted felons will receive life sentences. We'll
>>> imprison an even higher proportion of our population."
>>>
>>> Never mind the fact that no similar strategy seems to be working. We
>>> imprison more than anybody, and still suffer much higher crime rates
>>> than similar countries.
>>
>> Ten year minimum sentence for anyone who commits a crime, any crime,
>> while in posession of a gun. Add five years if the perp cannot legally
>> own a gun.
>>
>> Pay for it by eliminating all the foriegn aid to countries who are not
>> allies.
>
> Many (most?) States already have mandatory minimums for felony while armed.
>
> In many places, Cook County for example, a felon in possession of a
> stolen firearm used in an armed robbery can count on being charged with
> disorderly conduct and a disappearance ticket.

I call bullshit - I can find no link to support "a felon in possession
of a stolen firearm used in an armed robbery can count on being charged
with disorderly conduct and a disappearance ticket."

I'll stand corrected if you can provide one.

--
Add xx to reply

On 2/22/2024 4:19 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 14:44:54 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 16:49:57 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 16:46:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/21/2024 3:08 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Opinions vary and you're welcome to yours.
>>>>>
>>>>> This just in from the Maricopa County prosecutor:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://710wor.iheart.com/content/2024-02-21-arizona-prosecutor-refuses-to-extradite-suspect-in-nyc-hotel-slaying/
>>>>
>>>> The most consistent reason for our disagreements:
>>>>
>>>> I'm a data guy. You're an anecdote guy.
>>>
>>> "I worked with the guy. He used his solid model
>>> animations of the gun mechanism to explain it to me while he was
>>> designing it. The patent didn't involve that mechanism; it involved
>>> other components and their innovative manufacturing. But the gun is
>>> almost entirely his design."
>>>
>>> FRank Krygowski
>>>
>>> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/Zu_BtGgv8Fs/m/tk2Zbzx1BgAJ
>>
>> That post by Frank, sometime ago, probably does more to expose Franks
>> lack of mechanical knowledge then anything he has ever posted.
>>
>> You see, a recoil operated hand gun has a minimum of moving parts and
>> certainly doesn't require a animated model to understand, if for no
>> other reason that it is, itself, an animated model.
>
> Of course, Krygowski has no friend who designs guns. It was just
> another of his pathetic undocumented brags.
>

Floriduh dumbass demanding others answer his questions again....
--
Add xx to reply

On 2/21/2024 9:07 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 2/21/2024 8:18 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 14:55:04 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:18:35 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We
>>>> imprison more than anybody, and still suffer much higher
>>>> crime rates
>>>> than similar countries.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>
>>> Because we have more criminals.
>>
>> An interesting comparison of crime in Canada and the U,S
>> https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Canada/United-States/Crime
>>
>> It is rather simple to explain the incarceration rates
>> between the
>> U.S. and Canada.
>
> That page is evidence that the U.S. system of crime
> prevention is a failure compared to Canada. That should be
> obvious.
>

El Salvador's business climate, especially for small
businesses, has improved greatly with the removal of some
40,000 gang members to prison. Concomitantly their murder
rate plummeted which IMHO is a societal improvement as well.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/22/2024 1:44 AM, John B. wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 16:49:57 -0500, Catrike Ryder
> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 16:46:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/21/2024 3:08 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Opinions vary and you're welcome to yours.
>>>>
>>>> This just in from the Maricopa County prosecutor:
>>>>
>>>> https://710wor.iheart.com/content/2024-02-21-arizona-prosecutor-refuses-to-extradite-suspect-in-nyc-hotel-slaying/
>>>
>>> The most consistent reason for our disagreements:
>>>
>>> I'm a data guy. You're an anecdote guy.
>>
>> "I worked with the guy. He used his solid model
>> animations of the gun mechanism to explain it to me while he was
>> designing it. The patent didn't involve that mechanism; it involved
>> other components and their innovative manufacturing. But the gun is
>> almost entirely his design."
>>
>> FRank Krygowski
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/Zu_BtGgv8Fs/m/tk2Zbzx1BgAJ
>
> That post by Frank, sometime ago, probably does more to expose Franks
> lack of mechanical knowledge then anything he has ever posted.
>
> You see, a recoil operated hand gun has a minimum of moving parts and
> certainly doesn't require a animated model to understand, if for no
> other reason that it is, itself, an animated model.
>
>

His statement made sense to me.

Any basic firearm action (there are several current formats)
can be greatly improved by manufacturing process changes;
cold heading or SCM casting or sintering vs subtractive
machining for example. Economic improvements (faster cycle
time or reduced capital machinery) are real improvements
even where the basic action principles are unchanged.
Despite our USA high volume in the industry, manufacturers
regularly reorganize or are liquidated and one might say
that production cost is more important than which action
format is applied.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/22/2024 7:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is
>>>>> paying women
>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are
>>>>> kicked out of
>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for
>>>>> the dumbass
>>>>> course.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>
>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>
>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information
>>> proving women are
>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>
>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple who
>>> did divorce
>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman should
>>> stay in a
>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are
>>> lower? Really?
>>
>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>
> <eyeroll>
> Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful ignorance.
> The strawman is "the USA has had a government policy of
> paying women
> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult
> males out of
> their home. "
>
>>
>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>
> <snipped-cut-n-paste>
> <eyeroll>
> ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand
>

Overview:
https://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988/clintons-welfare-reform

--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/22/2024 7:23 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 2/21/2024 2:22 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/21/2024 12:10 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:18:35 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:36 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, you seem to not have thought about this very
>>>>>> deeply.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Explain why criminals are penalized by imprisonment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The usual answers are 1) To teach the criminal to obey
>>>>>> laws in the
>>>>>> future, and 2) to protect people from those who have
>>>>>> not (yet?)
>>>>>> learned to obey laws.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But our system of imprisonment doesn't seem to achieve
>>>>>> those goals.
>>>>>> See below.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/ranking/murder-homicide-rate
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Murder Rate- Canada (2017) 1.819
>>>>>>> U.S. - 5.244
>>>>>> So the U.S. has a much higher imprisonment rate than
>>>>>> Canada. If
>>>>>> imprisoning so many people taught criminals to obey
>>>>>> laws and protected
>>>>>> people from crime, the U.S. would have much lower
>>>>>> crime rates.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It isn't working. Doing the same thing over and over
>>>>>> despite failure
>>>>>> is insanity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This morning, the reconstruction of the KC parade
>>>>> mayhem shows a bunch
>>>>> of armed idiots who began with "F you!" and F you too!"
>>>>> and quickly
>>>>> descended into multidirectional negligent discharges.
>>>>> Who thinks like
>>>>> that?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.myarklamiss.com/news/morning-show/fox-14-your-morning-news-kansas-city-chiefs-super-bowl-parade-shooting-update/
>>>>
>>>> Yes. Wow, who would have imagined that letting every
>>>> yahoo in America
>>>> carry a gun everywhere might lead to so many mass
>>>> shootings, right?
>>>>
>>>> And did you note the firing rate heard from about 0:13
>>>> to 0:15 in that
>>>> video? "Let's make sure the idiots can empty a magazine
>>>> in two seconds!"
>>>>
>>>>> Regarding public policy, the current laxity has real
>>>>> costs too:
>>>>> https://cwbchicago.com/2024/02/cta-chicago-sentenced-two-shootings-on-felony-bail.html
>>>>
>>>> As discussed over and over, there are well established
>>>> legal and
>>>> financial reasons for our bail system - like "No new
>>>> taxes!!!" for example.
>>>>
>>>> You've presented nothing but individual anecdotes about
>>>> shootings by
>>>> those out on bail. I suspect those particular perps are
>>>> a very small
>>>> percentage of the problem.
>>>>
>>>> But as always, you're welcome to present systemic
>>>> solutions. Perhaps "As
>>>> soon as anyone is arrested, imprison him or her until
>>>> trial. We'll raise
>>>> taxes to build the jail capacity. We'll do away with
>>>> 'Innocent until
>>>> proven guilty' and remove judges' discretion."
>>>>
>>>> And perhaps "All convicted felons will receive life
>>>> sentences. We'll
>>>> imprison an even higher proportion of our population."
>>>>
>>>> Never mind the fact that no similar strategy seems to be
>>>> working. We
>>>> imprison more than anybody, and still suffer much higher
>>>> crime rates
>>>> than similar countries.
>>>
>>> Ten year minimum sentence for anyone who commits a crime,
>>> any crime,
>>> while in posession of a gun. Add five years if the perp
>>> cannot legally
>>> own a gun.
>>>
>>> Pay for it by eliminating all the foriegn aid to
>>> countries who are not
>>> allies.
>>
>> Many (most?) States already have mandatory minimums for
>> felony while armed.
>>
>> In many places, Cook County for example, a felon in
>> possession of a stolen firearm used in an armed robbery
>> can count on being charged with disorderly conduct and a
>> disappearance ticket.
>
> I call bullshit - I can find no link to support "a felon in
> possession of a stolen firearm used in an armed robbery can
> count on being charged with disorderly conduct and a
> disappearance ticket."
>
> I'll stand corrected if you can provide one.
>

All day, every day. Do you read news regularly?
Incidents:

https://cwbchicago.com/2023/10/chicago-gun-charges-david-cervantes-traffic-stop.html

"Judge William Fahy sent him home Monday with a nighttime
curfew."

Armed juveniles are ipso facto guilty of illegal possession.
But seldom charged:
https://abc7chicago.com/chicago-shooting-west-pullman-halsted-news/13429286/

Overview:
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/03/23/gun-violence-possession-police-chicago

In reference to a noted RBT contributor, this from that link:

“People are for ‘gun control’ but against ‘mass
incarceration,’” said James Forman Jr., a professor at Yale
Law School

"

--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/22/2024 8:51 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/22/2024 7:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is paying women
>>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are kicked out of
>>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for the dumbass
>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>>
>>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>>
>>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information proving women are
>>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>>
>>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple who did divorce
>>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman should stay in a
>>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are lower? Really?
>>>
>>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>>
>> <eyeroll>
>> Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful ignorance. The
>> strawman is "the USA has had a government policy of paying women
>> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
>> their home. "
>>
>>>
>>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>>
>> <snipped-cut-n-paste>
>> <eyeroll>
>> ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand
>>
>
> Overview:
> https://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988/clintons-welfare-reform
>
>

From your link:

"But the program really did have deep problems. The three most common
criticisms made of AFDC were:

1. It caused poor adults who could work to not work.
2. It caused dependency; rather than using it as a temporary safety
net, some people embraced it as a way of life.
3. It encouraged having children out of wedlock and discouraged marriage.

The first of these claims was definitely true, the second was kind of
true, and the last might have been true but the effect was very, very
small."

Still no evidence that the program was a "policy of paying women to have
babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of their home. "

--
Add xx to reply

On 2/22/2024 8:59 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/22/2024 7:23 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 2/21/2024 2:22 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 2/21/2024 12:10 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:18:35 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:36 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Again, you seem to not have thought about this very deeply.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Explain why criminals are penalized by imprisonment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The usual answers are 1) To teach the criminal to obey laws in the
>>>>>>> future, and 2) to protect people from those who have not (yet?)
>>>>>>> learned to obey laws.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But our system of imprisonment doesn't seem to achieve those goals.
>>>>>>> See below.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/ranking/murder-homicide-rate
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Murder Rate- Canada (2017) 1.819
>>>>>>>> U.S. - 5.244
>>>>>>> So the U.S. has a much higher imprisonment rate than Canada. If
>>>>>>> imprisoning so many people taught criminals to obey laws and
>>>>>>> protected
>>>>>>> people from crime, the U.S. would have much lower crime rates.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It isn't working. Doing the same thing over and over despite failure
>>>>>>> is insanity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This morning, the reconstruction of the KC parade mayhem shows a
>>>>>> bunch
>>>>>> of armed idiots who began with "F you!" and F you too!" and quickly
>>>>>> descended into multidirectional negligent discharges. Who thinks like
>>>>>> that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.myarklamiss.com/news/morning-show/fox-14-your-morning-news-kansas-city-chiefs-super-bowl-parade-shooting-update/
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes. Wow, who would have imagined that letting every yahoo in America
>>>>> carry a gun everywhere might lead to so many mass shootings, right?
>>>>>
>>>>> And did you note the firing rate heard from about 0:13 to 0:15 in that
>>>>> video? "Let's make sure the idiots can empty a magazine in two
>>>>> seconds!"
>>>>>
>>>>>> Regarding public policy, the current laxity has real costs too:
>>>>>> https://cwbchicago.com/2024/02/cta-chicago-sentenced-two-shootings-on-felony-bail.html
>>>>>
>>>>> As discussed over and over, there are well established legal and
>>>>> financial reasons for our bail system - like "No new taxes!!!" for
>>>>> example.
>>>>>
>>>>> You've presented nothing but individual anecdotes about shootings by
>>>>> those out on bail. I suspect those particular perps are a very small
>>>>> percentage of the problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> But as always, you're welcome to present systemic solutions.
>>>>> Perhaps "As
>>>>> soon as anyone is arrested, imprison him or her until trial. We'll
>>>>> raise
>>>>> taxes to build the jail capacity. We'll do away with 'Innocent until
>>>>> proven guilty' and remove judges' discretion."
>>>>>
>>>>> And perhaps "All convicted felons will receive life sentences. We'll
>>>>> imprison an even higher proportion of our population."
>>>>>
>>>>> Never mind the fact that no similar strategy seems to be working. We
>>>>> imprison more than anybody, and still suffer much higher crime rates
>>>>> than similar countries.
>>>>
>>>> Ten year minimum sentence for anyone who commits a crime, any crime,
>>>> while in posession of a gun. Add five years if the perp cannot legally
>>>> own a gun.
>>>>
>>>> Pay for it by eliminating all the foriegn aid to countries who are not
>>>> allies.
>>>
>>> Many (most?) States already have mandatory minimums for felony while
>>> armed.
>>>
>>> In many places, Cook County for example, a felon in possession of a
>>> stolen firearm used in an armed robbery can count on being charged
>>> with disorderly conduct and a disappearance ticket.
>>
>> I call bullshit - I can find no link to support "a felon in possession
>> of a stolen firearm used in an armed robbery can count on being
>> charged with disorderly conduct and a disappearance ticket."
>>
>> I'll stand corrected if you can provide one.
>>
>
> All day, every day. Do you read news regularly?

not chicago news

> Incidents:
>
> https://cwbchicago.com/2023/10/chicago-gun-charges-david-cervantes-traffic-stop.html
>
> "Judge William Fahy sent him home Monday with a nighttime curfew."

you wrote:
"a felon in possession of a stolen firearm used in an armed robbery can
count on being charged with disorderly conduct and a disappearance ticket."

1) cervantes isn't a felon
2) the firearm wasn't reported as stolen
3) He was charged with "felony aggravated unlawful use of a weapon by a
person under 21", not disorderly conduct
4) he wasn't issued a "disappearance ticket", he was given a curfew
(granted, seems light, but doesn't comport with your claim).

>
> Armed juveniles are ipso facto guilty of illegal possession. But seldom
> charged:
> https://abc7chicago.com/chicago-shooting-west-pullman-halsted-news/13429286/

Which still doesn't comport with "a felon in possession of a stolen
firearm used in an armed robbery can count on being charged with
disorderly conduct and a disappearance ticket."

besides, from your link

"the defense has a claim, a very strong one it seems, that the shooter
was acting in defense of his mother, who was being pummeled by an
assailant. That's a pretty hard case to bring on murder charges," said
ABC7 Legal Analyst Gil Soffer."

>
> Overview:
> https://www.themarshallproject.org/2023/03/23/gun-violence-possession-police-chicago
>
> In reference to a noted RBT contributor, this from that link:
>
> “People are for ‘gun control’ but against ‘mass incarceration,’” said
> James Forman Jr., a professor at Yale Law School

Nothing in the Marshall Project links even remotely resembles "a felon
in possession of a stolen firearm used in an armed robbery can count on
being charged with disorderly conduct and a disappearance ticket."

Care to try again?

>
> "
>
>

--
Add xx to reply

On 2/22/2024 2:40 AM, John B. wrote:

<snip>

> More Frankie make believe. The page in references portrays the numbers
> of criminal acts in Canada compare with the U.S. and has nothing to do
> with cause.
>
> But that's Frankie all over. When you don't know just throw a few lies
> in the game and hope that someone will change the subject.

We've seen over the years how "he who must not be named" will lie when
he has no data to support his beliefs.

Here's the reality: The U.S. has long moved past addressing the root
causes of crime.

The loss of living wage, blue collar, unskilled, union, manufacturing
jobs have ensured that crime will be here to stay. Frank should be well
aware of this, living near Youngstown.

Steel, shipbuilding, auto manufacturing, appliance manufacturing,
electronics manufacturing, etc., have been moving off-shore. Is it
easier to steal catalytic converters, and break into cars, than to take
a dull minimum wage job? Yes.

More prisons are now the long-term solution to crime. California got in
trouble for prison overcrowding and the solution was not building
additional prison space, it was to move low-level, non-violent criminals
to county jails. The county jails could not handle the numbers of
low-level criminals so "catch and release" became the norm for
misdemeanor property crimes.

It's not the dollar limit for misdemeanor versus felony since other
states have an even higher threshold than California, including Texas.
It's not the police. It's not the judges. It's not the district
attorneys. There is just not sufficient jail space to incarcerate all
the criminals. In fact, Gavin Newsom has been closing prisons to save
money. It costs about $100,000 per year per prisoner for incarceration.

There are also too many criminals in prison with life sentences that
pose no threat to society anymore but to release them would be
politically unacceptable. 25 years is long enough, even for murder, if
the criminal poses no threat.

Would voters support a bond measure for construction, and a tax measure
for the operation, of more jails and prisons? Because it's all about money.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On 2/22/2024 8:03 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 2/22/2024 8:51 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/22/2024 7:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government
>>>>>>> is paying women
>>>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares
>>>>>>> are kicked out of
>>>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par
>>>>>>> for the dumbass
>>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information
>>>>> proving women are
>>>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple
>>>>> who did divorce
>>>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman
>>>>> should stay in a
>>>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are
>>>>> lower? Really?
>>>>
>>>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>>>
>>> <eyeroll>
>>> Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful
>>> ignorance. The strawman is "the USA has had a government
>>> policy of paying women
>>> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult
>>> males out of
>>> their home. "
>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>>>
>>> <snipped-cut-n-paste>
>>> <eyeroll>
>>> ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand
>>>
>>
>> Overview:
>> https://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988/clintons-welfare-reform
>>
>>
>
> From your link:
>
> "But the program really did have deep problems. The three
> most common criticisms made of AFDC were:
>
> 1.    It caused poor adults who could work to not work.
> 2.    It caused dependency; rather than using it as a
> temporary safety net, some people embraced it as a way of life.
> 3.    It encouraged having children out of wedlock and
> discouraged marriage.
>
> The first of these claims was definitely true, the second
> was kind of true, and the last might have been true but the
> effect was very, very small."
>
> Still no evidence that the program was a "policy of paying
> women to have babies and paying them more if the kick any
> adult males out of their home. "
>
I'm old enough to remember when there were home visits by
welfare case workers, long long ago. They actually looked
for men's personal effects in the apartment, evidence of
male residence.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/22/2024 9:40 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/22/2024 8:03 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 2/22/2024 8:51 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 2/22/2024 7:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is paying
>>>>>>>> women
>>>>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are kicked
>>>>>>>> out of
>>>>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for the dumbass
>>>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information proving women are
>>>>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple who did divorce
>>>>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman should stay in a
>>>>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are lower?
>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>
>>>>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>>>>
>>>> <eyeroll>
>>>> Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful ignorance. The
>>>> strawman is "the USA has had a government policy of paying women
>>>> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
>>>> their home. "
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>>>>
>>>> <snipped-cut-n-paste>
>>>> <eyeroll>
>>>> ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand
>>>>
>>>
>>> Overview:
>>> https://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988/clintons-welfare-reform
>>>
>>>
>>
>>  From your link:
>>
>> "But the program really did have deep problems. The three most common
>> criticisms made of AFDC were:
>>
>> 1.    It caused poor adults who could work to not work.
>> 2.    It caused dependency; rather than using it as a temporary safety
>> net, some people embraced it as a way of life.
>> 3.    It encouraged having children out of wedlock and discouraged
>> marriage.
>>
>> The first of these claims was definitely true, the second was kind of
>> true, and the last might have been true but the effect was very, very
>> small."
>>
>> Still no evidence that the program was a "policy of paying women to
>> have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
>> their home. "
>>
> I'm old enough to remember when there were home visits by welfare case
> workers, long long ago.  They actually looked for men's personal effects
> in the apartment, evidence of male residence.

Which isn't "paying them more if they kick any adult males out of their
home". AFAIK it was to ensure the amount of money being distributed was
legitimate based on household income. IOW, If there was another male
person living there, why is it not shown in the records of the number of
people at the residence? contributions are being made by this additional
person, if any? An adult male living at the residence isn't an issue if
it's claimed properly. Note: AFDC means Aid to Families with Dependent
Children. "Families" does not automatically exclude men in that system.

--
Add xx to reply

On 2/22/2024 8:55 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 2/22/2024 9:40 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/22/2024 8:03 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>> On 2/22/2024 8:51 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 2/22/2024 7:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US
>>>>>>>>> government is paying women
>>>>>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares
>>>>>>>>> are kicked out of
>>>>>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par
>>>>>>>>> for the dumbass
>>>>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>>>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>>>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information
>>>>>>> proving women are
>>>>>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple
>>>>>>> who did divorce
>>>>>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman
>>>>>>> should stay in a
>>>>>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes
>>>>>>> are lower? Really?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>>>>>
>>>>> <eyeroll>
>>>>> Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful
>>>>> ignorance. The strawman is "the USA has had a
>>>>> government policy of paying women
>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any
>>>>> adult males out of
>>>>> their home. "
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>>>>>
>>>>> <snipped-cut-n-paste>
>>>>> <eyeroll>
>>>>> ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't
>>>>> understand
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Overview:
>>>> https://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988/clintons-welfare-reform
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>  From your link:
>>>
>>> "But the program really did have deep problems. The three
>>> most common criticisms made of AFDC were:
>>>
>>> 1.    It caused poor adults who could work to not work.
>>> 2.    It caused dependency; rather than using it as a
>>> temporary safety net, some people embraced it as a way of
>>> life.
>>> 3.    It encouraged having children out of wedlock and
>>> discouraged marriage.
>>>
>>> The first of these claims was definitely true, the second
>>> was kind of true, and the last might have been true but
>>> the effect was very, very small."
>>>
>>> Still no evidence that the program was a "policy of
>>> paying women to have babies and paying them more if the
>>> kick any adult males out of their home. "
>>>
>> I'm old enough to remember when there were home visits by
>> welfare case workers, long long ago.  They actually looked
>> for men's personal effects in the apartment, evidence of
>> male residence.
>
> Which isn't "paying them more if they kick any adult males
> out of their home". AFAIK it was to ensure the amount of
> money being distributed was legitimate based on household
> income. IOW, If there was another male person living there,
> why is it not shown in the records of the number of people
> at the residence? contributions are being made by this
> additional person, if any? An adult male living at the
> residence isn't an issue if it's claimed properly. Note:
> AFDC means Aid to Families with Dependent Children.
> "Families" does not automatically exclude men in that system.
>

Among us great unwashed, the name on the lease is frequently
not one of the persons actually living in the unit.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 2/22/2024 2:44 AM, John B. wrote:
>
> That post by Frank, sometime ago, probably does more to expose Franks
> lack of mechanical knowledge then anything he has ever posted.
>
> You see, a recoil operated hand gun has a minimum of moving parts and
> certainly doesn't require a animated model to understand, if for no
> other reason that it is, itself, an animated model.

The friend I mentioned did not design a handgun. It was a rifle.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/22/2024 9:40 AM, sms wrote:
> On 2/22/2024 2:40 AM, John B. wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> More Frankie make believe. The page in references portrays the numbers
>> of criminal acts in Canada compare with the U.S. and has nothing to do
>> with cause.
>>
>> But that's Frankie all over. When you don't know just throw a few lies
>> in the game and hope that someone will change the subject.
>
> We've seen over the years how "he who must not be named" will lie when
> he has no data to support his beliefs.
>
> Here's the reality: The U.S. has long moved past addressing the root
> causes of crime.
>
> The loss of living wage, blue collar, unskilled, union, manufacturing
> jobs have ensured that crime will be here to stay. Frank should be well
> aware of this, living near Youngstown.
>
> Steel, shipbuilding, auto manufacturing, appliance manufacturing,
> electronics manufacturing, etc., have been moving off-shore. Is it
> easier to steal catalytic converters, and break into cars, than to take
> a dull minimum wage job? Yes.
>
> More prisons are now the long-term solution to crime. California got in
> trouble for prison overcrowding and the solution was not building
> additional prison space, it was to move low-level, non-violent criminals
> to county jails. The county jails could not handle the numbers of
> low-level criminals so "catch and release" became the norm for
> misdemeanor property crimes.
>
> It's not the dollar limit for misdemeanor versus felony since other
> states have an even higher threshold than California, including Texas.
> It's not the police. It's not the judges. It's not the district
> attorneys. There is just not sufficient jail space to incarcerate all
> the criminals. In fact, Gavin Newsom has been closing prisons to save
> money. It costs about $100,000 per year per prisoner for incarceration.
>
> There are also too many criminals in prison with life sentences that
> pose no threat to society anymore but to release them would be
> politically unacceptable. 25 years is long enough, even for murder, if
> the criminal poses no threat.
>
> Would voters support a bond measure for construction, and a tax measure
> for the operation, of more jails and prisons? Because it's all about money.

Despite his insults, Scharf (AKA "sms") is largely correct in the
substance of his post. "No new taxes" limits incarceration space, and
incarceration alone doesn't work anyway. Most prisons and jails work
better as robbery training centers than as rehabilitation centers.

Kids growing up in the most wretched environments and with the most
wretched family structures see crime as their only hope. And crime tends
to get glorified in their culture, and to a degree in culture in
general, via video games and movies. And of course, guns are everywhere
in the U.S., leading to great temptation to use them.

Again: It would make sense to examine other countries with similar
prosperity and much lower crime rates. Those with intelligence could
learn from the comparisons.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/22/2024 8:51 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> Overview:
> https://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988/clintons-welfare-reform

Did you really read the article??

The overall theme seems to be that cracking down on the poor by reducing
welfare did not work. Also, that women having babies to get bigger
checks is almost entirely a myth.

This doesn't mean that welfare is perfect. Not even close. But please,
beware of simplistic myths and knee jerk reactions!

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2/22/2024 12:35 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 2/22/2024 8:55 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 2/22/2024 9:40 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 2/22/2024 8:03 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>> On 2/22/2024 8:51 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 2/22/2024 7:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is paying
>>>>>>>>>> women
>>>>>>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are kicked
>>>>>>>>>> out of
>>>>>>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for the
>>>>>>>>>> dumbass
>>>>>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>>>>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>>>>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information proving women
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple who did
>>>>>>>> divorce
>>>>>>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman should stay in a
>>>>>>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are lower?
>>>>>>>> Really?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <eyeroll>
>>>>>> Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful ignorance. The
>>>>>> strawman is "the USA has had a government policy of paying women
>>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males
>>>>>> out of
>>>>>> their home. "
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snipped-cut-n-paste>
>>>>>> <eyeroll>
>>>>>> ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Overview:
>>>>> https://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988/clintons-welfare-reform
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  From your link:
>>>>
>>>> "But the program really did have deep problems. The three most
>>>> common criticisms made of AFDC were:
>>>>
>>>> 1.    It caused poor adults who could work to not work.
>>>> 2.    It caused dependency; rather than using it as a temporary
>>>> safety net, some people embraced it as a way of life.
>>>> 3.    It encouraged having children out of wedlock and discouraged
>>>> marriage.
>>>>
>>>> The first of these claims was definitely true, the second was kind
>>>> of true, and the last might have been true but the effect was very,
>>>> very small."
>>>>
>>>> Still no evidence that the program was a "policy of paying women to
>>>> have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
>>>> their home. "
>>>>
>>> I'm old enough to remember when there were home visits by welfare
>>> case workers, long long ago.  They actually looked for men's personal
>>> effects in the apartment, evidence of male residence.
>>
>> Which isn't "paying them more if they kick any adult males out of
>> their home". AFAIK it was to ensure the amount of money being
>> distributed was legitimate based on household income. IOW, If there
>> was another male person living there, why is it not shown in the
>> records of the number of people at the residence? contributions are
>> being made by this additional person, if any? An adult male living at
>> the residence isn't an issue if it's claimed properly. Note: AFDC
>> means Aid to Families with Dependent Children. "Families" does not
>> automatically exclude men in that system.
>>
>
> Among us great unwashed, the name on the lease is frequently not one of
> the persons actually living in the unit.

Which is precisely why they conduct such 'inspections' at residences
that receive benefits.
--
Add xx to reply

On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 09:03:18 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On 2/22/2024 8:51 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/22/2024 7:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is paying women
>>>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are kicked out of
>>>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for the dumbass
>>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information proving women are
>>>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple who did divorce
>>>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman should stay in a
>>>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are lower? Really?
>>>>
>>>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>>>
>>> <eyeroll>
>>> Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful ignorance. The
>>> strawman is "the USA has had a government policy of paying women
>>> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
>>> their home. "
>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>>>
>>> <snipped-cut-n-paste>
>>> <eyeroll>
>>> ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand
>>>
>>
>> Overview:
>> https://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988/clintons-welfare-reform
>>
>>
>
> From your link:
>
>"But the program really did have deep problems. The three most common
>criticisms made of AFDC were:
>
>1. It caused poor adults who could work to not work.
>2. It caused dependency; rather than using it as a temporary safety
>net, some people embraced it as a way of life.
>3. It encouraged having children out of wedlock and discouraged marriage.
>
>The first of these claims was definitely true, the second was kind of
>true, and the last might have been true but the effect was very, very
>small."
>
>Still no evidence that the program was a "policy of paying women to have
>babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of their home. "

Err You don't know about the benefits for "single parent birth"?
It's been paid for quite a number of years now and I believe that
single parent births now account for about 40% of all U.S. births,
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 08:15:50 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is paying women
>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are kicked out of
>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for the dumbass
>>>>> course.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>
>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>
>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information proving women are
>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>
>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple who did divorce
>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman should stay in a
>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are lower? Really?
>>
>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>
><eyeroll>
>Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful ignorance. The
>strawman is "the USA has had a government policy of paying women
>to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
>their home. "
>
>>
>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>
><snipped-cut-n-paste>
><eyeroll>
>ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand

What's not to understand about the federal aid to unwed mothers
program?
See
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/government-grants-single-mother-mom-free
for additional information.

To my knowledge it's been going on at least since the early '60's and
probably earlier, when the girlfriend of one of the boys that worked
for me (3 fatherless children) got enough to not only support her
family but to buy her boyfriend all the beer he could drink several
times a week
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 2/22/2024 6:05 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 09:03:18 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2/22/2024 8:51 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 2/22/2024 7:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is paying women
>>>>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are kicked out of
>>>>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for the dumbass
>>>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information proving women are
>>>>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple who did divorce
>>>>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman should stay in a
>>>>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are lower? Really?
>>>>>
>>>>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>>>>
>>>> <eyeroll>
>>>> Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful ignorance. The
>>>> strawman is "the USA has had a government policy of paying women
>>>> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
>>>> their home. "
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>>>>
>>>> <snipped-cut-n-paste>
>>>> <eyeroll>
>>>> ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand
>>>>
>>>
>>> Overview:
>>> https://www.vox.com/2016/6/20/11789988/clintons-welfare-reform
>>>
>>>
>>
>> From your link:
>>
>> "But the program really did have deep problems. The three most common
>> criticisms made of AFDC were:
>>
>> 1. It caused poor adults who could work to not work.
>> 2. It caused dependency; rather than using it as a temporary safety
>> net, some people embraced it as a way of life.
>> 3. It encouraged having children out of wedlock and discouraged marriage.
>>
>> The first of these claims was definitely true, the second was kind of
>> true, and the last might have been true but the effect was very, very
>> small."
>>
>> Still no evidence that the program was a "policy of paying women to have
>> babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of their home. "
>
> Err You don't know about the benefits for "single parent birth"? > It's been paid for quite a number of years now

Which isn't "a government policy of paying women to have babies "

> and I believe that
> single parent births now account for about 40% of all U.S. births,

Which has nothing to do with this discussion, and certainly isn't any
evidence that "the USA has had a government policy of paying women to
have babies "

--
Add xx to reply

On 2/22/2024 8:43 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 08:15:50 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2/21/2024 10:52 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:40:23 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/21/2024 9:52 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 2/21/2024 4:40 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> True, but the false narrative that the US government is paying women
>>>>>> to have babies and paying them more if adult mares are kicked out of
>>>>>> the home is really, really, fucking stupid, but par for the dumbass
>>>>>> course.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel Moynihan raised that alarm in the 1960s:
>>>>> https://www.blackpast.org/african-american-history/moynihan-report-1965/
>>>>>
>>>>> but no one listened and it hasn't gotten any better
>>>>> https://singlemotherguide.com/state/
>>>>
>>>> Yes, aid exists. You haven't presented information proving women are
>>>> having babies and kicking out fathers for economic gain.
>>>>
>>>> I know or have known several single mothers, a couple who did divorce
>>>> abusive husbands. Are you suggesting that a woman should stay in a
>>>> marriage and endure frequent beatings so your taxes are lower? Really?
>>>
>>> Another Krygowski strawman...
>>
>> <eyeroll>
>> Another floriduh dumbass demonstration of willful ignorance. The
>> strawman is "the USA has had a government policy of paying women
>> to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males out of
>> their home. "
>>
>>>
>>> What is "Straw Man" and Why Do Narcissists Use It?
>>>
>> <snipped-cut-n-paste>
>> <eyeroll>
>> ye another dumbass cut-n-paste he clearly doesn't understand
>
> What's not to understand about the federal aid to unwed mothers
> program?
> See
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/government-grants-single-mother-mom-free
> for additional information.
>
> To my knowledge it's been going on at least since the early '60's and
> probably earlier, when the girlfriend of one of the boys that worked
> for me (3 fatherless children) got enough to not only support her
> family but to buy her boyfriend all the beer he could drink several
> times a week

<eyeroll>
More undocumented anecdotes from a guy whose lived in Thailand for the
last 40 years (translation - I don't believe you), and congratulations,
you just proved that "the USA has had a government policy of paying
women to have babies and paying them more if the kick any adult males
out of their home" is a strawman argument.

>

--
Add xx to reply