## Welfare wasted

Post by Chase Ricks » Thu May 17, 2012 4:23 am

http://freebeacon.com/indiana-welfare-dollars-spent-in-liquor-stores-strip-clubs-disneyland/
Go ahead and tell me they falsified this information and I'll tell you that you have been reading similar stories for so long you no longer care what happens in America.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by drawscore » Thu May 17, 2012 3:01 pm

Old news. A similar thing came up a year or so ago, and it was California welfare recipients that were hitting the ATM's in Las Vegas casinos. Of course, Eric Holder and his minions at the Department of Injustice don't want to hear about it. Either a year ago in California, or now, in Indiana.
Sorta demonstrates how much interest the Obama administration has in combating fraud, welfare, or electoral.
Drawscore

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu May 17, 2012 5:37 pm

So what's your point, Chase? Are you saying welfare fraud is a problem? Of course it is; it always has been. So what are you saying should be done about it, especially as the article states than the illegal transactions account for less than one percent of the welfare payouts? Crack down on those who make such transactions, or cut welfare for everyone alike - as Drawscore is probably thinking?
Oh, and btw Chase, didn't you once say in a pubic forum that you were in welfare?
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Chase Ricks » Thu May 17, 2012 5:43 pm

Jason I do not approve of those who abuse welfare by swindling the original state out of what its population earns.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu May 17, 2012 6:53 pm

> Chase Ricks wrote:Jason I do not approve of those who abuse welfare by swindling the original state out of what its population earns.

Well, yeah... I figured that out! And I do not approve of it either, lest you somehow got the wrong impression. I doubt anyone approves of that except for the thieves and cheats who do such swindling in the first place! It especially gripes me when they use the money for alcohol, cigarettes, porn, gambling, and other such addictive trash.
But you didn't answer my question. Precisely what do you say should be done about it?
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Chase Ricks » Thu May 17, 2012 6:59 pm

This is what I believe strongly should be done. All those who have dedicated their lives to robbing those dependent on welfare in the United States, regardless of political affiliation or party role, should be stripped of all their wealth and made to live among the poorest of the poor for a period of no less then three years so they can know exactly what it feels like to not have enough money for basic needs such as food shelter clothing and medical expenses if unable to afford Medicare, Medicaid or Obamacare.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu May 17, 2012 7:03 pm

> Chase Ricks wrote:This is what I believe strongly should be done. All those who have dedicated their lives to robbing those dependent on welfare in the United States, regardless of political affiliation or party role, should be stripped of all their wealth and made to live among the poorest of the poor for a period of no less then three years so they can know exactly what it feels like to not have enough money for basic needs such as food shelter clothing and medical expenses if unable to afford Medicare, Medicaid or Obamacare.

Now then, limiting yourself to what is actually practical (that is, legal in the US), what would you do?
Hint: your suggestion here is not even remotely practical unless we abolish the Constitution first.
Which, when you think of it, is a good thing!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Chase Ricks » Thu May 17, 2012 7:08 pm

Glad you asked Jason. Simple beginnings can lead to massive changes. In this case I would start by restructuring the welfare system so convicted felons that are newly released from state and government facilities have to wait a period of ten years without any new marks on their records before they can become eligible for benefits.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu May 17, 2012 7:17 pm

That's not practical either. For one thing it would only add to the recidivism rate - especially of those who committed theft-related crimes in the first place - by making it harder for them to find a job and make an honest living (many people fresh out of prison are flat broke). For another thing, that by itself would not affect those with no prior criminal record, which is probably the majority of those who commit such crimes.
How about this: if they can track how much welfare money is being spent on alcohol and so forth, they can also track precisely who is doing it. Anyone caught doing it would simply be excluded from welfare for life, plus possibly facing a fine and/or a prison term. That way only the guilty are affected, and not those who use their welfare payments only for things that they are intended for.
Of course, a good or a would be nice too, but then we'd stray into impractical territory again!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Chase Ricks » Thu May 17, 2012 7:19 pm

Your suggestions are well thought out Jason. I shall offer them to my superiors online.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by drawscore » Sat May 19, 2012 5:24 pm

First, replace the electric chair with electric bleachers.
Second, limit death penalty appeals to six months when the individual has been proven guilty beyond any doubt. When an individual is convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, but not beyond any doubt, appeals should be limited to five years from the date of conviction.
If a person is convicted of three violent felonies any two of which involve serious bodily injury to the victim, he shall be declared a "predator upon society," and shall be cordially invited to have a seat on the electric bleachers.
Every Friday afternoon, the sheriff marches them out behind the courthouse, sits them down, locks them in, and throws the switch.
Drawscore

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Sat May 19, 2012 9:07 pm

> drawscore wrote: When an individual is convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, but not beyond any doubt, appeals should be limited to five years from the date of conviction.

This might be fine, were it not for the growing evidence that a lot of people have been falsely convicted and wrongfully executed for crimes they had not committed. This also does not take into account how difficult it is for those previously convicted to take advantage of new technology in DNA testing that might prove them innocent.
If a way can be found to execute only those people where guilt is certain, i would be inclined to support the death penalty for murderers. Otherwise, until such things as racial profiling ceases to be a factor in convictions for crimes of all levels, I think capital punishment should be abolished altogether... at least for first convictions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_execution
http://www.criminaljusticedegreesguide. ... ution.html
http://www.the-slammer.org/carousel/wro ... ms-do-fail
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by drawscore » Sun May 20, 2012 7:02 am

Racial profiling matters not. If you are killed by a black man or a white man, it doesn't matter. You are just as dead, and your friends and family will grieve just as much.
With scientific and forensic advances, errors should be much easier to avoid. What you fail to mention, is that many of the cases overturned, were originally tried, and convictions obtained, before DNA testing was available.
Drawscore

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Sun May 20, 2012 8:48 am

> drawscore wrote:Racial profiling matters not. If you are killed by a black man or a white man, it doesn't matter. You are just as dead, and your friends and family will grieve just as much.
> Drawscore

Did you really miss that point, or do you choose to simply ignore the fact that your chances of being convicted for a crime are greatly increased if you are black or Hispanic than if you white? That's what I mean by racial profiling.

> drawscore wrote:With scientific and forensic advances, errors should be much easier to avoid. What you fail to mention, is that many of the cases overturned, were originally tried, and convictions obtained, before DNA testing was available.
> Drawscore

Not only was it obvious in context to anyone with at least a double digit IQ but this was actually my point; by your own rule, such people would not be allowed to take advantage of DNA testing when it did become available, if they'd had to wait more than five years (as many would have had to do) and they were still alive. Hell, even as things are, even when they meet both of these conditions, many felons on Death Row still cannot get DNA evidence testing done!!! Some have of course, but have others have not even in cases where a reasonable doubt might exist
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by drawscore » Sun May 20, 2012 7:40 pm

>>>Did you really miss that point, or do you choose to simply ignore the fact that your chances of being convicted for a crime are greatly increased if you are black or Hispanic than if you white? That's what I mean by racial profiling.<<<
Then you need to be more clear. Racial profiling to me, is a cop pulling over a black or Hispanic for no other reason than "he looks funny," or "he's a suspicious character."
>>>Not only was it obvious in context to anyone with at least a double digit IQ but this was actually my point; by your own rule, such people would not be allowed to take advantage of DNA testing when it did become available, if they'd had to wait more than five years (as many would have had to do) and they were still alive. Hell, even as things are, even when they meet both of these conditions, many felons on Death Row still cannot get DNA evidence testing done!!! Some have of course, but have others have not even in cases where a reasonable doubt might exist<<<
State courts may disallow DNA testing on old cases, but the federal courts are taking the position that if the technology is there, and can either confirm the guilt, or prove the innocence of the person on death row, then it should be used, state laws not withstanding.
And if a person is on death row, no reasonable doubt existed in the minds of the jurors that convicted him. You or I might think there is "reasonable doubt," but we aren't on the jury, and we have not seen the evidence put before the jury. Therefore, what we think, does not matter. What matters, is what the jury thinks.
Drawscore

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Chase Ricks » Sun May 20, 2012 9:02 pm

Drawscore if you do not stop goading others when you reply in the forums I have created I must ask that you delete your replies to leave sanity here.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Sun May 20, 2012 9:06 pm

> drawscore wrote:>>>Did you really miss that point, or do you choose to simply ignore the fact that your chances of being convicted for a crime are greatly increased if you are black or Hispanic than if you white? That's what I mean by racial profiling.<<<
> Then you need to be more clear. Racial profiling to me, is a cop pulling over a black or Hispanic for no other reason than "he looks funny," or "he's a suspicious character."

And you don't think that also happens in a court of law? Right!

> drawscore wrote:Therefore, what we think, does not matter. What matters, is what the jury thinks.
> Drawscore

I'm sure that's a great comfort to all those people who endured prison sentences (and perhaps face execution) for crimes that they didn't commit. But evidently you don't give a shit about those people, since you aren't one of them. Never mind that a jury is as fickle as so many voters, swayed more by whoever is the slicker talker - the defense attorney or the prosecutor - just as they are in an election. God help anyone in a criminal trial if he's poor and black and has you in the jury!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Sun May 20, 2012 9:09 pm

> Chase Ricks wrote:Drawscore if you do not stop goading others when you reply in the forums I have created I must ask that you delete your replies to leave sanity here.

No worries in my part Chase. After tonight I'm not responding to anything Drawscore says. Though he's not as bad here as he is in other threads, it's clear he's more interested in scoring points with rhetoric than he is in having an actual discussion. Sounds like a damned politician.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Chase Ricks » Sun May 20, 2012 9:12 pm

I know what you mean Jason so it is time I fight fiery rhetoric with knowledgeable facts and opinions as a debater.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Sun May 20, 2012 9:26 pm

> Chase Ricks wrote:I know what you mean Jason so it is time I fight fiery rhetoric with knowledgeable facts and opinions as a debater.

Uhhhh... I tried that. Didn't work. Drawscore doesn't respond to logic. Conservatives of his stripe rarely do.
And, uhh... I don't think your skills as a debater are as good as you seem to think they are.
But if that's what you want, have at it. But I think eventually you'll agree with me that the in the long run the only suitable response to Drawscore's brand of bullshit is to completely ignore him... just as I intend to do.
I know, I've said this before. But I think I'll stick to it this time. I'm tired of practically beating my head against a wall.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by drawscore » Tue May 22, 2012 2:24 pm

>>>I'm sure that's a great comfort to all those people who endured prison sentences (and perhaps face execution) for crimes that they didn't commit. But evidently you don't give a shit about those people, since you aren't one of them. Never mind that a jury is as fickle as so many voters, swayed more by whoever is the slicker talker - the defense attorney or the prosecutor - just as they are in an election. God help anyone in a criminal trial if he's poor and black and has you in the jury!<<<
Have innocent people been convicted, and even executed? Yes! Is it a tragedy? Yes! Did race play a role in some of these convictions? Yes. (The novel "To Kill a Mockingbird" is fiction, but all too often, similar convictions have occurred, particularly in the deep south.)
Now, fast forward to the 21st century. Do such instances still occur? Yes, but not with the same frequency as they did in the 30's, 40's, and 50's. (but even one is too many.)
Have scientific methods of proof and detection improved? Yes! But unless the defendant is an identical twin, the odds of two people having the same DNA is something on the order of one in 10 trillion. (1 in 10,000,000,000,000) That's far beyond a reasonable doubt, and since there are only around six billion people (6,000,000,000) currently on the planet, that's close enough to be beyond any doubt.
Should DNA testing be mandatory in murder cases? Yes! And probably down to any case where a defendant would spend time in jail or prison if convicted.
Ideally, a trial should be conducted by unfeeling computers, which would have no regard for race, color, creed, national origin, sexual orientation, immigration status, or any other irrelevant factor, unless, of course, such factors are relevant, and such relevance would be determined by the computer, after weighing all the facts.
But that's not going to happen any time soon, and besides, programming the computer still falls to a real, live person, with his own thoughts, feelings, prejudices, agendas, and ideas. Instead, we have to put up with the system we have, with all it's faults. It may stink, but it's a hell of a lot better that the systems used in Europe and Asia, where you are assumed to be guilty until proven innocent, even in some of the great western European democracies.
The bottom line, is that we, as a nation, have changed and matured since the middle of the last century. Not quite to the images portrayed on the "Star Trek" series, but we have grown. The likelihood of a person being convicted of a crime he did not commit, is probably less than 3%. The odds of a person being convicted of a murder he did not commit, is (my estimate) something like one in 10,000 or greater.
Drawscore

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Tue May 22, 2012 9:37 pm

> drawscore wrote:The likelihood of a person being convicted of a crime he did not commit, is probably less than 3%. The odds of a person being convicted of a murder he did not commit, is (my estimate) something like one in 10,000 or greater.
> Drawscore

Based on what? Unless you are a lawyer, those statistics are probably of dubious accuracy. The first is conservative enough (and the actual figure more like less than 1%), but the second one? High dubious. Anyway, we're not just talking about murder here. In fact, according to a recent study, nearly 10,000 people in the United States may be wrongfully convicted of serious crimes... each year!
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by drawscore » Wed May 23, 2012 12:46 pm

10,000 may seem like a huge number, but so is a million, until you compare it with a googol (1, followed by 100 zeros). The point, is that the figure is meaningless unless it is compared with the total number of cases tried, and the time period covered is known. 10,000 is what percent of that? It's one thing to toss out a figure, but it has to be in context.
10,000 is 10% of 100,000, and 1% of a million. So, if in a year, across the US, 500,000 cases are brought before a jury, and 10,000 are wrongly convicted, you get 2%. Over two years, and it's 1%. More than that, and it's less than 1%.
Statistics are funny things. A good statistician can make them stand up and sing the national anthem, and say just about anything he wants them to say. That's probably why it is said that there are three kinds of falsehoods: Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Drawscore

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Wed May 23, 2012 2:00 pm

> drawscore wrote:10,000 may seem like a huge number, but so is a million, until you compare it with a googol (1, followed by 100 zeros). The point, is that the figure is meaningless unless it is compared with the total number of cases tried, and the time period covered is known. 10,000 is what percent of that? It's one thing to toss out a figure, but it has to be in context.
> 10,000 is 10% of 100,000, and 1% of a million. So, if in a year, across the US, 500,000 cases are brought before a jury, and 10,000 are wrongly convicted, you get 2%. Over two years, and it's 1%. More than that, and it's less than 1%.
> Statistics are funny things. A good statistician can make them stand up and sing the national anthem, and say just about anything he wants them to say. That's probably why it is said that there are three kinds of falsehoods: Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
> Drawscore

You whole analogy is meaningless. If you'd read the article, which you apparently did not, your question would have immediately been answered.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by drawscore » Thu May 24, 2012 1:57 am

The article shows my analogy to be accurate. But then, it is obvious that we interpret facts and premises differently.
Drawscore

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Thu May 24, 2012 9:18 am

> drawscore wrote:The article shows my analogy to be accurate. But then, it is obvious that we interpret facts and premises differently.
> Drawscore

Possibly, but your talking about Google (the number) introduced an element of uncertainty that was not there.
The point was that the percentage of wrongful convictions is likely small; perhaps 1 out of 200. That seems small.
But that number translates to nearly 10,000 wrongful convictions for serious crimes every year. Not quite so small... especially if by sheer bad luck you happen to be one of those 10,000.
Also once again let me emphasis something: I am NOT saying banning capitol punishment outright. For people like terrorists, mass murderers, people who sell drugs to children, and so on; death is if anything too good for me. What is want though is that the system be rendered more foolproof. The standard for a criminal conviction is higher than it is for, say,a lawsuit (what happened with O.J. Simpson for example shows this). But I think the standard for imposition of harsher sentences should be higher still, with death imposed only where the proof is incontrovertible (someone shoots someone else in front of a hundred witnesses, is videotaped, and is caught right on the spot for example; not circumstantial crap like 'Oh, the robber was a black male, this guy was in the neighborhood and he's black, he's about the right age, so he must be the robber'). Where the case is very strong but not completely airtight, sentences should be lighter.
I also think penalties for drug users are ridiculously harsh - and btw I've never used drugs in my life; I don't even smoke or drink alcohol - when someone caught with a single gram of heroin or cocaine can receive a stiffer sentence than a person I know of who killed three people (one of whom I knew) riding in a car with him through extremely reckless driving that ended with a crash that only he survived. Shit like that btw is one reason why I stopped believing in the existence of a righteous God.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by drawscore » Fri May 25, 2012 3:42 pm

I think we can come to a meeting of the minds here.
Sentences are sometimes harsh at the trial court level. But you have appeals courts which are supposed to (but many times don't) oversee the trial courts, and have the authority to overturn the verdict, or remand the case back to the trial court for re-sentencing. In my state, we have the County and Circuit (trial) courts, District Courts of Appeals, and the state Supreme Court. If federal constitutional issues are involved, appeals may be made to the federal District Courts of Appeals, and to the SCOTUS.
Sentences are also, as you put it, "ridiculously harsh" because the people want it that way. The people elect the state and federal representatives, who pass the state and federal laws requiring draconian sentences. Often, judges think a person may deserve a lesser sentence, but because of the laws on the books, a first offender may get 10 years. In my state, we have "10-20-Life," meaning that if you use a gun in a crime, you get 10 years. If you fire the gun, it's 20 years, and if you kill or wound someone, it's life. And it's mandatory. The judge has no discretion. On top of that, the person convicted must serve 85% of his sentence before being eligible for parole, or "time off for good behavior." So blame the legislators, not the judges or the trial courts.
The other avenue, is "executive clemency," which is either a pardon or a commutation from the governor or president. Most of those go to fund raisers for, or contributors to, the aforementioned politicians, who got caught doing something untoward. The most notorious of those, would be Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich. W's commutation of "Scooter" Libby's sentence would be up there, too.
BTW, "Google" is a search engine and an ISP. A "googol" is the number 1, followed by 100 zeros.
Drawscore

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Fri May 25, 2012 10:24 pm

> drawscore wrote:BTW, "Google" is a search engine and an ISP. A "googol" is the number 1, followed by 100 zeros.
> Drawscore

Actually, yes I am in fact perfectly aware of all this; I've known what a 'googol' is (and what a googolplex is, too) long before there was a Google. However, I had a brain fart when I wrote this last post and wrote google when I meant googol! Damned homonyms!!!
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by drawscore » Sat May 26, 2012 2:23 pm

If you're not careful, them mean old homonyms will get you every time. To, too, and two; flack and flak; there, their, and they're; but and butt; dam and damn, and the list goes on. And even if you use SpellChek (or Spell check, or SpellCheck), it won't catch them. Witness:
"I have a spelling checker.
It came with my PC.
It plainly marques for my revue,
Mistakes eye cannot sea.
I've run this poem threw it
And I'm sure your please too no
Its letter perfect in it's weigh.
My checker tolled me sew."
Run that through SpellChek. It won't find any spelling errors.
BTW, I've been to Maine. Pretty country. I didn't stray too far off I-95, but I have been to or through Kennebunk, Portland, Augusta, Brunswick, Freeport, Old Orchard Beach, Waterville-Oakland-Winslow, and Bangor. But it was in the summer. I don't think I could take a winter in Maine. My blood is too thin from living in a somewhat milder climate.
Drawscore

### Re: Welfare wasted

Post by Jason Toddman » Sat May 26, 2012 11:43 pm

Run that through SpellChek. It won't find any spelling errors.
Mine probably would...but only cause it's messed up and actually won't recognize many common words - so I don't rely on it too much anyway.
BTW, I've been to Maine. Pretty country. I didn't stray too far off I-95, but I have been to or through Kennebunk, Portland, Augusta, Brunswick, Freeport, Old Orchard Beach, Waterville-Oakland-Winslow, and Bangor. But it was in the summer. I don't think I could take a winter in Maine. My blood is too thin from living in a somewhat milder climate.
I've lived in Maine many years and in similarly cold climates most of my life (winter in the mid-west and northern border states is no picnic either - and often even worse than Maine's), and I sometimes wonder if *I* can take any more of these Maine winters myself!!! The last one was pretty mild by Maine standards, and it still wore me out! I definitely wouldn't mind moving to a warmer climate were it not for various commitments that keep me where I am.
If you ever return to Maine you should try the coastal route - if you're not in a hurry; it's slower traveling but much more scenic. Especially Camden; that's where I like to spend some free time in the summertime; hiking up wooded 'mountain' trails. The mountains are a joke height-wise but they have very nice views at the top and have reasonably gentle climbing trails.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...