How One California City Pays Its Most Violent Offenders To Stay Out Of Trouble

Most people who commit crimes do so because they need money, hence burglaries, selling drugs, auto theft etc. Only a very few are out to hurt other other people. So for the most part it looks like this program deals with low level offenders, but not all since the murder rate is down 77%. To pay them what is essentially early social security allows them to stay out of the prison system which also allows them to have a chance of finding a job especially if skills training and employment assistance is included in the program.

Again you can't beat the success of the program in this city. Instead of sending 68 people to prison at a cost of $70,000 per year per prisoner which totals $4.76 million, they have paid them at most $68,000 or only 1.43% of the cost to incarcerate.

Who in their right mind would tell the people of Richmond CA with a population of 110,000 that they should pay taxes of $43.27 per tax payer to incarcerate when they can pay $0.62 per tax payer to prevent crime in the first place.

Oh yeah the murder rate is down 77% as well.

We have tried prisons for centuries and the results have shown time and again that when you send petty criminals to prison you make better criminals.

CDR (Join to see) - Let me get this straight - you ADVOCATE paying thugs to make good choices in life? In most states the predicate act for EXTORTION is that an individual or individuals refrain from 1) violence, 2) property damage, 3) harm to others in exchange for monetary considerations. Accordingly, it does appear that these 68 model citizens that you are so impressed with are EXTORTING money from taxpayers. Nice gig and given its California - par for the course in Moon Beam Country.

If the results show that it reduces crime and gives people a better chance at life then it is a good thing. It's not like they pay them forever. Plus lets be honest here, we subsidize all sorts of businesses and corporations (banks, oil companies, auto industry, etc) so why not subsidize with a tiny bit of money a few people to not commit crime.

The program is aimed at getting people to either not go down the road of crime or to stop going down that road. Less criminals in this world is a good thing. Why would you oppose that?

Plus you are advocating to put these people in a more expensive welfare system called prison. You are now paying essentially $70,000 to take care, feed, and house each one of them while they learn to be a better criminals. Prison is a better welfare system than any city has. You get three meals a day, a place to sleep, a gym, books, tv and all at tax payer expense of $70,000 per prisoner. I would rather pay some guy $1000 to not commit crime than pay $70,000 to lock him up so when he gets out he goes out to commit more crimes.

CDR (Join to see) - once again Commander this is not about an academic cost benefit anaysis. This is not about business subsidies. It is about the blatant extortion by gang members from tax payers. We are obviously on opposite sides on this. If these model citizens commit a crime then they pay the price. When I was in Company Command my men knew - categorically - that if they violated the UCMJ - they would pay the price. Yes I listened to all the extenuating and mitigating factors and I never heard one that I would consider justification for comitting a crime. My men knew that I valued and rewarded personal combat effectiveness and integrity over violation of the UCMJ.

Wish I could.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/05/us/dc-crime-bill-would-pay-people-to-avoid-crime.html?referer=https://duckduckgo.com/

LOL - get the right cat and scar or you won't pull it off!

I'm taking saber lessons as of next week. I plan on having a righteous scar within a month. A white cat I can get almost anywhere. Now, I may have to name him Mr. Bigglesworth.