Sad news: baby elephant has died.

[Fish]

haha that is crazy!
... poor dog

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by teevee

At some point one's socialization/learning/understanding of the world kicks in and moderates behaviour.

First of all ... the jails are full of idiots that not only commit one crime but are repeat offenders ... so much so that in the US there is the 3 strikes law to keep these morons behind bars where they belong instead of terrorizing society.

What you are saying is that these guys/gals are " risk takers " ? ... so they weigh out the odds before they commit a crime and then take the " risk " of not getting caught ... is that about right ?

I dont think so !

I think that for some of them they cant help it and/or are too stupid to see that if they get caught they will get locked up for a very long time.

Originally Posted by teevee

Again, since crime is socially defined, there cannot be a "crime" gene. What is considered criminal or lawful varies tremendously across human cultures.

I am pretty sure that the big ones are fairly universal ( ie. stealing, B&E, rape, murder etc ) regardless of where you grew up ... besides you would have to be pretty naive to think you could argue your case in a court of law in a country that forbids certain acts and get away with it.

People commit crimes every day regardless of the punishments that society puts in their path to discourage them from those acts. One has to think that in those people they are predisposed to committing crime which does not allow them to see the consequences of their actions ( both what happens to their victims and also what can happen if they get caught ) ... the thing is that it is not always IQ as there are some very smart crooks ... as I said before ... so smart that if they applied themselves to lawfull enterprise would do very well.

Alot of these criminal types have no heart whatsoever ... and can be traced back to when they were children ... abusive to children & adults at a very early age ( often with perfectly normal parents & siblings ) and the tale of woe gets worse as they grow up.

Like I said " Criminal Mind "

[Quinn]

Check the statistics... a lot of what you're suggesting may appeal to common sense but isn't supported by the research (a common theme in this thread I think).

At some point in time a significant difference forms between what people wish were the case and what actually is...

I would heartily recommend this title to everyone.

With this I'll take my leave of this particular conversation. As I alluded to previously, crime and punishment is probably one of the hottest topics out there, hotter than evolution versus creationism, likely due to the problems with data collection/analysis. As is the usual for me, I've probably made enough enemies in the last eleven pages.

[Fish]

You have raised a good point and I think that predisposition probably plays a greator role in so called "stupid crimes" than it does in others. The criminals who cant help but hit every person who makes them mad, or the car theives who don't wear gloves and keep getting caught, etc etc
But I think you are overestimating the risks involved in some crimes and underestimating the thought processes of some criminals.
A marihuana grow is a great example. A person could set up a 500 plant grow in a new community and in one year's time get three harvests and make a profit of one million dollars (after expenses).
The risks they would face are:
Being detected
Being caught and there existing enough evidence to be charged
Being convicted
A hundred little details all need to fall in place (properly) in order to achieve the conviction and then it would probably be only after a second or even third conviction that the person would recieve jail time, and that time would likely be measured in months, not years. Since many of us will work our entire lives and still not earn a million dollars, it would still be profitable even if you were caught and jailed everytime you did it (which would not happen). In a case like this, I believe the criminals' behavior is motivated by very cognitive processes and the "risks" are, to them, just the cost of doing business.

- Chad

[Cap'n]

Originally Posted by teevee

On the first point, I've emailed a professor about this to see what he says so hopefully we'll have a good authoritative answer soon. However I also must note that there are species (and even human cultures) which are not territorial but exhibit some of the characteristics of greed that I listed... as for genetics, well, genetics is what evolution is about. Without Mendel, Darwin would have been hooped. There is no evolution without genetics.

On the second point, I'm not sure either, as I have no background in anthropology.

Here it is. Not important now, but I'm still curious. Before you go if you could elaborate on "However I also must note that there are species (and even human cultures) which are not territorial but exhibit some of the characteristics of greed that I listed... "

And I've got to leave this one too. Great thread. Now I know more about you all besides the fish and corals you keep. Look forward to meeting more of you in person.

So I'm off to feed the baby. Every three hours! Did you know that?! How do they expect us to get any rest at that rate? Or clean the tanks? Or spend time in elaborate off topic forums?

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by Fish

But I think you are overestimating the risks involved in some crimes and underestimating the thought processes of some criminals.
A marihuana grow is a great example. A person could set up a 500 plant grow in a new community and in one year's time get three harvests and make a profit of one million dollars (after expenses).
The risks they would face are:
Being detected
Being caught and there existing enough evidence to be charged
Being convicted
A hundred little details all need to fall in place (properly) in order to achieve the conviction and then it would probably be only after a second or even third conviction that the person would recieve jail time, and that time would likely be measured in months, not years. Since many of us will work our entire lives and still not earn a million dollars, it would still be profitable even if you were caught and jailed everytime you did it (which would not happen). In a case like this, I believe the criminals' behavior is motivated by very cognitive processes and the "risks" are, to them, just the cost of doing business.

- Chad

ah but you are comparing a soft crime, to a murder/whatever type.. two totally different things. growing or smoking pot is done by 9/10 of kids by the age of 18 (I think this was the last numbers I saw) so our culture is becoming desensitized. at any rate growing pot is non violence and the only impact is on the person who get busted. A murder, rape what ever is usually a spontaneous act with no regard for the consequences. and the person that is hurt is the victim.

Steve

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by teevee

Check the statistics... a lot of what you're suggesting may appeal to common sense but isn't supported by the research (a common theme in this thread I think).

The fact that jails are full of repeat offenders ? ... do I need to prove that point with statistics ?


I have a niece in social work and a few police officers in the family ( both immediate and extended family ) and their statistics seem very different from yours ( albeit anecdotal as they actually deal with these people on a daily basis and not from the comfort of a classroom )

[Fish]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

ah but you are comparing a soft crime, to a murder/whatever type.. two totally different things.

Actually, I was addressing Buk_A_neer's point by comparing crime that some crimianls do because they have carefully planned it out and weighed the pros and cons to that which is commited by those who "cant help it and/or are too stupid to see that if they get caught they will get locked up for a very long time".
I didn't mention murder/rape in this comparison but I do agree with you that it is much more violent and universally accepted as being wrong. I do not agree though with your conclusion that growing pot only affects the person who gets busted. Infact, the only people affected by murders are the victims and their loved ones (not a lot in a city like Calgary), while the cultivation of marihuana negatively affects everyone who owns a house in the city of Calgary because it is you who is making up for the losses incured by banks due to mortgage frauds and homes that end up being written off and comdemmed. Probably the losses from the theft of electricity are passed along to the consumer by utility companies as well. (Not argueing that murder isn't the more serious crime, just that it has a comparetively smaller 'sphere of impact')

[Quinn]

I guess I can't just cleanly extricate myself from this one.

Originally Posted by Buk_A_neer

The fact that jails are full of repeat offenders ? ... do I need to prove that point with statistics ?

I have a niece in social work and a few police officers in the family ( both immediate and extended family ) and their statistics seem very different from yours ( albeit anecdotal as they actually deal with these people on a daily basis and not from the comfort of a classroom )

Of course the jails are "full" of repeat offenders - repeat offenders are more likely to be incarcerated. The jails are also disproportionately full of aboriginals... in short, jail populations do not tell us much about crime in the real world.

For what it's worth (nothing), my uncle is the head of the City of Calgary's Social Work Department. I know numerous prison guards and police officers, and both of these groups are about the most biased out there in respect to beliefs about crime. Guess what social group is more likely to engage in child and spousal abuse than the general population... not really the most objective information source if you ask me. Like asking a Haliburton executive if Bush should allow oil extraction in Alaska's nature reserves.

Marijuana is only illegal because Emily Murphy decided at the turn of the century that it was a tool of "the yellow man" (her words; see "The Black Candle") to seduce young white women. She went off to Ottawa, petitioned the boys in the houses, and they banned it in short order. Personally I am in favour of legalization of all banned narcotics.

Cptn, ah right, as I said before though, if like me you believe that greed under our definition is always adaptive, then you could say that any hoarding/resource storing behaviour is greedy...

[Fish]

Quinn,
Are you saying that prison guards and police officers are a "social group" (I thought that it was 40 hour/week "occupation"), and if so, are you saying that they are statistically more likely to engage in child and spousal abuse than the general population? - I hope you have some sort of evidence to back that up...
And you are for the legalization of all banned narcotics eh???
That's a really great idea Quinn . I mean general use of addictive, mind altering substances could only be an improvement. Just look how much alcohol alone has benefited our society .
Sorry, I'm trying to view both sides of the debate but you lost me on that post.
- Chad