Moderator: Community Team

What about the crime rates in prison? And I bet the Bloods and Crips are going to go to the national news about it as well.Ditocoaf wrote:Seriously, though... the U.S. prisons are so overcrowded... and underfunded. This would cut food costs dramatically, therefore solving both parts of the problem. Furthermore, it would enhance the "disincentive" effect.
I'm not saying we actively commit the death penalty to feed our prisoners; rather, we stop feeding them, provide them with the necessary tools, and allow nature to take its course.
So would this lower the crime rate? Does it make economical sense?
if all of the criminals eat eachother, the number of crimes in prison would eventually go down as well.muy_thaiguy wrote:What about the crime rates in prison? And I bet the Bloods and Crips are going to go to the national news about it as well.Ditocoaf wrote:Seriously, though... the U.S. prisons are so overcrowded... and underfunded. This would cut food costs dramatically, therefore solving both parts of the problem. Furthermore, it would enhance the "disincentive" effect.
I'm not saying we actively commit the death penalty to feed our prisoners; rather, we stop feeding them, provide them with the necessary tools, and allow nature to take its course.
So would this lower the crime rate? Does it make economical sense?

No, they'd either have ebola or be digested.Juan_Bottom wrote:Besides, I don't like the idea Cannibalizing Criminals. Then we would have the biggest strongest criminals getting out of prison, with a taste for human flesh.
I read somewhere that the only way you can catch (as opposed to inherit) sickle-cell anemia is by cannibalism.InkL0sed wrote:No, they'd either have ebola or be digested.Juan_Bottom wrote:Besides, I don't like the idea Cannibalizing Criminals. Then we would have the biggest strongest criminals getting out of prison, with a taste for human flesh.
lol. That's not funny.............lol.jonesthecurl wrote:I read somewhere that the only way you can catch (as opposed to inherit) sickle-cell anemia is by cannibalism.InkL0sed wrote:No, they'd either have ebola or be digested.Juan_Bottom wrote:Besides, I don't like the idea Cannibalizing Criminals. Then we would have the biggest strongest criminals getting out of prison, with a taste for human flesh.
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
You've seen the light!Mylittlepuddykat wrote:What about prisoners with short sentences, do they get put in with the hard nuts who've already killed and eaten thousands? How long will they last? 30 seconds?
If you sentenced someone to six months you would effectively be sentencing them to the death penalty.
Would this be a bad thing? That's five months, 29 days, 23 hours and 59.5 minutes less we'd have to feed and shelter a criminal. If you don't like jail, don't do the crime.Mylittlepuddykat wrote:What about prisoners with short sentences, do they get put in with the hard nuts who've already killed and eaten thousands? How long will they last? 30 seconds?
If you sentenced someone to six months you would effectively be sentencing them to the death penalty.

Ditocoaf wrote:Would this be a bad thing? That's five months, 29 days, 23 hours and 59.5 minutes less we'd have to feed and shelter a criminal. If you don't like jail, don't do the crime.Mylittlepuddykat wrote:What about prisoners with short sentences, do they get put in with the hard nuts who've already killed and eaten thousands? How long will they last? 30 seconds?
If you sentenced someone to six months you would effectively be sentencing them to the death penalty.
Yeah, next time you pick up a joint, think about your odds against 1,000 battle-hardened cannibals.Ditocoaf wrote:Would this be a bad thing? That's five months, 29 days, 23 hours and 59.5 minutes less we'd have to feed and shelter a criminal. If you don't like jail, don't do the crime.Mylittlepuddykat wrote:What about prisoners with short sentences, do they get put in with the hard nuts who've already killed and eaten thousands? How long will they last? 30 seconds?
If you sentenced someone to six months you would effectively be sentencing them to the death penalty.
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.
Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
What, you're saying that people who write bad checks don't deserve to be eaten?Juan_Bottom wrote:Ditocoaf wrote:Would this be a bad thing? That's five months, 29 days, 23 hours and 59.5 minutes less we'd have to feed and shelter a criminal. If you don't like jail, don't do the crime.Mylittlepuddykat wrote:What about prisoners with short sentences, do they get put in with the hard nuts who've already killed and eaten thousands? How long will they last? 30 seconds?
If you sentenced someone to six months you would effectively be sentencing them to the death penalty.
I couldn't disagree with you more. The punishment doesn't always fit the crime. If you don't believe its true, check out California's three strike law. Twenty years for writing a bad check above the amount of three hundred dollars? Get real....
Maybe we could adjust this idea to only cover certain types of prison. Like medium security and above?

Have we reached the imaginary point, in this imaginary country, where dissenters are imaginary cannabalized???Ditocoaf wrote:What, you're saying that people who write bad checks don't deserve to be eaten?Juan_Bottom wrote:Ditocoaf wrote:Would this be a bad thing? That's five months, 29 days, 23 hours and 59.5 minutes less we'd have to feed and shelter a criminal. If you don't like jail, don't do the crime.Mylittlepuddykat wrote:What about prisoners with short sentences, do they get put in with the hard nuts who've already killed and eaten thousands? How long will they last? 30 seconds?
If you sentenced someone to six months you would effectively be sentencing them to the death penalty.
I couldn't disagree with you more. The punishment doesn't always fit the crime. If you don't believe its true, check out California's three strike law. Twenty years for writing a bad check above the amount of three hundred dollars? Get real....
Maybe we could adjust this idea to only cover certain types of prison. Like medium security and above?![]()
Maybe you should be cannibalized, you dirty commie! If you're soft on crime, the criminals will rule our country!
I can't imagine.Juan_Bottom wrote:Have we reached the imaginary point, in this imaginary country, where dissenters are imaginary cannabalized???Ditocoaf wrote:What, you're saying that people who write bad checks don't deserve to be eaten?Juan_Bottom wrote:Ditocoaf wrote:Would this be a bad thing? That's five months, 29 days, 23 hours and 59.5 minutes less we'd have to feed and shelter a criminal. If you don't like jail, don't do the crime.Mylittlepuddykat wrote:What about prisoners with short sentences, do they get put in with the hard nuts who've already killed and eaten thousands? How long will they last? 30 seconds?
If you sentenced someone to six months you would effectively be sentencing them to the death penalty.
I couldn't disagree with you more. The punishment doesn't always fit the crime. If you don't believe its true, check out California's three strike law. Twenty years for writing a bad check above the amount of three hundred dollars? Get real....
Maybe we could adjust this idea to only cover certain types of prison. Like medium security and above?![]()
Maybe you should be cannibalized, you dirty commie! If you're soft on crime, the criminals will rule our country!And if criminals aren't going to run this imaginary country, who will run it's imaginary government?
Then we could televise it and make millions!sam_levi_11 wrote:i support the idea, have rapists, killers, dealers, pimps, war criminals and other seriious criminals put in prison and let loose as you say. therefor they will never get out and such.
Wayne wrote:Wow, with a voice like that Dancing Mustard must get all the babes!
Garth wrote:Yeah, I bet he's totally studly and buff.
I don't think that our FCC will even let you put that on cable.Dancing Mustard wrote:Then we could televise it and make millions!sam_levi_11 wrote:i support the idea, have rapists, killers, dealers, pimps, war criminals and other seriious criminals put in prison and let loose as you say. therefor they will never get out and such.
Right Sam, here's the plan: you get down to the patents office sharpish, and I'll get on the phone to Endemol. We're going to be millionaires.
Well, that's why they visit the filming locations first.Juan_Bottom wrote:I don't think that our FCC will even let you put that on cable.Dancing Mustard wrote:Then we could televise it and make millions!sam_levi_11 wrote:i support the idea, have rapists, killers, dealers, pimps, war criminals and other seriious criminals put in prison and let loose as you say. therefor they will never get out and such.
Right Sam, here's the plan: you get down to the patents office sharpish, and I'll get on the phone to Endemol. We're going to be millionaires.
