Bitcoin Forum

having seen prison systems fail to punish people due to re-offend rates
having seen prison systems fail common sense by giving smaller crimes harsher times.. and harsher crimes smaller times

knowing the costs of incarcerations costing alot ($£30k a year per inmate in many cases)

what views do people have for a better system
would it be instead of putting people with drug/alcohol issues where no other person was harmed. put into rehab
would it be for financial crimes people made to repay financially.
EG made to do volunteer work for just $500 a month social security($£6k) and the other $£24k going back to victims

i think what im basically saying is if you know it can cost $£30k a year for punishment. how many years would a particular crimes punishment deserve being spent on it. and what 'service' (cells,rehab,community,other) would you spend the funds on

so imagine you had your own island/continent and had the ability to write the laws and consequences. what would they be

Love God above all things and your neighbor as yourself.

Punishment for not keeping the law is found in the regulations.

8)

*so love someone you have never met and has never talked to you personally (aww must be lonely)
*then cheat on your neighbours wife
*then and only then can you appreciate yourself

umm. nah no thanks. seems like a sad lonely lifestyle choice

but lts play a game badecker.
you own some land. someone walks on your land and does something you dont like. so you invite thm into your barn and ask them to explain thmselves and you and your neighbours decide if the man is worthy of being forgiven. or dserves something bad happening to them.

imagine its tresspassing on your land
imagine its driving their bigfoot truck over th top of your vehicle. you know driving on your property
imagine they walked up to you and gave you an invoice for $500 because your property took them 3 minutes walking time from fense to door to speak to you. which is taking their personal time off them

what would be your barn rules AND RESPONSIBILITIES in your farmland society of your property boundries
would you for instance ask them to seek your permission to use your property else be charged a fine

But you have met God. His Spirit rides along with you right next to your spirit, so close that you can barely tell the difference. If He didn't ride with you, you would be dead.

8)

what you call god is not a single entity with 7billion tenticals touching everyone

if you read the bible from a critical thinking point. it is a book of camp fire stories later wrote down where philosophers try to understand biology, physics, evolution and also stories to form the initial basic morals for people to know whats right and wrong

god is not a single man, god is your subconscious, we all have our own subconscious
a good subconcious we name good(god) a evil subconcious we name evil(devil)

when you pray. your not praying to some omni being in the sky. your talking to that little voice in your head that tells you that its wrong to bang your neighbours wife, tells you to move your hand away when you put it too near a fire or the sharp side of a knife. its the voice that tells you not to pinch a wallet thats hanging out the pocket of a person walking infront of you

its not some omni being that has its own shared consciousness with other people and is telling everyone what to do.. it is your personal subconcious for you and you alone
this is why different people view their god differently. some people view it as if they do good they get rewarded, if they do bad they will get forgiven if they are remorseful, or just end up in a agonising loop of PTSD/depression if they cant forgive themself
some people are the 'god fearing' thinking they will be smitted and feel agony even for doing small harmless bad things.

anyway all this stuff has nothing to do with imagining your own system of rules and consequences.
so come on badecker. stick to the topic.
imagine this as your opertunity to design your own court, your rules of right and wrong, and of course the consequences
come on i know you secretly want to invent your own court. so her is your chance

ill make it easy. just use the 4 categories and give examples of each and show the possible consequences.
harm - consequence
loss - consequence
damage - consequence
tresspass -consequence

The US justice system is a great representation of how it should not be. It doesn't work and they still can't change it. It keeps going because politicians are afraid of touching it. They treat it like that friend with smelly feet. You can all smell it and you all would like to tell him somehow but nobody wants to be the one who does it.  ;D
The statistics are brutal. People get raped in prisons and most get extorted. If you're a young white pretty boy in prison you're going to pay every day with money or with ass if you don't have money. 

so imagine you personally had control of the rulebook(law) and the moneybag(treasury) how would you design a new systm

EG
victimless crime (person taking his own drugs himself or a woman agreeing consentualy to prostitute herself) deserve jailtime, or some kind of rehab?

would you redesign prisons

what laws would you strengthen or relax

Good guess. But... you aren't quite as dense as some.

8)

This is a difficult question for someone like me who watches it from the sidelines and was never in the prison system.
First of all at I wouldn't put in jail people weren't and aren't a danger to others but only to themselves. Drug addicts should go to rehab. If they keep running away they should be left to rot. You can't help someone who doesn't want it.

Some examples of what should be treated as misdemeanor:
Drug addiction and possession without the intent to distribute.
Drunk driving
Tax evasion
Small theft
Prostitution

People are serving sentences for hacking, distributing pornography, running torrent services and dark web markets in the US justice system. There's no need for that.
The famous case of Ross sentenced to life for running a website is a joke, the same as what they're trying to do to Assange and Snowden.

drink driving.
id question that one
as that has a higher risk of harming someone.
id not just make them pay a fine. id make them do some sobriety AA meetings and maybe have their vehicle fitted with a bell chime or whistle so that people around can hear him driving more so than other vehicles.
plus maybe he'd decide not to take his car to the local bar and walk/get a cab instead
:D

as for prostitution
why make using the muscles between lgs a crime but a guy on a building site using his biceps to lay bricks not a crime.
just have it licencd and managed.
EG in the UK building company need to certify their bricklayers and always have a foreman onsite. plus regular healthchecks
prostitutes have a licence and regular healthchecks and have a security guard onsite.

and to all other readers
just like my bell chime on car to warn pedestrians and other road users a drunk is nearby, and as a embarrassing thing to dter wanting to drive to bars.
what out of the box new punishments would you feel could b a effctive deterant that has not been done before but could/should be done

imagine the world of possibilities were open
even instead of paying $16k for 6month jail. you give someone $16k of college tuition or $16k of taxi fare tokns to that persons local bar to hand out to drunk people to get home safely

I agree with the above. Drunk driving should be punished but not with jail time. There's many other better ways, like breathalyzers connected to the ignition.
You can suspend their license, make them attend AA, retake the exam, pay a fine. As long as they don't kill anyone they shouldn't go to jail, and even if they do kill someone they shouldn't be put in the same jail with violent offenders.

I'm not against prostitution at all, just as I'm not against gambling, drugs, alcohol, and many other things.

A good way to reduce the cost of running prisons would be labor camps, where you're not forced to work, but rewarded for it. A prisoner would get only 3 basic meals a day and a bed to sleep on, but a working prisoner would get chips for which he'd be able to buy upgrades, like desserts, coffee, snacks, books, even a single cell. Nobody can force anyone to work, but give them rewards and they will support themselves.

A prison system in Sweden and Norway is very different from the one in the US but it works much better. They give their prisoners good food, a computer access, nice clean rooms with beds and closets, you could think poor people would want to get imprisoned, but somehow they don't. The incarcerated part of the population is much smaller than in the US, but the law is very similar. In Sweden operating a brothel is illegal and you can go to jail for it and the use of cannabis is illegal as well, so the law remains strict. The main difference is in the prison system, not the law itself.

a prison skyscraper. with the first 2 floor as a mall for all the inmates to shop in (and work in)
college and library above that
with the next few floors as the laundry and kitchens (more work availability)
then the residential above that.
going from menial basic standards up to the penthouse exclusivity the higher you go

with it being self sustainable via the prisoners doing work and gaining experience, skills and training. aswell as earning a 'bonus' which can be used for luxuries in the shops or upgrade their cell to higher standards

I have to say it looks like a great idea on paper. They'd climb the social ladder... literally.
Also, it would be easy to keep a tower like that secure. It would be enough to keep a few guards and make sure inmates are able to lock and unlock their rooms using a fingerprint or retinal scanner. They'd take care of everything buy themselves and those who wouldn't would go back to the basement and have fun in a room with no windows and eat oatmeal while the others get bacon and eggs.

Because of God, because of the words and wisdom of God, He reduce the numerous evil inside our heart.  He saves us from death and evil by His words.  Think and imagine like an atheist who haven't any God, I want to ask on what they feel? as they relieve?

Imagine that your land suffer from evil and death by the surrounding, you can be saved by the glory of God.

Prison is a huge waste of both the government's money and the inmates' time, and it probably increases the chance of inmates committing more crimes.

First of all, victimless crimes are not real crimes and should not exist.

For most crimes, the sentence should be based entirely on the premise of getting the person not to commit the crimes anymore, based on a case-by-case analysis of the person. Often, prison shouldn't be necessary at all. For example, serial shoplifters could be sentenced to a period of having to wear a bodycam whenever in public so that they could be surveiled and prevented from stealing anything. This would be a huge invasion of privacy for them, of course, but it's better than prison. Psychological treatment may be appropriate in a lot of cases. Maybe in some cases it'd be appropriate to apply some corporal punishment (eg. "100 lashes"). Having someone languish in prison for years is pretty much the worst thing for everyone, including the prisoner; I'd definitely prefer 100 excruciatingly-painful lashes than a year in prison.

The above works in a state, but it's also in-line with my anarcho-capitalist ideal. In an ancap society, prison would be a service of your protection agency, operating a bit like insurance. Typically, such prisons would have the goal of protecting you from retaliation from the people you harmed, convincing society that you are no longer a risk after you get out, and preventing you and the protection agency from bearing costs of further crimes. So typical ancap prisons would be rehabilitation-oriented, not "lock up for x years"-oriented.

I don't actually think that this would be good in any way, and I'm not advocating for it, but I've thought that it'd be rational from the US's perspective to offer inmates convicted of certain non-violent crimes the option of reducing their sentence by serving it in the military. The military is already set up as something of a brainwashing machine, and having some less-precious troops would give the military more flexibility. The US faces a problem now in that they're only ever willing to dedicate handfuls of troops to most places because they're terrified that there'll be a massacre of hundreds of troops, which would be a PR disaster. "US penal brigade wiped out" sounds bad, but it's quite a bit better than "thousands of brave US servicemen massacred."

What you have proposed is more of restitution than punishment for ones offence. I have read cases whereby someone charged was sent to rehab while others were sent to do community work as a form of restitution to the society but really some offences goes beyond restitution as there is need to ensure that some examples are set to deter such action. The £30k you have mentioned is high yes but its low compared to the cost of taking someone off the street. Imagine a drug lord whose network have sent several young people to their early graves as a result of drug abuse, several who are already in rehab facilities costing the society money to maintain, others on the verge of suicide. These young souls being destroyed could eventually be some of the brightest mind the society could produce but wasted because of someone quest to make profit. I think keeping that kind of individual off the street is safer than for him to be outside and get to run his business.

id not advocating teaching petty criminals to then become gun friendly and ok with killing another. after all the PTSD of servicemen already isnt good.
because its like being locked up for stealing a bottle of vodka. and then getting trained up on how to rob a bank at gunpoint

but the severe criminals that were already ok with killing. well. put them on the front line and make that the 'death row'

but yes for the other parts about petty crimes prison is the wrong place, because while in prison inmates talk and some end up endocrinating others into forming gangs and learning new criminally larger skills..

also to add
the military employment is not just to put a gun in a guys hands and teach him to shoot. many servicemen have office jobs, are mechanics, chef's, pilots and never get to have a gun in their hand pointing towards an enemy. so some of the 'non violent' offenders could be trained to be mechanics, intel specialists and cooks

It's hard to find a balance but ideally heinous crime would have a heavy enough punishment while petty crimes like shoplifting would get less. Personally I think some crimes are worthy of a capital punishment.

It'll also be beneficial if prisons are "tiered". The problem with lumping everyone together is they learn from each other. Someone who stole a pack of gums and stayed in prison for too long will know people in there and get introduced to gangs/syndicates.

This leaves us with white collar crimes. I want those punished more severely. They might not have committed physical harm against an individual but the harm they cause to society can be massive. I want them getting community service in addition to prison time to shame them. 

One thing I haven't made up my mind is working for prison time. It can cut back the time spent in prison but it's possible that it'll get abused and they'd just arrest more people for free labor. 


I agree with that last one. Some would go from petty to heinous crimes.

As for the 100 lashes some decry it as inhumane but if I'll be asked, I'd rather have scars and not walk for a few days than stay in jail for 10 years. Also the lashes are not met out in one day, they don't want to kill the inmate, else they would have just given it the beheading.

id see this as complex.
for instance, running a 'money service business without a licence' - punishment upto $5k fine per violation
to a common person that does local exchanges of ~$100 at a 1% fee thats 5000 transactions to pay  fine. but those 5000 transactions cause 5000 fines meaning $25m in fines

to a institution thats just a 1% fee on a $500k transaction. so by doing transactions of $1m+ they actually make money while breaking the law and not having to be regulated

this is why big businesses get away with alot of crimes because they just treat fines as a value added cost of doing business
whilst the 'little people' get stuck in a cycle they cant escape from leading to further punishments for not being able to pay fines

100% agreed. Not only are some laws unclear, they can hire the best lawyers to jump around loopholes. And even if they were found guilty, sometimes the amount earned is still higher than the fine that it can be viewed as operation cost. I remember Youtube only got a slap on the wrist for the children's data leak. An individual doing that would have landed in prison.

I don't know the actual laws but Ponzis most can agree are illegal. I think those caught should be subjected to humiliation by making them face their victims a few times a week for hours. Sure they get prison time but often the money cannot be recovered and likely they'll just use it after getting out of prison. Or it already is funding something shady.

Though they are not often praised for their justice system, I think the Arabs' practice of blood-money is a nice way for the family of the victim to be compensated and the criminal be given a chance to reform (provided he'll be under surveillance, murder is something serious). To make sure the rich don't abuse it all their income and assets should be taken into consideration so that the amount they'll have to pay will hurt.

For other crimes I'd be OK with community service. Or maybe they can have their pensions cut or have payment taken directly from their paycheck to pay for their crimes.

What to do with the extreme crimes? Did you know my country has a theoretical maximum penalty of 30 years? You could pull out a terrorist attack killing thousands, and you would still get 30 years. I remember a case of a man who raped and killed a woman, he got the same sentence, but after 16 years he was released on "good conduct". First thing he tried to do was rape a prostitute (prostitution is not a crime here), back to prison for some months i guess...

I think there are cases where both forced labor and perhaps capital punishment is required. For the lesser crimes your ideas are not bad at all. We have absurd things like people getting years imprisoned over downloading some movie, that is ridiculous.

For those that get "life sentences" capital punishment could be considered. Rape could be dealt bible style with some good old fashioned castration, perhaps only for repeat offenders (or more than one victim without doubts).

I don't know if "penal colonies" could have some use in certain circumstances, for "medium" or "light" crimes. I know in some Nordic country they have what essentially looks like a resort, they are sent to some island and live kinda like that Prisoner sci-fi show (without the interrogations). On the opposite you get countries like mine where the prisons are so hellish, you either become super criminal in there or die, period. So get caught in a protest and your chance of coming out like a blood thirsty killer is high. And yeah, they throw everyone together in conditions that would be too extreme to tell here.

Perhaps some are suited for rural labor, tending a farm and things like that.

I don't know if people could truly rehab or not given different conditions, in the first place they should be separated from society to prevent them (physically) harming people, then comes the next part of what to do with them. Some things like tax evasion should not be putting people behind bars, that is plain stupid (same as copyright infringers).

I agree with the strict code for extreme crimes. In the US it adds up so you don't have a maximum overall but a maximum for a single offense. This means tha if you get 20 years for murder and you kill a pregnant woman you get 40 and so on.
Forced labor is a great way to maintain the prison system without straining the budget.


Where do you see people incarcerated for years for downloading a movie? I heard that in some countries you can get a fine but only people running sharing services can face jail time like TPB, which is still too much if you ask me. Borrowing a book from the library is ok, but borrowing a movie from someone through Internet is suddenly not ok?

There are some petty offenders that are in prison that doesn't make sense at all whatsoever, these offenders should rather be used to do some odd jobs that people normally wouldn't want to do in the first place. Keeping the city clean with these offenders would be a great idea instead of jailing them and use tax payers money to feed them whiles they are incarcerated.

I agree with community service for not so serious crimes. This way he can repay his crime in a short period of time at the same time help the community.  For a heinous crime like murder, arson, etc,, I think is better to separate him from society for a period of time, as a prisoner. Parole to be given if he really reformed to become a good person.

i would consider that things could b done
for instance if a man kills 3 people. in a country that has 30year max thats 3 charges thus 90 years
for sexual assault
you could have like non-violent touching of a non consenting adult X
you could have like non-violent touching of a non consenting child XX
you could have like violent touching of a non consenting adult XX
you could have like violent touching of a non consenting child XXX
and then multiplied by the number of incidences
not just incidence meaning occassions it occured but also, adding other charges of a single occassion where person was threated, tied up a weapon was involved. it all adds up

thus a butt grab is not treated the same as a violent rape at knife point

i would be ok with castration for sexually based physical acts like rape
as for just being caught drinking at a bar and on the way caught short peeing in a bush treated as a sexual offense. i think would be rediculous to then give same punishment as a rapist

i dont see being plugged into a 'matrix' style system to live out your punishment. or being put into hibernation/frozn for prison length (movies like demolition man and minority report concepts)
though cheaper to monitor if they are all 'asleep' thus wont need guards i still think being awake and in a position to reflect on what they done should be prioritised rather than just getting through their sentance.
so rehab neds to be part of it, if there was to be any consideration of 'early release'

i think for early release bing just not doing bad stuff in prison.. is stupid. doing time by default should be that you dont do anything bad. and i think if you do do bad stuff in prison your time is extended

yes physical harm neds separating from society. whether its domestic abuse, a punch up, rape murder. obviously separate from society. but the time scales should be based on the harm done multiplied by how many incidences

as for non violent crimes well it cant be just a fine, there should be other things. even things not even tried before
i know things like running a ponzi also has things like not allowed to be a CEO again or not allowed to work in the finance section of an industry or company

but i still think financial crimes that are fins should be related to incomes. EG not a set $500 fine for a speeding ticket but instead $500 for minimum wage with it incrementing up in multiples of what income that person has

because some rich lambo owners think the price of hiring a private race track is more expensive than just driving normal roads and take the risk getting caught, so they just drive fast on public roads

Just to talk about your first couple sentences. Not all prisons fail in regards to rehabilitation -- I've totally seen an article or two talking about how Norway/Swedens prisons systems attempt to get people back on the right track.

People forget that in the US, the typical mentality towards criminals is that they're horrible people -- mostly non dependent on the crime itself. We're just starting to come around to the idea that people shouldn't be in jail for a long time (or at all) for non violent crimes related to drugs possession.

It's going to take sometime to lower mandatory minimums, and turn jails into a place of rehabilitation instead of a place of punishment and pain/suffering.

many countries that have the positive view of rehab call their prisons 'correctional facilities' as oppose to prisons 'incarceration facilities'

though america is very much known to just lock up and forget the inmates in 'correctional facilities' by not offering them any rehabilitation services/education/incentive to do better


(im british but most people in the btc community is american so i sway the context i talk about in their direction because they seem to hate it when using british or european examples)


whats most alarming to me about the topic is how much is spent and what its used for
EG for america 2.3mill inmates yet the national budget is $1.82bill
thats $79k budget per inmate on average
but the thing that alarms me most is that for every 4 inmates there is only one staff.

so for $316k budget for the 4 inmates only pays for 1 employee

imagining the staff salary get $30-$40k you have to ask where does the other $276k go

think about it a $2 a meal budget for 3meals a day for 4 inmates=$24 a day= under $10k a year
laundry. lets call that $10k
electric, heating, water call that $10k

thats still leaves $246k in question

There's been a lot of political debate over the years of what a prison should accommodate for. Its been a much debated topic of only using a prison for serious offenders. I would tend to agree, and although the general consensus that a prison is used to rehabilitate the offender that rarely ever happens, and normally results in a life of crime after being released, and multiple remissions into the prison system. I would tend to agree that prisons should be used for only serious crimes committed, and for those that are a danger to society.  

This is an interesting suggestion. Although, how that would be enforced would also be very difficult. There's a plethora of privacy issues involved with this, and not just for the person its suppose to be monitoring, but also the members of the public. A partial solution to this would to only turn on the camera when they enter a shop. Using something similar to the stolen goods detectors at the doorways of shops could be used to turn on the camera when entering, and then off when leaving. However, this doesn't prevent 2 issues;

1. Covering up the camera.
How would you enforce this? You could state in the terms of surveillance with camera that they aren't allowed to cover it up for an extended period of time. However, for someone to steal something it only takes a matter of seconds, and covering the camera can be disguised as simple as putting on a coat or turning the body in the opposite direction. You would need to be able to ensure that the camera can't be tampered with, can't be covered, and has full vision of the hands, and legs are all times.

2. GDPR
Filming in the pubic domain, and using that for evidence can be a tricky matter. I'm not sure what the status of this is over in the USA. However, I volunteer for Mountain Rescue over here in the UK, and we've had talks about using body cams to protect us, but also for insurance. The police use them, and we thought being a charity we might be able to do the same. After all, we are often supporting the emergency services by either location criminals on the run or body retrieval. We've had team members attacked by casualties (often due to drunk people) that we are trying to help. Despite our best efforts, we came to the decision that the amount of work to get that approved could be an issue. Filming, and using that footage as evidence can be tricky even when we mostly operate on the mountains where there's less people roaming around.

I've known people who have worked in the prison system here over in the UK even some of the more notorious ones around London. As far as I can tell from them talking about it there's a lot of waste, maintenance, and travel costs. If you're cooking for hundreds of inmates then you're going to have waste no matter what. I know people in the UK like the dramatize the whole prison system, and that they don't get a lot to eat etc. However, they definitely do. The standards in the UK are much more than those in Thailand for example.  Heating every year would likely be a lot more than 10k. Take your house for example which costs a few hundred pounds per month, and compare that to a full sized prison which has separate rooms, and has to follow certain laws, and regulations.

Same goes for electric, heating and water. I've worked in the water industry, and I can tell you its not cheap. Universities, and prisons have to go through regular sampling procedures which costs them every time. Where as normally the water board would be sampling the local reservoirs, and do the occasional house call prisons, and school systems need more checks throughout the year. That's without including the amount of water that would be used in a prison system which I'm not even going to try, and guess. However, if we consider the more irregular unexpected costs such as if there are any issues relating to infrastructure being compromised then that would require repair. However, to carry out such a repair where you have hundreds of people requiring water they would need to put in a bypass system in order to get potable water to the inmates. When a water pipe has been compromised it will need to be re-chlorinated, and sampled again adding to the cost. Depending on the length of the water main is how much it will cost, and I'm talking a piece of 63mm pipe of hundred meters of so costing in the hundreds, and a prison system would require much much larger than a 63mm piece of pipe. These are separate contractors to the government so there's no real mate rates in this business. An alternative is isolating the damaged pipe, and going "on boil" which is simply boiling the water temporarily until the water pipe is fixed. However, this would add to electricity bills, and when the pipe has been fixed would still require to be re-chlorinated, and sampled. The water industry is a multi billion pound industry, and England actually pays multi millions of pounds per year to Wales, and Scotland to send water down to them. Water is cheap for a standard house with only a few people living in them. However, when you consider prisons are housing hundreds of people at a time the price starts to rack up considerably.  

Travel costs have to be considered also. When a prisoner gets ill they either call a doctor in or they have to escort the prisoner out. Remember, that all medical costs are covered by the tax payer, and therefore if a inmate requires surgery the justice system incorporates this isn't their costs. However, then there's minor things such as medication costs, and painkillers. Yes, prisoners have full rights to receiving medication when they are ill, and has been approved by a doctor. Medication isn't cheap. Then there's dental costs, and other health issues that need to be taken care of. There's simply too much to list, and probably is why the government don't give a full breakdown on what they've spent their money on.

Although, I'd like to see some accurate statistics of the running costs of a prison which depict what everything is spent on. Although, I don't think that sort of data has been released to the public. Instead, they distribute a more general outlook of the running costs of the whole prison system. Check out this report from the Ministry Of Justice: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/653972/costs-per-place-per-prisoner-2016-2017-summary.pdf

Although 79k USD sounds a little steep per inmate its not far off the reported statistics of the UK (per inmate). Being around double the amount compared to the UK. Which, honestly could come to down to cost of living comparison, and other things such as more food per inmate etc. It is America after all, and we all know they like to do things bigger ;)

I'm not a fan of prison system. I'm actually totally against it. Well, for some cold hearted crimes, I sometimes get emotionally charged and feel a bullet to the head will be good, but that would just give police too much power.

I feel like human resource shouldn't just go waste. A person might have stolen let's say million dollars from bank. Once he's caught, he will be sent to jail for the rest of his life. But is it really necessary?

The million dollars would be recovered somehow by the bank. And if we put the person into forced employment, he would generate a living and also contribute something to society.

Same goes for murder. If someone commits murder, he shouldn't pay it with his own life by getting executed. I feel that, he can however pay it off by saving another life. How? Well, just take one of his kidneys and donate it to an urgently needed person. Voila! He just saved another person's life. Now give him rest and some employment under strict supervision. People would say taking his one kidney would be against his right? Well, taking his life with death penalty isn't worse?

The universe with its patterns formed life with an astronomically low chances, we shouldn't just waste the lives and resources simply by passing and executing void and useless laws.

firstly a cell is not some 3 bedroom house, its a single room. secondly a cell has 2 people in it. so its math of 2 rooms to get to $10k
so if you exclude a 3rd bedroom, exclude a dinning room, kitchen, living room. then heating 2 rooms is cheap EG £1 a day. yep i can heat 2 rooms for £1 a day which is £365 a year ($500 a year) i aslso calculated the 'common area' sch as halls and kitchens. and such too. and per 2 people the total came nowhere near £3k a year($5k) to have the total of $10k i put aside.
i put $10kcoz i was being generous even though i done the math of far cheaper.

if you are paying £8k on electric/heating for a 3-4 bedroom house then i think  its time you switched
:D

unlike a housing situation of 3-4 people bathing baths and using a washing machine every day to wash just 2 t-shirts at a time,
prison cells are 2 people only given a few minutes to shower(thus water economical)
prison cells are 2 people who use industrial laundry that takes masses of clothing in one cycle(thus economical)
again they dont have swimming pools, bathtubs, back garden fish ponds, nor do they ned to wash their car's or garden patio's  so the water usage is lower. and again i put numbers up to $10k to be generous.

and again if your paying £8k for water bills each year then its time you get your supplier to sort things out

new piping is not fitted daily. or weekly. infact in many prisons piping has not be dealt with in 50 years.
so one pipe-for-pipe replacement in say 25 years is only 'hundreds' a year

also the underground mains is cheaper. as prisons have basements thus no JCB diggers are needed within the prison walls. just plumbers with hard hats. thus cheaper and faster to repair. the piping within the prison
(the 'mains' pipe to the prison is coverd by the water company)

personal note: yes i do think about the details. i didnt just throw random number around nor pick a lowball number, i actually exaggerated the numbers in many cases to cover many variables and still there is spare funds left over that seem to be unexplained

i think i said my peace above. my math was based on a 4 person 1 guard calculation. and then was generous ontop to add more for the common/shared area.

prison guards salary is already covered in the math i done whether they stood in prison or in an ambulance it doesnt matter. its the same amount
as for surgery.. actually thats the NHS budget not prison budget. but i will accept this variable as america and other countries may not use the national health budget but instead require it to come from the prison budget.
but we are still at a point of based on 4 people 1 guard how many times a year would one need medical assistance to rack up $10k a year

if your family of 3-4 are costing you £8k in national insurance or for american readers $10k in medicare then something is off with your accountants sums. maybe your accountant is syphoning funds from you


is only £24k which just goes to show how low costs actually are
.. i really think its time you change accountants if your household bills are £8k for heating and £8k for water for a 4 bedroom house
manypeople can live on basic rations in the UK for less than £12k a year (benefits: living and housing)
so yea £24k sounds about right for the excess for guards and such

but the 'prisons' get £35k a year per inmate all in. so thats £11k in question
not as bad as america's $200k+ in question

they dont get large steaks in prison. its more like meatloaf and instant mash

though i kinda like the idea of donating a body part in exchange for avoiding the executioner. i however think. maybe a visit to the executioner and being put under anaesthetic and having more than a kidney removed while on life support. save maybe 11 people.
and then once all organs harvested. then given the second needle that ends the execution process for good

but then in both cases of just a kidney and whole body organ donation scheme. i can easily see that turning prisons into a 'for-profit' organ farm. incarcerating people just to keep up demand. EG arrested because of no crime but being o- blood type
(imagine it similar to claims of incarcerated just because of colour of skin, but this type blood type)

and the flip side
for those actually doing major crimes
what you may see happen is people get time off their sentence simply for blood donation because each 'giving blood donation can save upto 3 people' thus mathematically becomes more of a lighter sentence than a kidney donation
EG 24 donations a year = upto 73 lives saved thus 73 years off a life sentence. making a killer doing life for murdering 3 people at 25years per crime get released in just 2 years.
.. all for just sitting in a cell and having a needle stuck into him 24 times. which most junkies(who needle up daily) wont see as punishment or rehab but just an easy year vacation, all expenses paid

I am really against of sending people who consume drugs or alcohol to prison.
These people are not criminals - but they should be treated as people who need help.
Instead, people who sell drugs are criminals - those who make money when others feel depressed and try to get a gateaway from this situation.

Prison is a overall failure. Convicted criminals should do force labor according to their crime. Any prison time below 3 years should go under vocational training making them able to stand on their own when they get out of jail. Anything above 3 years should be spent 75% of time in forced labor in manufacturing, mining and cleaning. And the rest 25% for training them to settle back in society.

I'd rather if the prison system was disbanded in the most part. I'm a supporter of radical steps.

You commit a petty crime, you get forced to make it back to the victim. Don't have money to pay back - pay with whatever you have like your time.
Example: a thief gets caught stealing from a store you make him pay a fine or clean the floors.
2 guys fight in a bar over a girl - nobody goes to jail, they pay for the damages and eventual hospital bills.
Somebody rapes your daughter - he gets caught, convicted, you have the right to beat the shit out of him, his face is in the news and he gets branded for life as a rapist.
I'd only put murderers behind bars and mass murderers, especially those animals who rape and murder children should be executed in public.

cant pay for a drink of food taken from a store or bar. then yes work it off in labour. and also not just a probation officr but a social worker and a employment support officer to sort out th underlying reason why they needed to steal instead of just buying it.

physical fight. just like car insurance. who ever caused the damage pays the costs(legal and hospital and any property damage)

any kind of rape. yes definetly public named and shamed. but it has to be rape. not just getting caught peeing in public or grabbing an ass.

rape of kids. definetly castration. and heftier punishment
(im not into violent beating morally. but if i seen a rapist get beaten up, i wouldnt stop the fight)

as for execution. i say not immediate execution incase there was some vague chance that it was a false charge. so give a couple years to have a couple appeals chances. and then obviously with 3 verdicts of 3 trials showing guilt beyond reasonable doubt. then execution could be considered

in a country like america where they say people are free to bare arms.. but at the same time if the police see someone holding a gun(as their right to do so).. for police the first thought is to shoot the guy, the second thought is to get thier story straight that it was 'defence and justified suicide by cop' which is a bit of a weird circle of should people be allowed to bare arms

so if the law allows people to be killed if involved even in a petty crime via 'suicide by cop' then i think the execution chair should be allowed, otherwise its hypocritical that cops get to be judge jury and executioner

We had similar way of punishing criminals worldwide. Then came the humanist, these worthless people would shout out everytime the rapist and murderer are treated like they need to. According to them criminals should be rewarded for their deeds with free food and shelter without doing anything which are funded by the tax from the sufferer and normal law abiding people works hard to earn their own living.

You guys describe things exactly as they are. If you look at what the average prisoner does in prison, it's a combination of paradise and hell. They have time to work out, eat 3 meals a day, get free laundry, medical care, always a warm place to sleep, often a TV and a radio, they get to visit family, sometimes even a bit of gay love if you're into these things.
They can go to school, pray at a chapel, you name it. Many hard working people can't afford such pleasures.

Then there's hell when you can get beaten up, robbed, even killed for a pack of cigarettes. You get to see other inmates being bullied, raped. People come out of the system damaged and often unable to find a job. The only way for them to exist is to go back to their criminal life and if it leads to prison again so be it. It's better than living in a cardboard box and begging.

i know i have in some post described how things are. but they are not working and some prisons dont have some of the luxuries nor the hefty penalties which you describe as the heaven or hell 2 sides of prison. so my topic was about if things were to change.. how and in what way.

for instance if someone finishing their 2 year sentance. is not just put on the street with just a taxi fare. but actually spending the final 6 months actually sorting themselves out with a job.

for instance there are many 'public sector' jobs that are low grade (cleaning public toilets, community gardens) which could be dedicated to ex-cons thus ensuring a better chance of retaining a job and 'starting a new life' compared to circumstances before incarceration.

re-offending for small things like stealing foed usually happens because when released all they have is a taxi fare and a criminal record meaning they can go months without a steady income(thus needing to steal to survive again) while trying to plead to private businesses to give them a chance. however if they have a job at release. (as a condition of being released) then the re-offending rate goes down. and they can use the fact that they have a job, as a means of showing future next employers they have some potential and some experience to move up and into better employment

I actually know someone who looked healthier after being in prison. But yes, it's back to crime afterwards for many ex-cons. The stigma of having jail time meant that they'd find it even harder to support themselves. I know some prisons offer education as well as training but unless the person decide to build his own business his history is going to haunt him.


Reminded me of what I read that Roman husbands are allowed to "sodomize" their wives' lovers if they were caught. They use objects like fish or radish for this. No prison time but that guy ain't showing his face in public for a long time (well there's the possibility of death from the ordeal but yeah...).

I saw some interviews with ex cons on youtube and they were pretty disappointed with what was waiting for them on the outside. When you're a violent offender it's really difficult to get a job. Employers are afraid of you and there's a lot of non-violent offenders waiting in line so they will always choose those.
Their prison tattoos also become a problem outside. People see their gang affiliation and don't want anything to do with them. They are ghuman trash, but don't feel like that until they're back in the society. The society actually tells it to their face and this is the tipping point for most of them. They either break and become addicts or go back to violence.

Can we change it? Yes, but the politicians prefer to act like it's fine since the house isn't falling on their heads yet. They see the cracks but prefer put some fresh paint over it hoping that it will last until they're out of office and then it will become a problem for someone else.

Probably due to lack of tan (and vitamin D from the sun). They should add balconies and terraces for them to sunbathe. Imagine how the morale would rise.


-Look it's that fish ass guy!

The thread title is 'a society question about prison time'... and we do need to take into account the society aspect.

In the UK, mainstream political opinion is to an appallingly large extent determined by tabloid hysteria. Our 'democracy' is heavily influenced by witch-hunts, hate-campaigns, and the general stoking of the fires of prejudice. This wouldn't of course be effective if every voter took the time to think for themselves and question what they are told, but unfortunately many people just don't understand that the right to vote comes with the attendant responsibility to be well-informed.

Against this backdrop, I think the choices that a UK government can make whilst remaining in power are somewhat constrained.

There are more enlightened views in other countries, as this report (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/feb/25/norwegian-prison-inmates-treated-like-people) on a norwegian prison demonstrates.
The UK government - whichever party was in charge - would never decide to try something like this, the fear of the inevitable tabloid outcry would prevent it. The public here at least care far less about dry stats on reduced recidivism than they do about stringing up whoever they are told is the villain of the day.

More like he got fatter since he's not walking around with his "friends" and he's eating on time. As for ex-cons finding it hard to find a job, I believe there are companies that are hiring ex-cons as part of their social responsibility initiative but those are far and between and can't give every ex-con a chance.

Also link me this "fish ass guy". I'm a meme normie and it might have went past my radar.

There are different classifications of penalties of imprisonment. From light penalty of arresto menor to afflictive penalty of reclusion perpetua. Those penalties has three periods, the minimum, medium, and maximum. These penalties can be affected of What is the participation of the accused in the crime, if they are  accessories, accomplices, or principals. The penalties can be decrease if there are mitigating circumstances and can be increase if there are aggravating circumstances. As of today, here in our country, the penalty of death is obsolete, but the government is planning to revive such for the penalty of heinous crimes.

I have to agree that prison food in many countries is better than hospital food. I saw the menu and they even had fried chicken on holidays, things like pizza day and such while people in the hospital have to eat jelly all the time ;D

I wasn't referring to any particular meme but the way people in Rome would have reacted after seeing that sodomized lover walking with a fish sticking out of his butt.
Anyway, hope this satisfies you.
https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a44O4ry_700bwp.webp

My input was based on all the hidden factors that contribute to the costs of running a prison, and not just for water, and food costs, but for everything. I'd agree 11k is no where near that of the American prisons, but I can't possibly comment on that. Although, water charges for a prison will be much more than your regular household due to the fact that they would need regular quality assurance checks. This isn't one sample per prison. Its a sample of each length of water main over 5 meters I believe.

However, my point being is its these little things which aren't often public knowledge that we don't think of. My original point which was poorly presented I'll admit wasn't about justifying the costs, but giving a little insight into the hidden factors of running something like this with all the rules, and regulations that are put in place.

AFAIK, UK prisons actually provide very good quality of food to the prisoners. I think it was either Charles Bronson or another high profile prisoner who has publicly said that they have been treated extremely well compared to 30 years or so ago.

my points was about not 11k but an acceptable assumption of $£30k.. however seeing places like america that are charging $80k is obvious sign of extreme funds wastage
yes 11k is the minimal cost for people.. and yes add in guards(£5k per inmate) and hidden costs like extra hygiene checks can bring things upto say £$30k sound reasonable. but the $80k seems very iffy to explain

anyway. even with the differential of say 11k for a nominal living in the community non convict on benefits vs a 30k prisoner.
my main topic point was is that 19k difference spending on prison a good resource for certain crimes. could that 19k difference instead go towards putting people into community projects, rehab, victim reimbursement, social services, healthcare to solve the underlying causes of the crime, to actually offer a better chance of the prisoner to not repeat their illicit acts again

How much more bitcoins do we need to buy an island and start a society from scratch?

Well, prison in my country sucks but in this guy's case he began eating regularly and I suppose started to have a regular sleep pattern. Can't stay up late when you are being monitored. I think that's one more reason to actually reduce the prison time, prisons get less crowded and there can be more focus on rehabilitating people in for non-violent crimes. Reduced expenses since you'd have fewer inmates.

Also, thanks for image. I would have LOLed had I been handed that receipt.  ;D

The problem you have with that is that an unacceptably high number of people who end up incarcerated ... kinda suck.  Certainly not all, and I don't mean to suggest that they deserve to be in jail because of it. But a lot of people are addicted, stupid, or just dysfunctional in various difficult or impossible to cure ways that contribute to them making the sort of bad decisions which predictably end up with them in jail.

The military doesn't want those folks: Even as cannon fodder-- if you can ignore the moral problems with ever using a human that way-- they can be more trouble than they're worth.

Already one of the serious moral problems with the military is that participation to is isn't particularly voluntary for many people:  Many people feel forced into service because their economic situation leaves them justifyably feeling they have few other options. Beyond the ethical issues of forcing people into life threatening situations, a non-voluntary participant has an even weaker position to stand up against abuses of military power. A penal participant would be far worse.

And then there is the question of incentives:  If prisoners frequently go into the military to avoid sitting in a cell that creates a powerful incentive for the state to create more prisoners.

I think it should probably be considered a human rights abuse to make any use of prisoners which doesn't benefit the prisoner (or at most their fellow prisoners) primarily such as education, therapy, or employment like activities *at market rates* where all the proceeds would go to them when they leave prison. Perhaps it would be okay for them to defray their incarceration costs up to whatever they'd be spending for housing/food outside of prison, but I think even that is sketchy. They certainly shouldn't be performing public service as a prisoner (though I think limited amounts of public service is an alternative to incarceration). I think this should hold even where the prisoner would voluntarily agree otherwise just like how someone can't consensually enter into slavery. -- it isn't as if an incarcerated person can ever actually consent in any case: Consent under duress isn't consent.  Anything else has too much risk of bad incentives, and when it comes to locking people up-- that isn't a place where society should be tolerant of bad incentives.

There should NEVER be any prison time given if the court hasn't found any harm to a human being, or damage to human-owned property. This should be made into a formal law of the courts, with evidence and proof of both, that there is injury in some way, and that the defendant did the injury.

8)

ok lets test out your freeman stance

imagine you had a family farm. the whole family owned it in equal shares
no one could decide what to do without majority vote for a certain plan.

but each day someone who didnt want to be part of the family and was treated as a stranger just drove into your farm at top speed and wheelspinned and drove out.
then the kept doing it 5 times a day, every day for a year

what would be the punishment
knowing there is a risk of an animal or family member getting hit someday, or even damage to the land

but with no one YET physically harmed no damage done.

what would be the punishment
or
just allowed free spirit to just wheelspin on someone elses property owned by multiple people and put them at risk

Darwinism.. And the world would be rid of them, and their possible "dysfunctional' genetics, for good..


Many won't make it far enough to be protected when the free people have the right and mindset to protect themselves and solve their own problems without appealing to the authority of a higher power, if that is even an option..

For there to be no harm or damage done, the owners would be enjoying the spectacle. But at least they wouldn't care.

8)

Since it has been shown in the "Evolution is a hoax" thread, that Darwinism doesn't exist... LOL! You make a good joke.



If there wasn't any government, a thief would get caught and be forced to pay the price for his thievery... forced by the good people of the area.

Once the thieves saw this, they would realize that they would have to band together and form a thieves' government to survive.

Once the TG was active, the good people would realize they would have to form a good government to protect themselves from the TG.

Once the TG crooks realized that they were losing to the GG, they would become nice on the outside, so they could penetrate into the GG and be thieves from within.

This is what we have today... governments within governments within governments, on and on... Deep State.

The local jury is the authority - judge - in all things that affect the local area they are in. This is the way that the good people can rule, at the same time keeping the bad people from becoming country-wide dictatorial.

The only thing that is wrong is that the local people don't understand that they can pick up the local jury for anything, and change the country through jury nullification. So, they don't do anything, and nothing changes.

8)

The linkage between generics and most forms of dysfunctional behaviour are very weak to statistically insignificant-- human genetics is already well optimized by evolution to produce consistently good outcomes. Worse, some of the strongest genetic connections that exist appear to be for traits that also produce HIGH ability in some people-- greater intelligence, creativity, etc. So if you were to try to breed out the dysfunctional people, you might also breed out the most capable.

Sometimes seemingly bad traits are preserved by evolution because they confer advantages in some situations, with some upbringings, by chance, or in combination with other genetic traits.

Plus what we consider 'dysfunction' is highly dependant on social context.  Galileo Galilei was considered a bad guy and a trouble maker by the powers that be in his time.

And every one of us has had ancestors who were lesser than ourselves.

Besides, human beings don't deserve to die just because they're losers even if you could somehow objectively determine that they were.

know that
gmaxwell prefers a judge and witness court room where witnesses follow judges rule and just agree or get removed from court
gmaxwell does not prefer juries that decide and set the precedence of rule where the judge simply gives options of different charges that could be set

so .. now i wonder
if gmaxwells society preference for having a central leader like himself deciding whats good or bad for bitcoin whiie suppressing opposition is due to his genetics or how he was brought up

personally i think its the megabucks income from the corporations he founded and got investment pumped into that swayed his morals.
it may have begun much earlier, via upbringing or a birth defect.. though i just think it was money related in recent years


evidence
gmaxwells hatred of opposing dev teams because HE feels HE would have to review their code and it would be too much work for HIM
gmaxwell doesnt want to have bitcoin reference client wrote in a new coding language that may benefit others because HE doesnt want to learn it

also to note
HIS evidence of trying to quote satoshi has been taken out of context, as satoshi was realising that people were starting to see him as a central point of decision making due to such questions. thus he left. to break that centralising aspect
 
it was not to be taken as context to prove a central point of reference of a single client and no opposition is the direction bitcoin should be taken

P.S
its my damn topic so dont go censorship crazy deleting this post, just because its not a thing you want to see being said

Across the hall from notbatman, right?     8)

i know you dont believe in the concept of tresspass.
as long as it means you dont get a speeding ticket for breaking the rules of the road because the same no harm or damage was done..
means the police officer can open your car door and search your car and ask you any questions and waste your time
because there was no harm or damage

so your other topic where no damage or harm was done, means you cant invoice a police officer. right?

also to note. anyone who knows badeckers address can happily walk into his house and stand there stalking his family, watching them. and just use the front entrance hallway and back door as a path for people to just walk along and not be told to get out

How in the world dumb can you be? It isn't a trespass when someone is invited. It isn't a trespass when the owner doesn't care.

If the owner doesn't like it, then it's a trespass. If the owner doesn't do something about it but doesn't like it, it is still a trespass.

If the corporation tries to sue the man/woman doing the trespass, why does the corporation make up a fictional "person" to sue? If the man/woman who is doing the trespass treats the corporation's fictional person just as it is, a fictional person, he can sue the pants off everyone involved with the fictional person, because they are damaging him/her, but are not calling the man/woman to account. They are only calling some fictional person to account.

Let each man/woman member of the corporation sue for damages because it is hurting the pocketbook of each, or it is threatening each, or maybe it has damaged the person of one or two of them. If the men and women of the corporation bring claims against the man/woman doing the trespass, then the trespasser just might be convicted.

As it is, the idiot trespasser thinks he was called into account when the fictional person was called the trespasser. So, he accepts the position of being the fictional person. And that is the way he is found guilty. He isn't the person on the indictment. Why not? Because the indictment person doesn't bleed when the indictment is stabbed with a knife, but the man/woman does.

Wake up, and stop accepting that you are the fictional person on the indictment.

8)

firstly you are the naive one by saying the daft 'fictional person' freeman nonsense
you love them buzzwords and phrases, your still not ready to look passed the freeman concept and to look at the reality of what goes on

you really need to delete the bookmarks referencing freeman stuff and actually look at real stuff

'fictional person' (facepalm)
you are really stuck in a decades old myth

...
so here is the reality check
the highway is not your property and the court is not your barn. you have to play by their rules and procedures

police officer follows policies and rules and has the responsibility to make sure that others do not break certain rules. this includes the highway code. meaning you can drive however you like on your own private land. but if your on public property you have to follow the highway code.. and if your on someone elses property you have to follow their rules.

trying to pretend your a fiction and how you the blood being are not the same blood being witenessed driving on a highway without a licence. where the witness is the police officer who identifies you..
you will not get away with it by playing the 'fictional person' debate. instead the case will be rescheduled for another date if you kept up the disruption to the court process.

pretending courts rues policies and procedures dont apply to you is foolish in court.

some things that can happen is this
by you denying that the defendant is in the court. is the same as just not turning up. thus the court could get a warrant for your arrest or just put the case in the governments favour as your acknowledging you as the accussed did not turn up to defend it, thus there is no defense.. meaning prosecution instant win
by you denying being the accused. but witnesses identify you. you could be locked up for messing with the court and maybe even put on a psych hold and assessed for mental competance.

you have no clue what really happens in a court or the real court procedure or why things are done a certain way.
EG going to a hearing and doing the freeman dance demanding a jury..
sorry a jury is at trials which is a separate event AFTER a hearing. which are for times where there is doubt and the evidence needs to be brought in and where the accused pleads not guilty. again a hearing and a trial happen at separate times

your freeman strategies you read have been done by people that have not even used them where it has actually truly worked. even karl lentz la la la la'd over stuff to hide what really happened.

anyways back to the point


imagine you had a family farm. the whole family owned it in equal shares
no one could decide what to do without majority vote for a certain plan.
but each day someone who didnt want to be part of the family and was treated as a stranger just drove into your farm at top speed and wheelspinned and drove out.
then the kept doing it 5 times a day, every day for a year
what would be the punishment
knowing there is a risk of an animal or family member getting hit someday, or even damage to the land

in this scenario the person was not wanted on your property. what would the punishment be

go on. admit it. when you want to sue them for tresspass.. doesnt it then counter your 'no harm no damage' freeman stance?
are you going to continue with the murder is a victimless act because the victim cant accuse anyone so there is no crime
are you going to continue with stalking and entering peoples home is a victimless act so there is no crime
are you going to continue with speed whilst driving without licence and insurance and say there is no crime

or are you going to wake up that people have to take responsibility and follows the laws/acts/statutes.. otherwise the acts become empty of power. including the acts that say right to bar arms, which would suddenly become meaningless in your world

^^^ You're just upset because you didn't really know what you were doing when you did it.

The laws better change to what the people want, or a lot of lawmaker-heads will roll, just like is going to happen as the Trump impeachment jokers start to back down.


In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws (http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/272317-2019-11-25-in-virginia-and-elsewhere-gun-supporters-prepare-to-defy-new.htm)




8)

badecker you dont know
you just quote something and then pretend its your personal experience

i never followed the freeman crap. but i done research on many sides of what different people thought about different laws
and so that involved looking into freeman crap

the issue you have is to just read something and believe it. rather than research it

by the way.
you have trouble getting passed the concept that there is more than just 'no harm no damage no loss' because you cant grasp the concept of tresspass. and so i have not yet mentioned the next bombshell that would double spark and blow your mind. contract law
but im trying to give you baby steps to help you escape the freeman hole you dug yourself into before going into the bigger stuff..

you really need to accept that your freeman stuff has many flaws and doesnt work.. as your favourite freeman guy 'la la la's himself out of explaining

i still laugh that you think you can go to a fed court and announce that your a fiction and not the accused and pretend the accuser isnt present and how you dont recognise their rules and want the court to only follow your law, whether it freeman youtube videos or sharia law.. sorry that just aint how things work

by the way. as for law changing
citizens dont write laws. they elect a representative and hope that representative shares the electorates wishes and has the sway to get laws changed. problem is the election itself is not a guarantee that the 'promises' candidates make will flourish
after all.. trump still wants a wall.. and years later it aint happened
after all trump wanted to buy greenland.. and that aint ever gonna happen

and as for gun control.
in a couple years another senator could be elected and repeal the virginia changes and make gun control stricter

Guns are private property. As property, they'd have to throw out all the foundational governmental documents to take private property away. Of course, then it wouldn't be legal.

8)