Breakdown In Civil Order

[bilby]

Criminals are people who commit crimes

And see this right here shows your depersonalization.

See the active current tense, here.

It is not ""criminals" are people who have committed crimes", but rather "criminals are people who commit."

Compare again " who have committed" with "who commit".

This is down to your fundamental failure to observe what it is you are actually feeling and thinking as you feel, think, and ultimately put out statements.

A small percentage of people commit most of the crime. Emily isn’t wrong.

A small percentage of crime is detected, and a small percentage of that is ascribed to a person by the court system. A non-trivial fraction of those convictions are wrongful.

The data allow us to conclude that a small percentage of people are convicted of most of the crime; And even that a small percentage of people are accused of most of the crime. The very phrase "round up the usual suspects" suggests that there's a massive confirmation bias at work here, and a vicious circle. When a crime is committed, the police look first and hardest at 'the usual suspects'; So it's this group that are most likely to be convicted; So this group are over represented in the conviction figures; So it "makes sense" to look first and hardest at this group.

But the fact remains that there's probably almost nobody who reaches the age of thirty without having done something that could, if they were unfortunate enough, have resulted in their conviction for a criminal offence.

We have met the enemy, and it is us.

Many people resile from that - after all, "we" are good people (who make very occasional lapses of good judgment); While "they" are hardened criminals who are preying on our society (and are likely irredeemable).

But that's nonsense - the division, as Solzhenitsyn observed, is not between "us" and "them"; It runs through every person's heart.

As the massive scale of the US prison population suggests, if you attempt to lock up all the criminals, you can only succeed by locking up bloody everybody.

 

[Emily Lake]

This is down to your fundamental failure to observe what it is you are actually feeling and thinking as you feel, think, and ultimately put out statements.

Thank you for mansplaining to me what I think and what I mean. I'm sure that you, as a man of the species, know better than poor little me, I'm just a woman, I don't know anything.

 

[Jarhyn]

This is down to your fundamental failure to observe what it is you are actually feeling and thinking as you feel, think, and ultimately put out statements.

Thank you for mansplaining to me what I think and what I mean. I'm sure that you, as a man of the species, know better than poor little me, I'm just a woman, I don't know anything.

Hey, you're the one making statements that you aren't taking the time to understand.

Hey @Toni maybe you can "woman-splain" it to her instead?

 

[Emily Lake]

But the fact remains that there's probably almost nobody who reaches the age of thirty without having done something that could, if they were unfortunate enough, have resulted in their conviction for a criminal offence.

I've jaywalked, and I've sped. And I ran a red light once. And when I was a child, I accidentally shoplifted a candy bar which I went back and paid for. I've probably trespassed unintentionally a few times.

I have not ever beaten, attacked, murdered, robbed, or raped anyone. I've never sexually assaulted anyone. I've never burgled anyone. I've never sold drugs, nor have I engaged in sex trafficking, nor have I kidnapped anyone. I've never abused a child.

I cannot imagine a situation in which I would do ANY of those things, ever.

 

[bilby]

This is down to your fundamental failure to observe what it is you are actually feeling and thinking as you feel, think, and ultimately put out statements.

Thank you for mansplaining to me what I think and what I mean. I'm sure that you, as a man of the species, know better than poor little me, I'm just a woman, I don't know anything.

And what is Trausti's excuse?

You are both wrong. Neither of you are wrong because you ate a woman, so playing the victim of sexism card here is a bit pathetic.

 

[Emily Lake]

This is down to your fundamental failure to observe what it is you are actually feeling and thinking as you feel, think, and ultimately put out statements.

Thank you for mansplaining to me what I think and what I mean. I'm sure that you, as a man of the species, know better than poor little me, I'm just a woman, I don't know anything.

Hey, you're the one making statements that you aren't taking the time to understand.

Hey @Toni maybe you can "woman-splain" it to her instead?

The sheer arrogance of telling me what I think and what I believe, and what you have decide I actually mean is just flabbergasting. Who the hell do you think you are, and why the holy fuck do you think you know anything about my mind? I'm not even convinced you know your own mind - how about you sort that out before you armchair psychoanalyze other people?

 

[bilby]

But the fact remains that there's probably almost nobody who reaches the age of thirty without having done something that could, if they were unfortunate enough, have resulted in their conviction for a criminal offence.

I've jaywalked, and I've sped. And I ran a red light once. And when I was a child, I accidentally shoplifted a candy bar which I went back and paid for. I've probably trespassed unintentionally a few times.

I have not ever beaten, attacked, murdered, robbed, or raped anyone. I've never sexually assaulted anyone. I've never burgled anyone. I've never sold drugs, nor have I engaged in sex trafficking, nor have I kidnapped anyone. I've never abused a child.

I cannot imagine a situation in which I would do ANY of those things, ever.

Your lack of imagination is a symptom of your privilege.

In the wrong situation, you would be just as likely to do those things as anyone else.

 

[Emily Lake]

Your lack of imagination is a symptom of your privilege.

In the wrong situation, you would be just as likely to do those things as anyone else.

I absolutely 100% guarantee that I am NOT as likely to do those as certain other people are. With complete and utter confidence.

I'm a bit concerned that you think you're just as likely to rape someone as a convicted rapist is... that you're just as likely to molest a child as a child molester is... that you're just as likely to murder someone as a convicted murderer is.

 

[steve_bank]

Here in Seattle and Washington in general criminals are becoming more emboldened day by day coincident with the decline of police and new laws restricting enforcement. Complainants are comming from both the left and the right.

Restorative justice is meaningless and pointless without strong law enforcement.

Fear to a degree is a part of civil order. It is human nature. The idea that social and community programs coupled with weak law enforcement is going to bring back order is a progressive fantasy.

 

[bilby]

Your lack of imagination is a symptom of your privilege.

In the wrong situation, you would be just as likely to do those things as anyone else.

I absolutely 100% guarantee that I am NOT as likely to do those as certain other people are. With complete and utter confidence.

Yeah, but that's because you believe that "violent criminal" is a class of unperson, rather than an action by a real human person.

I'm a bit concerned that you think you're just as likely to rape someone as a convicted rapist is... that you're just as likely to molest a child as a child molester is... that you're just as likely to murder someone as a convicted murderer is.

Just as likely? Given identical circumstances, yes.

Though obviously my actual circumstances, like yours, are very different from those of the people who actually perpetrated those crimes.

The question is how to modify their circumstances such that they too feel aghast at the very idea that they might do those things.

And jail, or the threat of jail, is demonstrably a shithouse way to achieve that.

 

[Jarhyn]

This is down to your fundamental failure to observe what it is you are actually feeling and thinking as you feel, think, and ultimately put out statements.

Thank you for mansplaining to me what I think and what I mean. I'm sure that you, as a man of the species, know better than poor little me, I'm just a woman, I don't know anything.

Hey, you're the one making statements that you aren't taking the time to understand.

Hey @Toni maybe you can "woman-splain" it to her instead?

The sheer arrogance of telling me what I think and what I believe, and what you have decide I actually mean is just flabbergasting. Who the hell do you think you are, and why the holy fuck do you think you know anything about my mind? I'm not even convinced you know your own mind - how about you sort that out before you armchair psychoanalyze other people?

I think I am a wizard who has spent far more time watching people talk and figuring out how to parse things actively than most of the people I've met.

I know things about your mind exactly from the words that spill out of it and if you don't like people seeing into your mind through your words you can always simply stop speaking them.

As to my own mind, I regularly explore it with open eyes. Or mind's eyes as the case may be. I tend the garden in there and am generally unafraid to pull up anything I don't like there.

Complete and utter confidence, of the sort that is "100%", that YOU are better and YOU would never be bad to others is a sure enough indicator that you are not, but rather you are merely 100% blind to your own failings.

 

[ZiprHead]

Well, I've bought and sold pot. Bought and sold blotter acid. Bought and possessed methamphetamine. Bought and possessed opium. Drove drunk several times. I've never done a violent crime. Yeah, I was young and stupid. Now I haven't had a traffic ticket in thirty years (That could change since I've gotten the bimmer).

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But the fact remains that there's probably almost nobody who reaches the age of thirty without having done something that could, if they were unfortunate enough, have resulted in their conviction for a criminal offence.

I've jaywalked, and I've sped. And I ran a red light once. And when I was a child, I accidentally shoplifted a candy bar which I went back and paid for. I've probably trespassed unintentionally a few times.

I have not ever beaten, attacked, murdered, robbed, or raped anyone. I've never sexually assaulted anyone. I've never burgled anyone. I've never sold drugs, nor have I engaged in sex trafficking, nor have I kidnapped anyone. I've never abused a child.

I cannot imagine a situation in which I would do ANY of those things, ever.

This. Everyone occasionally commits a minor crime. Most people never commit any serious crime.

 

[Jarhyn]

But the fact remains that there's probably almost nobody who reaches the age of thirty without having done something that could, if they were unfortunate enough, have resulted in their conviction for a criminal offence.

I've jaywalked, and I've sped. And I ran a red light once. And when I was a child, I accidentally shoplifted a candy bar which I went back and paid for. I've probably trespassed unintentionally a few times.

I have not ever beaten, attacked, murdered, robbed, or raped anyone. I've never sexually assaulted anyone. I've never burgled anyone. I've never sold drugs, nor have I engaged in sex trafficking, nor have I kidnapped anyone. I've never abused a child.

I cannot imagine a situation in which I would do ANY of those things, ever.

This. Everyone occasionally commits a minor crime. Most people never commit any serious crime.

So, either of y'all pay any attention at all to Le Mis?

Thief! Parole Breaker! Church Robber! Employer! Saver of many lives! Honest man.

I wouldn't rob people. Steal, yeah, stole a bunch of "intellectual property", though never claimed work as my own, and never sold it. Not even most of my actual work, if I could get away with it.

I don't think that a lot of people see themselves selling drugs or selling their body until they are there selling drugs or selling their body because some shitty person has leverage. At that point it's all about the leverage and how much more you give.

Not being able to imagine a situation where the imaginer is a bastard is them living an extremely privileged life. It just means it is going to be all the worse when that day comes and they have failed to make plans on how to give up as little ground as possible if someone or circumstances design to make them.

 

[Hermit]

you ate a woman

---

---

I absolutely 100% guarantee that I am NOT as likely to do those as certain other people are. With complete and utter confidence.

I have not ever beaten, attacked, murdered, robbed, or raped anyone. I've never sexually assaulted anyone. I've never burgled anyone. I've never sold drugs, nor have I engaged in sex trafficking, nor have I kidnapped anyone. I've never abused a child.

I cannot imagine a situation in which I would do ANY of those things, ever.

Your certainty is astonishing. What is it based on? Do you regard yourself as inherently qualitatively superior to someone of inherently criminal bend? Have you spent time wondering what causes people to commit crimes?

 

[bilby]

you ate a woman

I have a black belt in Thai-Poh

 

[Enigma]

Your lack of imagination is a symptom of your privilege.

In the wrong situation, you would be just as likely to do those things as anyone else.

I absolutely 100% guarantee that I am NOT as likely to do those as certain other people are. With complete and utter confidence.

Yeah, but that's because you believe that "violent criminal" is a class of unperson, rather than an action by a real human person.

I'm a bit concerned that you think you're just as likely to rape someone as a convicted rapist is... that you're just as likely to molest a child as a child molester is... that you're just as likely to murder someone as a convicted murderer is.

Just as likely? Given identical circumstances, yes.

Though obviously my actual circumstances, like yours, are very different from those of the people who actually perpetrated those crimes.

The question is how to modify their circumstances such that they too feel aghast at the very idea that they might do those things.

And jail, or the threat of jail, is demonstrably a shithouse way to achieve that.

Given the above, what objection would you have to a proposal to legalize, say, armed robbery, arson, rape, and murder?

After all, if whether or not any given person performs those actions is purely due to a matter of circumstances and the those circumstances are only minimally impacted by the punishments given criminal justice system, then how is punishing people for what essentially amounts to being unlucky enough to have those particular circumstances just?

 

[bilby]

Your lack of imagination is a symptom of your privilege.

In the wrong situation, you would be just as likely to do those things as anyone else.

I absolutely 100% guarantee that I am NOT as likely to do those as certain other people are. With complete and utter confidence.

Yeah, but that's because you believe that "violent criminal" is a class of unperson, rather than an action by a real human person.

I'm a bit concerned that you think you're just as likely to rape someone as a convicted rapist is... that you're just as likely to molest a child as a child molester is... that you're just as likely to murder someone as a convicted murderer is.

Just as likely? Given identical circumstances, yes.

Though obviously my actual circumstances, like yours, are very different from those of the people who actually perpetrated those crimes.

The question is how to modify their circumstances such that they too feel aghast at the very idea that they might do those things.

And jail, or the threat of jail, is demonstrably a shithouse way to achieve that.

Given the above, what objection would you have to a proposal to legalize, say, armed robbery, arson, rape, and murder?

After all, if whether or not any given person performs those actions is purely due to a matter of circumstances and the those circumstances are only minimally impacted by the punishments given criminal justice system, then how is punishing people for what essentially amounts to being unlucky enough to have those particular circumstances just?

Punishing people isn't just; Retribution is pointless, vindictive and cruel.

Rehabilitation is a noble goal.

Deterrence can be just.

Incapacitation is a last resort.

That you apparently can't see any purpose to making crimes unlawful, other than punishment, is truly sad.

 

[Enigma]

Given the above, what objection would you have to a proposal to legalize, say, armed robbery, arson, rape, and murder?

After all, if whether or not any given person performs those actions is purely due to a matter of circumstances and the those circumstances are only minimally impacted by the punishments given criminal justice system, then how is punishing people for what essentially amounts to being unlucky enough to have those particular circumstances just?

Punishing people isn't just; Retribution is pointless, vindictive and cruel.

Rehabilitation is a noble goal.

Deterrence can be just.

Incapacitation is a last resort.

That you apparently can't see any purpose to making crimes unlawful, other than punishment, is truly sad.

Who said anything about retribution? I am talking about punishment.
Punishment may be done for many purposes including retribution, rehabilitation, deterrence, and incapacitation.
Just having the punishment of crimes be handled by the state as opposed to by retributive action from the victim (and/or friends and family of the victim) has served as a limiter for retribution overall.

If you believe that it is meaningful to make crimes unlawful but not punished, then provide an example, real or hypothetical, of how such a law is in any way functionally different from not having that law at all.

 

[steve_bank]

The vast majority of us do not DUI and exceed the speed limit because we know it will affect cost of insurance. Most of us pay bills on time because we know it affects our credit score.

Recently a guy driving a stolen car crashed through police cars and escaped. Per the new state laws it did not meet the requirement for hot police pursuit and police let him get away.

Reduce consequences for crime and people will exploit it.