4 ms·
That is a bit short-sighted, though. People can end up labled criminal without doing much of anything - plenty bad stories about that. Then there are folks with
by jospoortvliet 10y ago
That is a bit short-sighted, though. People can end up labled criminal without doing much of anything - plenty bad stories about that. Then there are folks with psychological issues - you can't blame somebody with a psychosis for what they do. Then there are people who have been abused and never got a decent chance in life to be decent people - not fair to lock them up without furtherfurther help either.
Now therr might be people who had a good upbringing and education, no psychological issues and all opportunities in life but they still become criminals. These are generally corrupt politicians and bankers and asshole CEO's and such, NOT the kind of people who would be hurt by harsh anti-crime policy.
Just how anti-encryption laws don't hinder cruminals, only good-meaning activists and journalists, neither do harsh laws against crime help against actual crime. See how Denmark and other nordic countries treat criminals - they have extremely low crime rates as result.
- greedo 10y agoWe don't know the root causes in this specific case, just the outcome. Barring a psych eval, we have to assume this is just a violent person, and restrict their freedom appropriately. In the end, it doesn't really matter the root cause, since we can't go back in time to ameliorate those factors; violent criminals need to have their freedom restricted. I'm not talking about "criminals" who misunderstand the law and get caught in a technicality. That's your strawman. I'm talking specifically about a violent person committing assault and battery.