3 ms·
>I'm convinced that the solution to crime is not to increase punishments, but to make the speed and likelihood of being punished fast and almost certain. You a
by throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>I'm convinced that the solution to crime is not to increase punishments, but to make the speed and likelihood of being punished fast and almost certain.
You apply that to every Karen's favorite pet laws and suddenly we're all living in 1984.
Look at the opinions of HN for example. You've got a subset of people who think speeding should be a shoot on sight offense. And you've got a subset of people who think littering should be a shoot on sight offense. You've got a subset of people who think that anyone who uses power equipment before 10AM is Literally Hitler(TM). I'm being only slightly hyperbolic here. It all adds up. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
- voakbasda 5y agoWhich is why a huge swath of laws need to be thrown out. The majority of our governments are tyrannically inhumane. If a law is not going to be enforced, remove it from the books.
- SilverRed 5y agoPeople advocate for these "shoot on sight" punishments because they are sick of offenders getting away with things. Light but certain punishments would fix this. If there was a $50 fine for speeding but you have an almost 100% chance of getting caught, this would be more effective (I think) than a $400 fine which takes months of offending to be caught. Fast feedback loops are the key here.