3 ms·

Some people hold opinions on pre-crime approach to crime. Some would even argue that creating lists of potential troublemakers, dissidents, and all around probl

Some people hold opinions on pre-crime approach to crime. Some would even argue that creating lists of potential troublemakers, dissidents, and all around problematic characters is.. not noted for great results throughout history.. including that of US. I personally hold this really controversial opinion that crime should be addressed when crime is committed. Doing it before it is committed breaks the fabric of reality and/or common sense.

8note 5y ago
The US still has said lists(eg. No fly list and sexual offenders lisssst); are you just more okay with having some people on a precrime list than others?
- isoskeles 5y ago
  I can't speak for the person you're replying to, but I'm against any No Fly lists, both for the pre-crime aspect and for the the opaqueness with which its implemented. Sex offenders, by definition, have committed a crime. So that's not really a pre-crime list. Although, sure, some people may not belong on those lists, and it's pretty life-ruining for them. Your point reads a bit like this: "These injustices exist that you should be against, so why are you supportive of them?"
- A4ET8a8uTh0 5y ago
  And I am really uncomfortable with those as well. I am not sure why you would assume I accept those lists and not others for some reason. No fly list in particular is an abomination. That said, given that Delta is creating a its own version ( and asking other cartel members to join ), soon we may be revisiting this conversation.
Shacklz 5y ago
The amount of crimes committed with firearms seems to generally correlate with the ease of access to firearms. Trying to make it less convenient to obtain and own firearms, and this includes registration thereof, generally reduces the amount of firearms in circulation, implicitly also reducing the amount of crimes committed with them. It's like seatbelt-laws, yes, they infringe your personal liberty to do however you pleases, but they also generally help to reduce accidents and, implicitly, reduce cost for society (and not just in terms of money). Again; from my outsider-point-of-view, that the US even has to have these kinds of discussions seems so weird to me. There are way too many people dying in the US because of the absurd amount of guns, not trying to address this with legislation (as every other advanced nation managed to do) seems outright absurd.

8note 5y ago

The US still has said lists(eg. No fly list and sexual offenders lisssst); are you just more okay with having some people on a precrime list than others?

isoskeles 5y ago
I can't speak for the person you're replying to, but I'm against any No Fly lists, both for the pre-crime aspect and for the the opaqueness with which its implemented. Sex offenders, by definition, have committed a crime. So that's not really a pre-crime list. Although, sure, some people may not belong on those lists, and it's pretty life-ruining for them. Your point reads a bit like this: "These injustices exist that you should be against, so why are you supportive of them?"
A4ET8a8uTh0 5y ago
And I am really uncomfortable with those as well. I am not sure why you would assume I accept those lists and not others for some reason. No fly list in particular is an abomination. That said, given that Delta is creating a its own version ( and asking other cartel members to join ), soon we may be revisiting this conversation.

Shacklz 5y ago

The amount of crimes committed with firearms seems to generally correlate with the ease of access to firearms. Trying to make it less convenient to obtain and own firearms, and this includes registration thereof, generally reduces the amount of firearms in circulation, implicitly also reducing the amount of crimes committed with them. It's like seatbelt-laws, yes, they infringe your personal liberty to do however you pleases, but they also generally help to reduce accidents and, implicitly, reduce cost for society (and not just in terms of money). Again; from my outsider-point-of-view, that the US even has to have these kinds of discussions seems so weird to me. There are way too many people dying in the US because of the absurd amount of guns, not trying to address this with legislation (as every other advanced nation managed to do) seems outright absurd.