6 ms·

Summary for those who don't want to click: "The majority of violent crimes are perpetrated by a small number of persistent violent offenders, typically males, c

Summary for those who don't want to click: "The majority of violent crimes are perpetrated by a small number of persistent violent offenders, typically males, characterized by early onset of violent criminality, substance abuse, personality disorders, and nonviolent criminality." So in theory if we purge the bottom 1% of the population every decade or so, there will be at least 63% less crime?

gjsman-1000 3y ago
Well, societies used to do that. It was called the Death Penalty. Not saying it’s a good or bad thing but…
- bilbo0s 3y ago
  Not really. That purges people through all layers of society. I think the commenter means to purge the literal socioeconomic bottom. Not, for instance, middle class people who kill their spouse or betray the country by spilling secrets. I could be mis-reading the commenter though.
- 93po 3y ago
  the comments here honestly scare me. you're not going to take the stance that literal state sanctioned murder is a bad idea for people who commit regular crimes?
  - gjsman-1000 3y ago
    I think that your problem is that using the word “murder” implies “unjust.” Funny enough, you actually accept “state-sanctioned murder” right now, like it or not. Any soldier who attempts to invade Ukraine may be shot without a trial or a hearing. If “state-sanctioned murder” is always immoral, Ukraine should let them in peacefully, and appeal to higher authorities to diplomatically come to a solution to the “illegal immigration of young Russian men with guns” problem. I don’t think that’s a good idea and I don’t believe you do either. That’s fine. Invading a country is enough to be threatened with death. Attacking someone’s daughter for the fourth time isn’t.
    - 93po 3y ago
      Murder to me means taking a life without being prompted to do so out of self defense. There is no reason to kill someone locked behind bars where they are physically incapable of doing anyone harm. I am against the death penalty in any form for any reason. This is murder, and it's done out of a sense of justice, which is a childish excuse to make people feel better. A Ukrainian soldier defending an invasion is just that - defense. I have more nuanced thoughts about pacifism and how it applies to this situation, but it isn't worth getting into because no one here would discuss it in good faith and it's also off topic.
      - gjsman-1000 3y ago
        > Murder to me means taking a life without being prompted to do so out of self defense. I hope there is a missing adjective there. > There is no reason to kill someone locked behind bars where they are physically incapable of doing anyone harm. Just sharing my thoughts, but prisons are only as safe as the local power supply. When things go south, you end up with the Camp Hill Prison Riots.
        93po 3y ago
        > Just sharing my thoughts, but prisons are only as safe as the local power supply. When things go south, you end up with the Camp Hill Prison Riots. Having worked inside prisons (in a volunteer capacity) I can confidently say that they maintain safety even without power and that the ability for people to riot in the manner that happened at Camp Hill was the result of procedural problems that mostly don't exist at prisons anymore.
  - sershe 3y ago
    Why is it a bad idea? Abstractly, if I had a 100% reliable way to execute all violent criminals, I'd absolutely do it. The only problem I see are false convictions. Taking people with repeated convictions for separate offenses (3 strikes, and such) would reduce that dramatically. Then you have to weight the remaining potential false convictions against actual victims of violent crime that could be prevented, and maybe indirect damage to society. Violent criminals themselves have no moral value in my book.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > Why is it a bad idea? Because institutionalizing killing as a response to violating expectations normalizes killing as a response to violating expectations, and does not do anything to assure that people in whom that value is reinforced also have faith in society’s system of assessing violations.
      - sershe 3y ago
        How is it related? That doesn't seem obvious to me. For a different example, does it mean tax law enforcement normalizes taking money from people thus and increases property crime? People usually have separate magisteria for this kind of thing... it's quite obvious when you see how libertarian try and fail to break thru the latter one, trying to make people think of taxes as extortion. I think it's even more disconnected for death penalty vs murder...
    - 93po 3y ago
      People like you scare me more than anyone who's in prison for something violent. You want to universally kill people by the millions for making mistakes. This is a perspective completely lacking any empathy and compassion. These are human beings with lives, families, experiences, and have the opportunity for growth and improvement to become a person who can peacefully integrate with society. Giving up on them and murdering them is ridiculous and I really hope you reevaluate your perspective and learn some compassion.
      - sershe 3y ago
theossuary 3y ago
Ah yes let's take stack ranking and apply it to society, that'll end up great
artificialLimbs 3y ago
I think better would be figuring out how to incentivize fathers to remain the fathers to their children, as fatherless men are drastically more prone to crime and risky behavior.
golem14 3y ago
Doesn't the Mitchell and webb look has an episode on this? "Have you looked into what happens if you kill all the poor?"

gjsman-1000 3y ago

Well, societies used to do that. It was called the Death Penalty. Not saying it’s a good or bad thing but…

bilbo0s 3y ago
Not really. That purges people through all layers of society. I think the commenter means to purge the literal socioeconomic bottom. Not, for instance, middle class people who kill their spouse or betray the country by spilling secrets. I could be mis-reading the commenter though.
93po 3y ago
the comments here honestly scare me. you're not going to take the stance that literal state sanctioned murder is a bad idea for people who commit regular crimes?
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  I think that your problem is that using the word “murder” implies “unjust.” Funny enough, you actually accept “state-sanctioned murder” right now, like it or not. Any soldier who attempts to invade Ukraine may be shot without a trial or a hearing. If “state-sanctioned murder” is always immoral, Ukraine should let them in peacefully, and appeal to higher authorities to diplomatically come to a solution to the “illegal immigration of young Russian men with guns” problem. I don’t think that’s a good idea and I don’t believe you do either. That’s fine. Invading a country is enough to be threatened with death. Attacking someone’s daughter for the fourth time isn’t.
  - 93po 3y ago
    Murder to me means taking a life without being prompted to do so out of self defense. There is no reason to kill someone locked behind bars where they are physically incapable of doing anyone harm. I am against the death penalty in any form for any reason. This is murder, and it's done out of a sense of justice, which is a childish excuse to make people feel better. A Ukrainian soldier defending an invasion is just that - defense. I have more nuanced thoughts about pacifism and how it applies to this situation, but it isn't worth getting into because no one here would discuss it in good faith and it's also off topic.
    - gjsman-1000 3y ago
      > Murder to me means taking a life without being prompted to do so out of self defense. I hope there is a missing adjective there. > There is no reason to kill someone locked behind bars where they are physically incapable of doing anyone harm. Just sharing my thoughts, but prisons are only as safe as the local power supply. When things go south, you end up with the Camp Hill Prison Riots.
      - 93po 3y ago
        > Just sharing my thoughts, but prisons are only as safe as the local power supply. When things go south, you end up with the Camp Hill Prison Riots. Having worked inside prisons (in a volunteer capacity) I can confidently say that they maintain safety even without power and that the ability for people to riot in the manner that happened at Camp Hill was the result of procedural problems that mostly don't exist at prisons anymore.
- sershe 3y ago
  Why is it a bad idea? Abstractly, if I had a 100% reliable way to execute all violent criminals, I'd absolutely do it. The only problem I see are false convictions. Taking people with repeated convictions for separate offenses (3 strikes, and such) would reduce that dramatically. Then you have to weight the remaining potential false convictions against actual victims of violent crime that could be prevented, and maybe indirect damage to society. Violent criminals themselves have no moral value in my book.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > Why is it a bad idea? Because institutionalizing killing as a response to violating expectations normalizes killing as a response to violating expectations, and does not do anything to assure that people in whom that value is reinforced also have faith in society’s system of assessing violations.
    - sershe 3y ago
      How is it related? That doesn't seem obvious to me. For a different example, does it mean tax law enforcement normalizes taking money from people thus and increases property crime? People usually have separate magisteria for this kind of thing... it's quite obvious when you see how libertarian try and fail to break thru the latter one, trying to make people think of taxes as extortion. I think it's even more disconnected for death penalty vs murder...
  - 93po 3y ago
    People like you scare me more than anyone who's in prison for something violent. You want to universally kill people by the millions for making mistakes. This is a perspective completely lacking any empathy and compassion. These are human beings with lives, families, experiences, and have the opportunity for growth and improvement to become a person who can peacefully integrate with society. Giving up on them and murdering them is ridiculous and I really hope you reevaluate your perspective and learn some compassion.
    - sershe 3y ago

theossuary 3y ago

Ah yes let's take stack ranking and apply it to society, that'll end up great

artificialLimbs 3y ago

I think better would be figuring out how to incentivize fathers to remain the fathers to their children, as fatherless men are drastically more prone to crime and risky behavior.

golem14 3y ago

Doesn't the Mitchell and webb look has an episode on this? "Have you looked into what happens if you kill all the poor?"