4 ms·

I'm not saying that tough-on-crime policies are the right answer, I'm saying that things like the three-strikes-law enjoyed support from communities afflicted b

I'm not saying that tough-on-crime policies are the right answer, I'm saying that things like the three-strikes-law enjoyed support from communities afflicted by crime because they are the primary victims of criminals. They will want solace from criminals who are threatening them today, not mere promises that their communities will be safer 20 years from now. Providing security is one of the State's most basic functions and people will demand it.

bluefishinit 3y ago
> They will want solace from criminals who are threatening them today, not mere promises that their communities will be safer 20 years from now. Tough on crime polices mean that all of our communities will be less safe 20 years from now, we know this because we can look back 20 years, 20 years before that and so on. The only real way out of this is to address the structural inequalities that we have in the US, but that sadly seems unlikely to happen since the existing system is designed to put a stop to it. Being "tough on crime" is like drinking booze to cure depression. It's only going to make things worse. It doesn't address any of the root causes of the issues at hand.