3 ms·

I'd agree with you more if the "robbery" part wasn't in the quote. Too many factors are involved with the event of robbery; I can still envision a bunch of one-

by smtddr 12y ago

I'd agree with you more if the "robbery" part wasn't in the quote. Too many factors are involved with the event of robbery; I can still envision a bunch of one-off people who had a lapse in judgement and/or fell on hardtimes not needing jail-time. Violence is something I'm much more incline to condemn someone for when it wasn't clearly self-defense with no pre-emptive way to avoid the situation. >>That tends to support the claim that these are "bad people" in the ordinary sense of the term. I feel like I'm getting needlessly pedantic now. The ordinary sense of the term, imho, is actually wrong and comes from the media(and religion?) vilifying a bunch of things to skew the public's calibration of good & evil. I have a feeling I'm about to fall into a deep rabbit hole of disagreements so I'll just concede that you're right given the mainstream's perception of good & evil.

notahacker 12y ago
Whether or not jail time is the best solution is a tangential point, but people convicted of "robbery" under UK law have been proven guilty of using force or threats to steal (as opposed to less specific legal definitions of theft), whilst living in a society which usually provides adequate benefits (including medical care) for those with little or no source of legal earned income. Whilst some people's circumstances might influence or pressurise them into acting in this way, it's not exactly an inadvertent, victimless or no-real-alternative type of crime. One doesn't need to have a particularly hardline attitude towards criminal offenders to assume that those guilty of robbery must have hugely transformed their outlook on life if their stated beliefs that they're more moral, kind, compassionate etc. than the average person aren't totally delusional. (Actually, they'd probably have a stronger argument for claiming to be as "law abiding" as everyone else since few people aren't technically guilty of breaching some law) There are former criminals who are shining examples of people who are not only able to turn their own lives around but are also willing to dedicate huge amounts of time to convince others not to make the same mistakes; one might say showing more kindness, compassion or morals than average. But there are also plenty who think their only real mistake was getting caught.

by smtddr 12y ago

notahacker 12y ago

Whether or not jail time is the best solution is a tangential point, but people convicted of "robbery" under UK law have been proven guilty of using force or threats to steal (as opposed to less specific legal definitions of theft), whilst living in a society which usually provides adequate benefits (including medical care) for those with little or no source of legal earned income. Whilst some people's circumstances might influence or pressurise them into acting in this way, it's not exactly an inadvertent, victimless or no-real-alternative type of crime. One doesn't need to have a particularly hardline attitude towards criminal offenders to assume that those guilty of robbery must have hugely transformed their outlook on life if their stated beliefs that they're more moral, kind, compassionate etc. than the average person aren't totally delusional. (Actually, they'd probably have a stronger argument for claiming to be as "law abiding" as everyone else since few people aren't technically guilty of breaching some law) There are former criminals who are shining examples of people who are not only able to turn their own lives around but are also willing to dedicate huge amounts of time to convince others not to make the same mistakes; one might say showing more kindness, compassion or morals than average. But there are also plenty who think their only real mistake was getting caught.