161–170 of 233 posts
For me, it's a systems design problem. How do you design a law enforcement system that (1) doesn't grind down poor and minorities the way the current system does, yet (2) still makes punishment for minor crimes like shoplifting sufficiently swift, sure, and severe to be an effective deterrent? Liberals tend to say "Let's focus on (1) and ignore (2)," while conservatives say "Let's focus on (2) and ignore (1)." Is it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of curiosity, I pulled up 73 countries that list prisoners per capita as well as theft per capita. There wasn't any meaningful correlation.
I didn't really expect there to be a correlation.
If the two are unrelated, then it may be that people want harsher punishments anyway just as you don't want harsher punishments anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what is the real reason they're closing the stores? I want to hear the rest of the conspiracy theory :(
The word of big business is truth and doubting it is a conspiracy theory? That’s a bit of a leap. Anyway, TFA links to more reading in its final paragraph. Look for the link in the following text: but: An analysis of crime statistics and other reporting by The Atlantic cast doubt on what it called the "great shoplifting freak-out," citing "fuzzy data" and asserting that what's being lumped together as shoplifting is…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So Walgreen is closing otherwise profitable stores out of spite? Do you have any evidence for this?
They are challenging the assumption/claim that they are profitable.
High inflation? A pandemic disrupting millions of people's income? Rising inequality? Colour me surprised.
These people aren't shoplifting to get their needs and to propose such so am ignorance of the situation. There was a wonderful and detailed article a while back about a baby formula shoplifting ring in the south that shows how this works. The people who are doing the shoplifting are often drug addicts who are promised cash payments or more drugs if they will go and shoplift by a middle man who then stockpiles the goo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are people with low incomes and often drug habits moving to a city with exorbitant rent. With a couple roommates and a retail job you can easily afford rent in large parts of the country.
Sure blame the victim.
For me, it's a systems design problem. How do you design a law enforcement system that (1) doesn't grind down poor and minorities the way the current system does, yet (2) still makes punishment for minor crimes like shoplifting sufficiently swift, sure, and severe to be an effective deterrent? Liberals tend to say "Let's focus on (1) and ignore (2)," while conservatives say "Let's focus on (2) and ignore (1)." Is it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have a high recidivism rate because are correctional institutions have no intention of correcting anything about our inmates. California profits off of private prison labor, and have no incentive to provide a path to recovery from a life of crime.
That's nice. Feel free to fix the prison system at any time; if the people who come out don't commit more crimes, I'll be happy. In the meantime, imprison the people who do commit crimes, and if they do so again after they're out, imprison them again.
There's a reason prisons are called "schools for crime", and it's because of silly lines like "if they do so again [...], imprison them again". Please actually think, and eventually realize that reducing recidivism rates is how you get your "people who come out don't commit more crimes".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't really expect there to be a correlation.
Your argument presupposed that those who want harsher punishments do so because punishment is tied to crime per capita. If the two are unrelated, then it may be that people want harsher punishments anyway just as you don't want harsher punishments anyway.
What? No.