As Operation Cease Fire found out in Boston, the situation is much the same with violent crime, and can be solved by putting the most profligate offenders in prison and keeping them there.
Shoplifters are an easier problem to solve. The city just has to classify them as looters, and the city DA can put out the word that no one who shoots a looter gets prosecuted, and it will stop almost instantly.
Self-defense is illegal in NYC. You're supposed to let the criminal stab you until he gets tired, then the NYPD will reluctantly arrest him and drag your carcass to the curb for garbage collection.
Giuliani showed that less extreme measures can be effective. The key is to stop letting dindus use the magic R word to get what they want. The problem is those less extreme measures aren't politcally feasible in hellscapes like NYC without a Pinochet type figure to take out the trash.
Amazing how, without criminals, crime seems to reduce to near nothing.
You can give top tier healthcare, universal income, free education, expert sanitation services, and yet, there will still be crime. But get rid of criminals, and crime suddenly goes away.
Not to zero, sure, some crimes are committed accidentally, or by first-time offenders, but the largest indicator for if someone will commit a crime, is if they have committed one prior. To not address that, would be like not asking if you have a history of heart conditions when getting assessed for heart attack risk.
Criminals are literally their own demographic. Regardless of any subsidiary correlations about race, sex, or religion; criminals are their own demographic. And they explicitly exist to predate on the rest of society. There is little else to do besides remove them from society, or wait until they are so old they stop committing violent crimes.
I saw a crazy stat claiming that a ten strike rule would reduce crime by 20%. When the state’s refusal to put away ten time offenders is responsible for 20% of crime, it’s time for people to start taking matters into their own hands, theoretically speaking.
The crime only goes down while the criminals are in prison.
When you work out that it costs $300 a day (or whatever) to keep people in prison, life in prison for thousands of people starts to sound expensive.
For the greatest social benefit, society should just hang them.
Even if they won't hang them, flogging them publicly for every offense after 10 would be an effective deterrent for most crimes. A quick, medically supervised, same day flogging and then kick them back onto the street.
As Operation Cease Fire found out in Boston, the situation is much the same with violent crime, and can be solved by putting the most profligate offenders in prison and keeping them there.
Shoplifters are an easier problem to solve. The city just has to classify them as looters, and the city DA can put out the word that no one who shoots a looter gets prosecuted, and it will stop almost instantly.
Self-defense is illegal in NYC. You're supposed to let the criminal stab you until he gets tired, then the NYPD will reluctantly arrest him and drag your carcass to the curb for garbage collection.
Stuff like this makes me understand Lee Kuan Yew's extreme measures in Singapore.
Giuliani showed that less extreme measures can be effective. The key is to stop letting dindus use the magic R word to get what they want. The problem is those less extreme measures aren't politcally feasible in hellscapes like NYC without a Pinochet type figure to take out the trash.
"But you're not solving the root cause of violent crime!"
Yes we are. We're imprisoning the root cause of violent crime.
The criminals.
Amazing how, without criminals, crime seems to reduce to near nothing.
You can give top tier healthcare, universal income, free education, expert sanitation services, and yet, there will still be crime. But get rid of criminals, and crime suddenly goes away.
Not to zero, sure, some crimes are committed accidentally, or by first-time offenders, but the largest indicator for if someone will commit a crime, is if they have committed one prior. To not address that, would be like not asking if you have a history of heart conditions when getting assessed for heart attack risk.
Criminals are literally their own demographic. Regardless of any subsidiary correlations about race, sex, or religion; criminals are their own demographic. And they explicitly exist to predate on the rest of society. There is little else to do besides remove them from society, or wait until they are so old they stop committing violent crimes.
I saw a crazy stat claiming that a ten strike rule would reduce crime by 20%. When the state’s refusal to put away ten time offenders is responsible for 20% of crime, it’s time for people to start taking matters into their own hands, theoretically speaking.
"Ten strikes" sounds like the weak shit single mothers do to "punish" their bastard children.
"I'm going to count to three! One! Two. T-Two-and-a-half..."
Gary Plauche - father of the year
The crime only goes down while the criminals are in prison.
When you work out that it costs $300 a day (or whatever) to keep people in prison, life in prison for thousands of people starts to sound expensive.
For the greatest social benefit, society should just hang them.
Even if they won't hang them, flogging them publicly for every offense after 10 would be an effective deterrent for most crimes. A quick, medically supervised, same day flogging and then kick them back onto the street.
"Beer-lover..."
Sigh, add it to the list.
source :
https://archive.ph/VCKkk
Just put them down, they're worse than rabid dogs.
Don’t worry, they’re going to be pumping up those number very soon.
He was just collecting reparations and sheiit.
Society becomes 33% better if we permanently remove this scum.
islam is right about thieves
King Leopold II had the right idea when dealing with them in the Congo.
But when muslims steal from non-muslims, it rapidly becomes 'reparations'.
Why bother arresting them, at that point?
"It's just property crime bro!"
So is burning down my house, yet I'm not gonna play nice with it. England's Bloody Code, Singapore, and Hammurabi are correct.