Lucid108 t1_ixrhbgp wrote
Reply to comment by thisisntmineIfoundit in What to Know Now That the N.Y.P.D. Is on Amazon’s Neighborhood Watch App by k1lk1
>Has it occurred to you that when a young man or woman are being encouraged to contribute to a crime (shoplifting / raiding a store) or joining a gang, you know, before they have ever committed a crime aka the "root", if the message is "you will be caught and go to jail" and not "people don't care, won't report the crime, and the cops won't arrest you and the judge won't prosecute" that mayyyyybe that could be, oh I don't know, discouraging people to ever get into that kind of crowd???
This looks to me like a very good example of circular logic. This isn't hard. If people are committing crimes, it's literally scientifically supported, that they do so due to lack of resources/legitimate avenues to meet their needs. Take care of people's most basic needs and you'd see a huge reduction in crime, abuse victims could leave abusers safely, etc. etc. Just having the looming threat of prison hasn't solved crime in the several hundred years we've been doing it, what makes you think it'll magically work with a few extra billion dollars?
drpvn t1_ixrmpv6 wrote
TIL that “it’s literally scientifically supported” that rapists rape “due to lack of resources/legitimate avenues to meet their needs.”
Lucid108 t1_ixrpdam wrote
Your glibness aside, rape is absolutely about power and is usually perpetrated against people who do not have the necessary support structures to leave the situation. Speaking of which, you ever look up the stats on how many sex crimes cops have solved and how often people who go to them for protection against these sorts of things are dismissed by the people who are supposedly there to protect and serve? How 'bout that 40% statistic about cops, since we're on the subject?
drpvn t1_ixrr27g wrote
Trying to give women support structures to help them leave violent relationships is good but it will not eradicate rape.
No I haven’t looked into the “40%” thing. I do know it’s copypasta so I assume there are massive caveats that need to be added to it.
NashvilleHot t1_ixsi6ju wrote
You just posted up thread about striking a balance as best we can. And here you’re saying it’s good but not worth doing because it won’t eradicate rape. 🤷♂️
drpvn t1_ixsljet wrote
You’re misreading me. I’m saying nothing can eradicate crime. That’s why we need policing. To deal with, you know, rapists, for example.
[deleted] t1_iy68ir2 wrote
[deleted]
utamog t1_ixxct7d wrote
Crime apologists like you are literally what made me switch to being a republicans (Still voted Adams however). I believe in body autonomy, and separation of church and state but this violence apologist shit is by far the most deranged danger to society I can think of.
Lucid108 t1_iy5suqb wrote
If you're gonna make an example out of me, at least try to understand my point.
thisisntmineIfoundit t1_ixroww9 wrote
>Take care of people's most basic needs and you'd see a huge reduction in crime
This looks to me like a very good example of logic from someone who does not live in the real world.
We have a huge safety net and it's getting bigger. It would take too long to explain how bloated and unaudited our social benefit systems are and list the examples of people who don't need it receiving help and sitting on their ass. Not to mention in cities like SF where you are definitely fully taken care of if you're in bad shape, crime is worse than ever.
What's really funny about this is you claim cracking down on crime doesn't change things at all when NYC is the way it is today versus 10/20/30 years ago because of drastically different policies from different administrations having an effect.
Lucid108 t1_ixrq4lj wrote
Yeah, not like there are systemic barriers to a lot of the aid people need or anything
longknives t1_ixutqlj wrote
Absolute LOL that you think we have a remotely adequate safety net. Talk about not living in the real world.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments