Why do you immediately think of it as that violent ? ,
Not tolerating the crime, involves arresting the person, and penalizing them with fines and other consequences for a while, and then if possible work on improving their living standards and help them get a job to get out of a life of crime.
Not tolerating crime does not mean shooting people up or inflicting wounds on them, why should it be that extreme ? , either inflict wounds on people or let them go free with misdemeanor charges ?
It just kills the conversation and scope to actually fix this rise in crime mess, that is spreading everywhere.
> Why do you immediately think of it as that violent ? , Not tolerating the crime, involves arresting the person, and penalizing them with fines and other consequences
Different branch of these threads:
> So they steal from you, and then you get the privilege of your tax dollars paying for their room and board. I dunno, I can see why some people might not be chuffed to bits by that solution.
If we’re going to make sure we get appropriate vengeance, and we’re not going to pay to incarcerate them… what do we have left? Physical punishment? Slavery? Unless bankruptcy of a person (without any assets to begin with) alone is a sufficient punishment for these crimes, I’m all out of ideas on where this could go.
You may not be who he was referring to, but the people he was referring to certainly seem to be present.
Your two sibling comments are currently "Why is the comfort of the aggressor more important than the comfort of the innocent victim?" And "Yes." The assumption that some people in this thread are in favor of violence seems to be borne out.
Wishing physical violence into any IRL situation is some real keyboard warrior crap. I understand the appeal, I sadly do, but we need to move beyond it.
Will you be the one to deliver the violence, or would you rather someone else did that on your behalf?
Anyone who has implemented violence IRL is also scarred, for life.
Can’t steal if you don’t have a hand!