77
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
77 points (94.3% liked)
Ask Lemmy
26669 readers
2091 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics.
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The way things are going is scary though. My salary in real-terms has plummeted around 30% since I started a new job 2 years ago due to the weakening currency, high inflation, increasing utility bills (the energy crisis, and inflation), and high interest rates affecting the mortgage at renewal and the maintenance fee (that just went up 15% today!). And I'm lucky to still keep my job, I know a lot of people who haven't been so fortunate.
And then the so-called "Left" push for "de-growth" and reducing consumption - just making us even poorer (already living without a car is restrictive and a hassle, but it's so expensive now), doing nothing to combat violent crime, and more concerned with fringe issues like the LGBTQIA2S+ community.
I honestly think if things carry on like this we'll see the resurgence of real fascism as people face severely declining living standards and lose patience - just look at Zemmour and Bukele for example. And such concentration of power never works out well in the end.
You can't complain about the dangers of totaliterianism and also make your last two bullet points with a straight face.
I live in a country with ID cards and digital ID now and it's far from totalitarian. Nice for being able to sort out your taxes and mortgage online though.
This sort of anti-technology stuff is really holding society back (just like the anti-GM, anti-vaccine stuff, etc.)
Tech is fine but applying for permission to have kids (based on what criteria?) and having to present my DNA everywhere to track everything I do is several steps into overbearing state control.
You misconceive what is "degrowth", it is surely not about making people poorer, outside the rich... Degrowth calls for a radical reassessment of what needs to be produced vs. shrunk, how, by whom, for whom, and under what ownership system. So degrowth has never been about shrinking ‘everything’, ‘everywhere’. And it is not something we could do in the current system, there is nothing to compensate if we ban cars right now or tax carbon for the most vulnerable, hence degrowth is about redistribution.
So I agree with 90% of this, and I don't understand why you're getting downvoted. That being said, the one thing I can't get behind is worse punishments for violent crime. I'm not saying violent crime is good, but basically all of the evidence suggest that worse punishments do nothing to curtail it, and in fact make it more likely. The longer someone spends in prison, the less likely they are to reintegrate into society. If the goal is to reduce violent crime, rehabilitation is far more effective than deterrence.
It's not about putting people off doing, but stopping them re-offending. If they're in prison for 40 years for murder, they can't murder someone else. If it's only 5 years, they can.
This isn't some theoretical thing either - it's the current reality in Europe. Almost every criminal has prior convictions, often serious ones.
https://polisen.se/aktuellt/nyheter/2023/mars/atta-ars-fangelse-for-valdtakt-grov-misshandel-och-manniskorov/ - here's one example:
Two prior convictions for sexual violence - then committed a horrific kidnapping and rape after his second release.
Or this one: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-55666623 - already a known sex offender, went on to commit further crimes.
Or this guy - https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-56569863 - an illegal asylum seeker who had avoided deportation so far, etc.
There's one sentence that guarantees no re-offending, and I think we need it for serious violent crime (especially repeat offences).
I don't disagree with this, but it sounds like you're talking less about violent crime in general and more about sexual battery and premeditated assault, which makes up a relatively small proportion of violent crime.
Most violent crime is just regular conflict that escalates into throwing punches, and throwing these people in prison is the quickest way to push them away from lawfulness and down the path of crime. Prison is just networking for criminals.
Yeah, I mean like serious, repeat crime. Robbery too - one of my friends was robbed at knife-point and beaten by 4 guys.
The police caught one and he was an undocumented "minor", since he was considered a "minor" (but they all say that) he was put in a youth holding centre before trial. And then right before trial just walked out as there's no security, he has no papers and just disappears, free to meet up with his gang and rob more people again.
It's madness - Europe has become much less safe due to stuff like this. Like it's one thing to accept refugees, etc. but we need to have absolute zero tolerance for those who end up worsening our own society.
I agree for stuff like an odd bar-fight, or aggressive argument, etc. then it shouldn't be sentenced near as badly, as they can be rehabilitated and don't pose a threat to the general public.
Eugenics already?
Not eugenics but just ensuring that they have a fair start in their life.
It's bizarre that if you adopt a dog they'll check how much room you have, any criminal record, your income source, etc. - but you can have a child with none of that.
And then society and the child end up paying for it - via benefit payments, crime, drug problems, etc.
Just simple things like paying a 10k deposit, no recent violent criminal record, etc. would go a long way.
You're basically saying minorities shouldn't have children. 10k is insane. If anything, certain things should be subsidized.
I never wrote anything about minorities. A child will cost far, far, far more than 10k - the point is it'd be a deposit that you get back when they're born to pay for things.