Hello, Hal.
Can you share some details as to the effectiveness of these programs and why they haven’t been adopted on a larger scale here in the states?
The Government is run by people who are generally honest and don't do a lot of crime*. This is a subset of people who develop a mindset that anyone who might be tempted to do a crime* would be deterred by the fear of getting caught and incarcerated.
Given that assumption, to reduce crime, the rational answer is "Put more cops out there so the chance of getting caught is higher, and make penalties larger so the price for doing the crime and getting caught is higher"
The fallacy here is that the group is projecting their mindset - that being in jail is a show stopper that must be avoided at all costs - is the mindset of someone who would commit a crime* in the first place. For the people wanting more cops and tougher sentences, the point is moot because they would never commit a crime* in the first place, regardless of the potential for retribution. But for the person who would commit a crime* - the concept of jail isn't a big deal. If you're so broken that you'd murder someone, jail isn't that big a deal. They aren't thinking "well, I want to kill this person, but jail would suck so I won't do it"
Given that - the actual rational answer is to try to address the question "why are certain humans willing to do crimes* - and is there a way we can alter that". But the people making the rules can't comprehend the mindset that for some people, jail isn't considered much of an issue.
* - violent crimes. The people running the government don't really have a problem with fraud, insider trading, or corruption. That is why these crimes have low penalties.
RecentWTF is up with this Clown... by Reacher
Total Members: 142