Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by stockhausen, Nov 4, 2019.
Why are the personal choices of a small subset of the poor the fault of those they are jealous of?
Is it fair to say that majority of the stabbings are/were gang related?
Gangs will always be after other gangs, we need to show the youth that gang mentality is not the way forward.
I didn't realize place of birth or parents were personal choices.
It's hard when music and films portray it as cool and aspiring
Even as loose as the avengers are a gang, suicide squad is a gang, I know it's weak but you know what I mean
Ah the nature vrs nurture debate, its always a tricky one
We can't just show them that they shouldn't be doing that, we need actually provide something meaningful and unfortunately life for most is meaningless, nobody is happy working a shift or two of retail.
They need apprenticeships or something where they can actually do something useful, though to be fair there will always be a minimal amount of people who are simply happy being criminals.
We also need to stop this pitiful war on drugs, because it's a waste of police priorities, replace it with an engagement and education program. Then deal with it as a health problem rather than a criminal one (which has been an abject failure btw), obviously there still should be a specialist unit dealing with importation and large drug operations, but that's the limit realistically, it's an act of mitigation after all.
it is not that tricky. genetic factors have small impacts on life outcomes compared to the environment, and we can;t change genetics. What we can do is provide a better environment.
The personal choice is to carry and use a knife.
I was referring to born into wealth and area and opportunity as nature in this case, where obviously there is still cases of degenerates, just as there are cases of poverty stricken rising up to great heights of achievement in life
To be fair, is it though? If you're surrounded by knife wielding weirdos, not having one is a disadvantage to your survival.
Obviously the logic is that it's a choice to a rational individual who should really just stop being involved, but that isn't saying anything useful as clearly they don't feel they can just walk away.
We also need support in society, akin to that which existed prior to the Tories austerity drive, in order to protect vulnerable kids from gangs who prey on them using the same tactics that are employed by sex offenders, it's basically grooming with the end goal being indoctrination rather than sex.
You will never 100% weed out organised crime, what you can do however is ensure that the criminals get their hands on as few of our young people as possible.
So how is that fixed by taking money from unrelated individuals?
Decriminalise drugs, stop cutting everything, raise taxes to pay for brexit.
First, they carry knife because is the most accessible weapon.
They do so because are confident that even in the event of using it, there's a big chance the consequences won't be severe. Few years in, if any at all.
And the reason to carry knife, more often than not is related to drug dealing. And as society seems to accept the use of drugs, criminality is just one of it's nasty side effects.
Everyone should be allowed to carry a sword. That'll sort it overnight.
It's got nothing to do with consequences, they don't think they'll be caught in the majority as has been confirmed over many, many reports over many, many decades.
In any event, the difference isn't between a prison sentence and freedom, it's between a prison sentence and death, the logic is obviously in favour of not being murdered, so they carry a knife as a rational person in that circumstance should. (even if it is irrational in the first place to be in a gang)
They aren't unrelated though are they? We all live in this society, we all don't live in individual universes where we can't affect others.
I wasn't really getting into the taxation argument though, just replying to the thin line between a logical choice and being in an environment where choices aren't easy to make, i have no idea why they don't just drop their knives and find a better lifestyle, but it can't just be because want to.
I will say though that those people are already having money taken from them on the abject failure of drug policies we have had for decades, it's most ironic that they'd rather expend their taxes on punishment rather than treatment, while they themselves scoff down cocaine/weed/LSD/MDMA or whatever every weekend. Therefore being entirely related to the gangs selling them their drugs in the first place and the increase in violence that's associated with the demand. It's more than a bit depressing, the paradoxical nature of it all.
I'd love to know the Venn diagram of people who moan about crime and people who take drugs.
The people talking about raising taxes or forcing reductions in inequality are though, even though its irrelevant to the point at hand, as an emotional jealousy response leading to violent action is a fault of the individual, not a fault of the stimulus.
What we need to do is understand what the stimuli are, and work out if there is any rationality to them, before determining whether the stimulus needs to be changed or the individual does. A genuine failure to be able to meet basic needs, or a rational desire for self defence, is the sort of stuff that should be tackled at stimulus level. Jealousy should not.
Unfortunately jealousy and a desire for status is a basic driver of human behaviour. Pragmatically if you want to reduce this kind of crime you need to reduce inequality (or at the very least, the perception of it).
By having jobs pay living wages, sufficient social services, investments in local industries and commerce that will increase employment requirements, investments in education, improved policing, investments in social service schemes, support for apprenticeships. Really the list is pretty unlimited.
Separate names with a comma.