I think stricter laws and harsher prisons are the answer. More death penalties too especially for repeat sexual offenders and definately for murderers. Not for people who do accidental manslaughter though. I sympathize with them because their actions were unintentional. People need a strong hand to lead them, not this free floating, it's ok you killed someone, we can make you better crap. I don't care what your rate of readmission is in your prisons and if it is smaller, some people just make bad decisions and their lives should be ended for it. I especially believe this for terrorist in Norway, but their weak prison system will make sure he spends the next 20 years eating ice cream while watching Looney Tunes.

IIIIITHE1IIIII said: So now you are suggesting that Sweden is not a real country?

Yes, I am. It has been a sleepy little, mostly homogeneous shoebox diorama of a country for decades. We will see in the coming decades just how well this touchy-feely approach works as more of the country comes to resemble Malmö, which for all your moral superiority doesn't seem to me so different from the ghettos in France or America.

homer said: I think stricter laws and harsher prisons are the answer. More death penalties too especially for repeat sexual offenders and definately for murderers. Not for people who do accidental manslaughter though. I sympathize with them because their actions were unintentional. People need a strong hand to lead them, not this free floating, it's ok you killed someone, we can make you better crap. I don't care what your rate of readmission is in your prisons and if it is smaller, some people just make bad decisions and their lives should be ended for it. I especially believe this for terrorist in Norway, but their weak prison system will make sure he spends the next 20 years eating ice cream while watching Looney Tunes.

I must point out that the bolded is indeed bullshit in my opinion. Rewarding bad actions is not the right way to go, and is not considered treatment in my book.

MDMAlliance said: I think we should still blame criminals for their actions, but not take it so far as to give them death threats like Americans love to do so much.

It really doesn't matter if we blame them. Regatdless of if they are responsible for their actions, we still need to punish & contain them. Punish them so that they hopefully want to avoid committing the crime again. Contain them so they won't hurt more people.

In a perfect world, we would have amazing doctors who could detetct the psychological problems with every individual criminal, but we don't live in a perfect world. It's not practical at all to try and 'fix' the millions upon millions of criminals we have. Espescially with some who may have problems where we don't even know if we can fix - The OP mentioned genetics as a factor of some people's criminal actions. It's quite possible that these genetics are incurable, yet how would we know if a criminal had these genetics? Where would we even start? How many years would it take to analyze every criminal? And what if new criminals have new problems?

Our current set up is the most practical. Send them to jail. Our feelings for them our pretty much irrelevant to the situation. We can feel as we want to feel. As long as we don't act on our feelings, but on practicality. I'm sure there are a lot of well-disciplined people out there that share the philosophy of 'dont judge anyone'. Both religious and non-religious.

badgenome said: IIIIITHE1IIIII said: So now you are suggesting that Sweden is not a real country? Yes, I am. It has been a sleepy little, mostly homogeneous shoebox diorama of a country for decades. We will see in the coming decades just how well this touchy-feely approach works as more of the country comes to resemble Malmö, which for all your moral superiority doesn't seem to me so different from the ghettos in France or America.

I am well aware of what is happening in Malmö and I strictly oppose it. The problem over there is that the immigrants have brought their culture and (some of them) refuse to let go of even the most ridiculous customs. Our government is convinced that they will learn to be perfectly open minded eventually, but as long as they keep supporting that they don't even need to learn to speak swedish I don't see this happening in the near future.

I don't support everything that the Swedish government does. But it still does a better job than most.

Jay520 said: MDMAlliance said: I think we should still blame criminals for their actions, but not take it so far as to give them death threats like Americans love to do so much. It really doesn't matter if we blame them. Regatdless of if they are responsible for their actions, we still need to punish & contain them. Punish them so that they hopefully want to avoid committing the crime again. Contain them so they won't hurt more people. In a perfect world, we would have amazing doctors who could detetct the psychological problems with every individual criminal, but we don't live in a perfect world. It's not practical at all to try and 'fix' the millions upon millions of criminals we have. Espescially with some who may have problems where we don't even know if we can fix - The OP mentioned genetics as a factor of some people's criminal actions. It's quite possible that these genetics are incurable, yet how would we know if a criminal had these genetics? Where would we even start? How many years would it take to analyze every criminal? And what if new criminals have new problems? Our current set up is the most practical. Send them to jail. Our feelings for them our pretty much irrelevant to the situation. We can feel as we want to feel. As long as we don't act on our feelings, but on practicality. I'm sure there are a lot of well-disciplined people out there that share the philosophy of 'dont judge anyone'. Both religious and non-religious.

I meant on a personal scale, because our sense of justice is messed up.  What saves us from this is a more balanced court system than in the past.

IIIIITHE1IIIII said: homer said: I think stricter laws and harsher prisons are the answer. More death penalties too especially for repeat sexual offenders and definately for murderers. Not for people who do accidental manslaughter though. I sympathize with them because their actions were unintentional. People need a strong hand to lead them, not this free floating, it's ok you killed someone, we can make you better crap. I don't care what your rate of readmission is in your prisons and if it is smaller, some people just make bad decisions and their lives should be ended for it. I especially believe this for terrorist in Norway, but their weak prison system will make sure he spends the next 20 years eating ice cream while watching Looney Tunes. I must point out that the bolded is indeed bullshit in my opinion. Rewarding bad actions is not the right way to go, and is not considered treatment in my book.

Glad we agree. I personally believe in the death penalty but I understand your arguement. If I were born in their exact situation, I believe I would have acted the same way but I agree with Badgegnome that strict punishment is needed as a deterrent. that being said though, I don't think the death penalty is fairly handled so it has it's flaws.

One thing I've never understood about people against pre-determined worlds:

They say "If everything is pre-determined, then we can't fault anyone for anything and we should therefore excuse them and feel bad for them."

Well I say... "If everything is pre-determined, you can't fault me for hating the man who did that. I can't 'choose' to feel guilty and pardon him of his crimes."

Anyways, back on topic. I feel that people see the situation like this: A man does something terribly evil to a helpless woman. After years of torment, she saves herself and kills him in the process."

You could argue that "A man had a terrible upbringing and as a result did what he had to do to feel control and "save" his life, which resulted in severe pain for a woman. That woman had a terrible experience and as a result killed him to bring back control to her life and save herself."

Making their situations seem very similar. In this case, however, I'd side with the woman. It's much more acceptable to take revenge out on those who have wronged you than to spread that wronging to more innocent people.

IIIIITHE1IIIII said: I am well aware of what is happening in Malmö and I strictly oppose it. The problem over there is that the immigrants have brought their culture and (some of them) refuse to let go of even the most ridiculous customs. Our government is convinced that they will learn to be perfectly open minded eventually, but as long as they keep supporting that they don't even need to learn to speak swedish I don't see this happening in the near future. I don't support everything that the Swedish government does. But it still does a better job than most.

Well, that is exactly where your "let's be sympathetic to everyone" bullshit has landed you. Some people cannot be reasoned with because they have no interest in being reasoned with.

And look at Japan. They take the exact opposite approach to criminality as you're suggesting, and they are better than Sweden by almost every single metric.

wfz said: I feel that people see the situation like this: A man does something terribly evil to a helpless woman. After years of torment, she saves herself and kills him in the process." You could argue that "A man had a terrible upbringing and as a result did what he had to do to feel control and "save" his life, which resulted in severe pain for a woman. That woman had a terrible experience and as a result killed him to bring back control to her life and save herself." Making their situations seem very similar. In this case, however, I'd side with the woman. It's much more acceptable to take revenge out on those who have wronged you than to spread that wronging to more innocent people.

Just remember that while the woman killed him to take revenge and to clear her mind, capturing her was his revenge for his miserable childhood (well, and to clear his mind).

Both of them did something wrong because of previous experiences. Her experience just happened to be more recent and more visible to the public.