I am, of course, upset about the rioting in England. I am worried for the people there. I really hope this is resolved soon and with very little violence
( Read more... )
I know nothing of this specific situation, but it's my understanding that rioting happens when people feel as though they have nothing to lose and aren't willing to take it anymore. That doesn't sound to me like the kind of person who would be deterred by harsh penalties.
Regardless of the rightness or wrongness of the rioters, I don't see as how people willing to riot would be put off by harsh penalties.
Although those kinds of reactions to the rioters are reminding me of the long list of comments on an article about how a group of atheists are protesting some religious monument at the Twin Towers site - the comments are nothing but "kill the atheists" and "they're not human anyway", and I'm not paraphrasing.
That kind of hateful attitude makes me instantly sympathetic towards whatever group is being targeted, even if I wasn't on their side to begin with.
*nods* I think it's a mix. Some of the rioters think they have nothing to lose. Some think the system is unfair and that this is the only way to be heard. Some of them just joined in, because they figured with so many people rioting, they could loot with little consequence. I don't have a lot of sympathy for the last category, but when civil order breaks down bad things happen
( ... )
Yeah, if they already think the system is unfair and this is how to get heard, being severely punished for it just doesn't sound like a deterrent. We see this all the time in so many of the misguided attempts at law - people who are otherwise law-abiding citizens making laws that would deter *them* from "misbehaving" without understanding what makes a person "misbehave" in the first place - because they aren't people who "misbehave".
tacit wrote an interesting piece on rule-making that I can't find right now. It was about a government office that had no waiting room. People *had* to visit this office because it's a government office and there's no way around it (DMV maybe?). But since there was no lobby, people waited outside because they just couldn't fit inside
( ... )
The thing to remember is that the kind of people who (invariably) call for harsh measures, extreme punishments, horrific vengeance, etc. are severely impaired in their thinking.
It's not about creating a 'deterrent' - obviously, being harsher to the already-hopeless only inflames their rage, hate and despair, but that's okay with the RWA types, because what they really want is an excuse for a bloodbath, to prove the Might of the Right Side (their side) and crush those layabouts once and for all
( ... )
I was shocked to hear it happened somewhere else before it happened here, actually. But mainly because I don't keep up with the details of British politics.
It's a whole lot safer to riot in London than it is in New York, Chicago, New Orleans, LA... from what I'm given to understand, the British cops are first-rate at thumping heads, and there's a weird sort of sporting tradition of street rioting among the young idiots who go out to get thumped.
Here in America it's generally assumed that the cops would rather just shoot you, that they're likely to beat you to death if you "resist arrest", and that if you kill one of them, they'll stop at nothing to bring you down. I think it takes a lower degree of despair to riot when you're very likely to die for it, and people haven't gotten to that point yet over here because their backs aren't up against the wall.
Comments 6
Regardless of the rightness or wrongness of the rioters, I don't see as how people willing to riot would be put off by harsh penalties.
Although those kinds of reactions to the rioters are reminding me of the long list of comments on an article about how a group of atheists are protesting some religious monument at the Twin Towers site - the comments are nothing but "kill the atheists" and "they're not human anyway", and I'm not paraphrasing.
That kind of hateful attitude makes me instantly sympathetic towards whatever group is being targeted, even if I wasn't on their side to begin with.
Reply
Reply
tacit wrote an interesting piece on rule-making that I can't find right now. It was about a government office that had no waiting room. People *had* to visit this office because it's a government office and there's no way around it (DMV maybe?). But since there was no lobby, people waited outside because they just couldn't fit inside ( ... )
Reply
It's not about creating a 'deterrent' - obviously, being harsher to the already-hopeless only inflames their rage, hate and despair, but that's okay with the RWA types, because what they really want is an excuse for a bloodbath, to prove the Might of the Right Side (their side) and crush those layabouts once and for all ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Here in America it's generally assumed that the cops would rather just shoot you, that they're likely to beat you to death if you "resist arrest", and that if you kill one of them, they'll stop at nothing to bring you down. I think it takes a lower degree of despair to riot when you're very likely to die for it, and people haven't gotten to that point yet over here because their backs aren't up against the wall.
Reply
Leave a comment