Mfw people will still defend some incarnation of the death penalty

>there are still people who believe that aversion to killing another human isn't entirely conditioned from birth by one's culture and that anyone here would be universally berated as an utter coward if they didn't support the death penalty 100 years ago

No OP, you are the one who needs to kys.

I think victims should be given the opportunity to carry out the death sentence.

For the foreseeable future, with our current knowledge of mental health, yes, reforming incarceration is the best option for now

>ethics are meaningless because they can be affected by societal attitudes
I'd disagree with you there

>he thinks laws are about "ethics"

No user, and they never were. Laws are about maintaining order and stability. Nothing else.

why should they not be ethical?

Because thats not how it works. Thats not how anything works, in fact. "Ethics" are bipolar, fickle things that can often times go spastic over the course of only a few decades, or even years (Such as America going from ultra-conservative to ultra-liberal and then back to conservative again during the 60's-70's - Ethics are also extremely susceptible to the sway of propaganda, appeal to emotion, and other forms of plebbery. Laws should be entirely practical and not focused on people's fleeting feelings. And thankfully, thats the way its been throughout all of human history.

why should they be ethical?
why should they not not be ethical?
why should they not not not be ethical?

>fleeting feelings

ok stalin

That's a valid interpretation of law, but it has no bearing on your original post

The death penalty is generally an acceptable way of maintaining order and stability by purging people who have no hope of ever being rehabilitated.

>Implying Stalin did anything wrong except purge the army at the worst possible time

I understand that that's your view, but your first post had you telling OP to kill himself because his position was influenced by current societal attitudes.

There are valid arguments for the death penalty (though none that I agree with), but your initial point was dumb

That which can be asserted flippantly can be dismissed flippantly, familia.

Why not life sentences? And don't say waste of resources because if that's your reason you should be anti capitalist. Assume post-scarcity.

nice platitude

They do still however get bored.

And life in prison is boring as fuck.

Thats not how crime works

>Assume post-scarcity

also

>being mad that someone shitposts when the OP is itself a shitpost

I think the death penalty should be presented as an alternative to life in prison. Thoughts?

Considering the state of American and Latin-American prisons, this sounds surprisingly not inhumane.

Norway has no death penalty or life imprisonment, and they have one of the lowest reoffending rates in the world.

most people would rather be dead then spend life in prison.
Life in prison kinds sucks.

Because Norway is an extremely homogenous, developed, isolated society that has never seen the horrors of war for several generations and has the privilege of being surrounded by extremely peaceful neighbors. All that while simultaneously refusing to make the same mistakes that its neighbors are making by importing hundreds of thousands of people from undeveloped, war-torn third world countries.

Its the exact same story for Japan.

Isolation + Ethnic and cultural homogeneity + High development = civilized society

Norway is a white nation. Whites are actually capable of improving/reforming themselves.

Don't try to pretend that this would work in Brazil.

Duterte did nothing wrong.

And socialistic policy. America is essentially a fend-for-yourself system, which leads to 1000% Norway's incarceration rate.

Wrong. Norway is state-capitalist, similar in many ways to China in regards to economic policy. The government of Norway owns 37% of the country's economy.

Their welfare system and national healthcare and universities beg to differ. It's a social democracy, which is in the direction of socialism, hence socialistic policy.

How well would you say it's going for them?

I hear everything on the spectrum from "on their way to utopia" to "DANGER IL'AB'IMMINENT"

Norway is on the same boat as Russia: that is to say the state of their economy is very dependent on the price of oil.

That being the case - you can probably imagine how things are going for them right now

Norwegian here, it's pretty utopian

>living in a near utopia
>still posting on anonymous image boards

i have issues prioritizing

Double whammy. I'd rather pay than frack but it seems my """""options""""" as a consumer have all but vanished to make way for the cheapest common denominator.

OP: My family is from El Salvador, where gangs control all public life, the murder rate is over 100, and cost the country 16% of it's GDP, and spread their lawlessness to other places such as Los Angeles, Costa Rica and Mexico.

Are you saying such "people" can be reformed? Are you saying they are better off ruling from the lawless shadow of jail? Why should they have a right to stay alive, just to keep terrorizing the populace, or recruiting young people from jails, on the state's dime at that?

Why do stupid first world liberals think everything would be okay if we all just had organic farms and free PS3s like in Sweden?

Some people can't be reformed, in practice jail only makes people turn worse than they were and these people will only burden society, living only to kill, rape and steal. Do you think that if we just "encouraged" the guys in my pic with ethics, Jesus and farming tools they'll become productive members of society? Allow me to laugh if that's the case.

Here's a good article of what happens when you can't purge scum from your society:
economist.com/news/americas/21699175-countrys-gangs-specialise-extortion-they-may-be-branching-out-gangs-cost

You can't really act like every country's problems are the same, phampai.

They are a product of their environment, so why would we treat a person badly somewhere where going to commit those crimes anyway?

Unfortunately the situation is bad, but I'm saying we can reduce the crimes to environment and mental health. Remove environment and it becomes a mental health issue, not a law and order issue.

Then in that case, the biggest mistake of said first world liberals is not understanding just how conditional these policies are.

Why would someone not legislate with their own country in mind though? If I believe that the government should spend more on infrastructure, that's because I'm a Canadian, and Canadian roads in many parts of the country are in terrible shape.

Why do jihadists continue being jihadists? Why do billionaires hoard their billions? Why do people send their children to private school? Why do people cooperate with the Chinese government at the expense of the citizens? Why do latin american drug lords continue to terrorise their countries?

Because it benefits them.

Remove the benefit (environment) and you remove the crime (both legal and moral kinds)

>People become Jihadists and blow themselves up because it benefits them

Are liberals literally incapable of conceiving that people do things for the sake of a cause rather than their own narrow self-interest?

Jihadists and islamists hold sex slave auctions and kill those that try to stop them, because they are sexually frustrated desert faggots who are obsessed with poon. The 72 virgins meme benefits them. How are you so retarded to think that they think otherwise?

Ok, I'll admit that El Salvador is a special case. But the people that think that the thing Norway does could be applied universally drank too much Kool-Aid. Some people will never be reformed, and it's time we acknowledge that.

Lmao please stop with the "environment" meme. Most criminals can't control their instincts, most criminals are instrinsically violent and uncapable of civilized life. It's in their genes and ancestry, and no matter how much money you pour into these communities, they'll never become productive citizens.

How come blacks are still a permanent underclass in thr richest and most powerful nation in the world, even below hispanics and asians whose parents didn't know english? How come India, crowded and poor as it is, hasn't descended into the lawless hellhole of Brazil's favelas?

And even assuming that it is indeed just the environment:
1. How would you reform it in a way that is not equally authoritarian as the death penalty? Do we strrilize single mothers, forbid reunions of youths and impose uniforms in public? Or are you a deluded liberal that thinks giving everyone free shit like in scandinavia will make everything better (protip; It doesn't, look at somalis and moroccans in Sweden)
2. What do we do with the current criminals? Do you think a bunch of thugs will reform just because "muh ethics"?

Stop trying to defend murderers and rapists.

>He actually believes the 72 virgins meme

You know this is American propaganda right

Brazilian here.

Thank you for this post based Salvadoreno user. In the end it's really OP who, besides being a faggot, is patronizing criminals as if they didn't know better. They know exactly what they're doing.

Crime is a shortcut for poor fag losers to gain money, women and status in their communities. In Brazil, retarded middle class retarded teenage girls will go to favelas to have sex with drug dealers because its "edgy". They know they would never enjoy this status, never be able to buy top brand shoes and clothes and never be able to score this type of pussy by working a normal job. They are not innocent, missguided teens! They understand exactly what the risks and rewards are, and they make the conscious decision to engage in destroying people' lives and families, mostly of other poor people, for his own personal, egoistical gains. Well, then don't complain if society decides that you should be locked in a jail cell or killed.

They believe that it will benefit their faith, their family and their countrymen.

That's still because of the benefit, just abstracted a bit. Jihadists also get a salary higher than many of them would get in work otherwise.

Obviously, everywhere in the world isn't as prosperous as Norway.

But can you deny that:
A. In a country as prosperous as Norway, criminals can and should be reformed, since they have viable alternatives.
B. Achieving prosperity for citizens to the level of Norway would make it much less alluring to be a criminal.

I will concede that the problem is getting to that prosperity, and Norway has it easy because loloilmonee.

[citation needed] for that instinct meme. Are you an evolutionary biologist? A geneticist? What is your profession?

Also,
>implying india is a model poor society

1: accept that there will be an unfair prison system until society changes. Also, I'm against economic migration. I am for global redistribution of wealth, because that would stop gibmedats niggers entering the west and artificially changing the gene pool.
2: murderers and thugs are often murderers and thugs because they need to be. Look at Canada. Do you see many people doing what the Salvadorans do? No, because it isn't a necessity to survive.

Stop trying to defend prison corporatists.

>Are you an evolutionary biologist? A geneticist? What is your profession?

Are we seriously doing this?

>makes claim
>buttfurious at having to prove claim

I don't know. If you ask me why people frame arguments about local issues as all-pervading ones, I couldn't tell you.

I guess they need to puff up their chests to sound relevant and authoritative? Or that it affirms an urgency that people would not act without? I don't know, that's just speculation.

>posting on a Mongolian children's sandpainting board
>will only debate with people who are certified PhDs in evolutionary biology and genetics from Oxford

A study. Give him a single reputable study to evaluate. How does this not benefit you in any way?

>makes claim about genetics
>knows nothing about genetics
>expects to be taken seriously
>blowing my inquiry out of proportion due to severe buttanger

Am I missing something or did you just skip over the part where he directly asked for the profession of the guy he's talking with

>The only thing keeping murderers and thugs from becoming peaceful Canadian is lack of jobs.
Stop patronizing criminals

It's just a little silly.
>El Salvador is not like Norway
>Therefore Norway's solution to its problems has no merit to it

That would explain things, actually.

>believes criminals are criminals because muh genetics and hence they can't help it
>this is less deterministic than environmental arguments in your mind

apex kek, chum.

>le "muh poor nigger children dindu nuffin we need mo money for dem programs ;__;" meme
Kill yourself. They know exactly what they are doing, they aren't little lost puppies who became forced to hold guns and knives.

They don't do it because they are starving, and they continue doing it in France's Banlieues, in London's Hackney, in Sweden's refugee centers, in Los Angeles and Toronto.

Is every single poor person a criminal?

>muh first world crime happens despite everyone being middle class meme
>muh poverty doesn't exist in the west meme

I bet you haven't worked a day in your life.

I'm arguing criminals are fucking adults, knowing full well the consequences of their actions, and should be treated like adults. Break the law, go to jail/black sack.

Well, yes, if ALL the countries were as rich, white homogenous places like Norway, I guess it would have some merit, but that's like saying "All children would be like Einstein if all classes were taught by CERN researchers", ie. Something physically impossible.

If blacks in the US (and arabs in France, and pakistanis in the UK, and Turks in Germany, and... well, you get the point) continue to be an underclass no matter how much money is poured into them across generations, what makes you think Darkest Africa will go through their own Meiji restoration and become civilized?

We have to think of practical, earthly solutions.

Besides, never did you imply it was the sole source, just the one that actually can be acted on, and one that you believe will yield results.

I can't zap a psychopath into pacifism with mind rays. But I can draft society that supports mutualism so that the more high functioning ones can come to understand its in their benefit. And I can draft a society that doesn't punish the low functioners for genetic determinism.

No. The majority isn't. Which only proves his point that poverty is not an excuse for criminal behavior like retarded SJWs try to reason.

>And I can draft a society that doesn't punish the low functioners for genetic determinism.
>Still arguing for basing systems of law on "ethics" rather than maintaining order and stability

You stop this right now

>Muh poor gang members would be starving in the streets if they didn't rape and stab people
>Detroit has worse crime than India and China because we need mo money for dem program even if our hourly wage is what they would earn in a week
Lmao desu

"Hey poor people, you have the option to stay poor in poor neighbourhoods and be able to see the financial districts from your houses longing for a better life, or you can do some horrible things to make your life bearable, disliking both scenarios but having more resources in the latter."

"Wait why are you committing crimes bro????? You could just stay in poverty bro!!!!1111111 :^D"

social homogeneity is good, i agree, but i believe separate ethnically homogenous communities are capable of not falling for the life sentence and death penalty meme.

environment and mental health are the only causes of crime. prove me wrong frienderino :)

>muh poor peepol bad becos they don wan be poor meme

You seem to be implying order and stability aren't values in the same way that "ethics" are.

I mean this as an honest question, where do you see the distinction?

>someone kills someone else
>Hey, let's feed, clothe and shelter him for the rest of his life. That'll show him!

Do you find gangs in poor areas? Do you find gangs in rich areas? If your answers were not yes and no, in that order, then you are a massive homosex.

Also,
>what is relative cost of living?

>muh poor criminals in London/NYC/Chicago/other rich first world cities would be LITERALLY starving in the streets if they didn't rob, rape and kill people, its the fault of the system maaaan

This is my favorite meme.

I don't think it's a racial problem. The Irish were seen as non-white, were largely poor and had large gang problems in the US and Canada, and they're largely integrated. I think it's a "throw money at a problem and hope it goes away" problem.

Africa is getting more "civilized." Nigeria is about on par with India, Kenya would be on par with South America if not for Somalians and Sudanese raiding across the border all the time.

Namibia, Tanzania, Senegal, and a few others are mostly alright countries.

I agree that poverty isn't an excuse. It doesn't mean it's not a factor though. Some people are always going to be criminals. Some people are mentally ill, and they will commit crimes because they want to. That's why simple solutions don't exist for complex problems.

"Ethics" are often times entirely disconnected from reality, based rather on high-minded idealism and petty thought-experiments more than anything. Order and stability are objective, albeit vague properties required for the functioning of modern industrial nation-states on any level.

>"Hey poor people, you have the option to stay poor in poor neighbourhoods and be able to see the financial districts from your houses longing for a better life, or you can do some horrible things to make your life bearable, disliking both scenarios but having more resources in the latter."
>"Wait why are you committing crimes bro????? You could just stay in poverty bro!!!!1111111 :^D"
I just wish SO MUCH you would come to Brazil to have an enriching encounter with your missguided peaceful Canadians who just didn't have the opportunity!

>environment and health...
I can't, they're some possible causes that we have the capability of addressing.

If more money means incentivizing think tanks to provide studies and draw solutions from them, sure. If more money gets thrown into systems that don't work; without any alternative due to the notion of yours that our institutions are in any way complete, no.

I really wish we could be a bit more specific than these wide sweeping narratives. But the ideas I tend to align with are often lampooned as this.

>order and stability aren't values
Go to a warzone and come back. Then tell us.

>muh prison system should be about punishment meme

Get the fuck out. The only reasons that prison should exist are to protect society from a repeat attack and to reform the perpetrator. Give the whole MUST PUNISH BAD PEOPLE prank a rest.

In the London neighbourhoods near me, there are shit schools, shit job opportunities, etc. One million people last year had to use food banks, and slightly more than that are in poverty in the UK. In some schools around the country, some teachers literally buy students school uniforms because the parents cannot afford it.

I don't understand what you mean, or how it is a counterargument.

nice strawman

>They are a product of their environment, so why would we treat a person badly somewhere where going to commit those crimes anyway?

this is the least respectful thing ever, you are essentially attempting to strip them of their human agency.

As if they were children or animals who can't control their behavior.

I used to be liberal too. "Thugs" and "youths" are the ULTIMATE redpill.

>London

You're British then. That honestly explains everything.

>people should be rewarded for being criminals
Lmao

I see. Unfortunately, I feel they're often conflated, whereas the high minded ideas of order are used to justify brutal autocracy. But that's pretty far from what the actual topic of the thread is.

I never said they weren't.

>You seem to be implying order and stability aren't values in the same way that "ethics" are

>you.. implying
>that
>order and stability
>aren't values

They can be, and they can also be held as high minded ideals IMO.

Order and stability are abstract qualities that are used to describe real life situations in the same way that many high minded values are. There is a spectrum in which they apply and I am in no way implying that they're any, singular thing; good or bad. But I agree with the first user that I quoted that the further they are from representing reality, the less useful they are to us.

>makes laws that will be completely different to the exact laws in the other 195 countries, so already there is a layer of arbitrary-ness to the lawmaking
>when poor people commit crimes, then scapegoats their human agency and says they did du sumfin

The poor have two options: stay poor, with shit jobs and shit lives, and to commit crimes to risk incarceration for a slightly better life (mo money).

>all people from a certain country must think alike meme
And where are you from, chap?

Reward and punishment treats people like animals. Fuck off with your monotheistic morality.

>I don't understand what you mean, or how it is a counterargument.
You didn't make an argument (besides making an apology for crime, which is not an argument at all, just a personal, edgy opinion) so how can it be a counterargument? As to the meaning of what I said, it's simple. I wish you would meet in real life the criminals you so comfortably (and cynically) patronize from your sheltered home. It's not an argument, just wishful thinking. But a man can dream.

If a state can kill its citizens legally than that in a way justifies killing.

>And where are you from, chap?

Take a guess

Have you even seen someone from outside your country in your life? Even from afar?

People ARE animals. We may strive to be better than that, but we're still animals.