|
|
 Originally Posted by Renton
I'm not saying the 3rd world countries are doing it right, I'm saying there's not much to correlate the existence of strict law enforcement with the reduction of violent crime. The U.S. has one of the most strict justice systems in the world and ranks 108th in intentional homicide rate. Aside from warlord-wracked African nations and cartel-wracked Latin American ones, it's one of the most dangerous countries in the world.
It's not about how the US uses its violent authority, it's about why and how the US has a violent authority. You approach this problem by brushing it aside.
A lot of humans have the capacity to commit violence, but usually unnatural incentives need to be put in place for violence to be truly worthwhile. Incentives like being able to sell a plant on a black market for dramatically higher than its market value. Or incentives like easily hijacked foreign aid that then be distributed for a massive profit. Without the state, there really isn't much for the cartels and gangs to offer people. Would they continue to exist, yes of course, but in a much-diminished capacity.
Unnatural incentives?
I'm twisting my brain to understand wtf this means.
Apes kill to eat. Apes kill each other for political reasons. We're apes. Apes that Economics would describe as an endless fount of desires, desires which can be achieved through violence... but that violence isn't of our natural incentives.
|
Reply With Quote