If you want 'tough on crime' that actually works, but you have to be tough on all crime, including crime in the police. And make sure the entire justice process works.
UK has a 'tough on crime' government, they've increased severity of sentences, but have cut funding to the police. The rate of prosecution, i.e. how likely you are to get caught, fell off a cliff. Also now that police is poorly paid, we have corruption in the police.
Research shows that certainty of punishment is far more important than severity of punishment. Criminals are chancers.
Then we have to make sure that suspects get proper legal council. The current plea bargain system in US is absurd. You can prosecute some poor shmuck for a crime, they can't afford a lawyer, and state lawyer sucks, so they take the plea. Taxpayer pays for their imprisonment, police reports great success. Meanwhile real criminal goes free to commit more crimes with more experience. And they will be harder to catch next time.
Most european countries do not have severe punishment of criminals, yet crime rates aren't crazy.
I havent been to US, so i am not sure about any Bay Area shenanigans
So we completely agree because I’m pretty sure that is all that actually matters.
The issue in US currently is a deranged political fade has taken hold that sees criminals as victims of their circumstances and has started not punishing criminals.
It can be simultaneously true that criminal behavior is often a result of bad circumstances AND that it requires consistent punishment, not that the first point negates the 2nd. Instead social programs need to focus on improving circumstances that lead to criminal behavior not removing punishments.
This political fade is a bankrupt flawed ideology that is effectively mass social psychosis or insanity.
The problem is there’s another flawed political ideology that tells us that—investing in social programs to improve the circumstances that lead to criminal behavior—is bad because communism.
UK is regarded as extremely highly policed state by other Europeans and yet it's less safe than here in mainland Europe.
Which ones? Britain is one of very few countries in Europe where the police don't routinely carry guns, and are perceived as approachable.
I think you should look instead at inequality. Britain has the worst income equality in Europe.
My police is approachable and I don't care about the gun on their belt. I saw them use it for protection of the citizens - I appreciate they have it and don't consider it over-policing, it's not moving that scale anywhere.
It's not about the gun, it's about the rights of the police. The police here carries a gun but has zero rights/power against citizens not breaking any laws. They can't even stop you and ask for your ID - that would be considered "communism" here (same with the cameras, that's a "communist practice").
It's not worth continuing the discussion since you haven't said which country.
Edit: It's applied rarely and only for egregious cases, eg breaking into a depot to spray-paint subway cars and getting caught on CCTV doing it. There are plenty of things to criticize about Singapore (for one, there's a lot less oversight on prisoners getting caned as an administrative punishment), but the way they handle vandalism isn't really at the top of my list, not least because it's remarkably effective.
...
No it isn't. Absolutely not. No way. Never coming there. Damn this place. Doesn't matter what the offense has to be, it's never fine.
Do you think that each and every judgement of judicial caning was correct? That mistakes can't happen?
Isn't this mostly a myth? You will get fined for littering in Singapore just like elsewhere, though their fines are higher and the police arguably enforces laws against littering more eagerly than in the West. Caning (not flogging) is reserved for more serious offences (IIRC the lightest one is vandalism.)
Dubai employs flogging, but for Shariah offences, not for littering.
Hong Kong doesn't use judicial corporeal punishment at all.
Like all 'proper oldschool' conservative societies, in Dubai laws is applied only to the 'right people'.
For example extramarital sex is a crime, but if you open Tinder it's full of hookers.
Vienna is pretty mixed since the times of the Austro-Hungarian empire, but fairly safe. Glasgow is almost purely Scottish, but dangerous. Naples is probably less ethnically mixed than Rome, but more dangerous. Marseille is a lot worse than Genoa etc.
I don't doubt that particular kinds of immigration can worsen crime situation considerably, but some places can manage that and some fail miserably. You can even see it in the same city if the political representation changes. AFAIK the current mayor of Barcelona is notorious for letting street crime fester.
There are tons of immigrants in Germany/Western Europe and east Asia.
That is an absurdly inaccurate assertion.
There are Vietnamese communities in CZ/SK everywhere, even in very rural areas, but, you won't see them much in the streets, because they spend their life indoors working, and they usually own their shops, living right behind them, so they aren't even seen commuting to work and back. Quite often the only small grocery in a village or a small town is Vietnamese-owned.
But maybe East Asians are now considered (elevated? condemned?) as basically white by the American racial discourse?
Whether left or right, their concept of ethnicity is primitive. white/black/asian.
Are Russians same ethnicity as Germans? Are Germans same ethnicity as Bavarian? Russian government considers Russia to have ~100 ethnic groups native to Russia.
Us discourse is either about skin-colour, or about man-made country borders.
The only scientifically based concept is Haplogroups, bur noone knwos about them.
The rest is man-made concepts and culture.
>The rest is man-made concepts and culture.
You got to it at the end. There’s nothing about any of it that is scientific, it’s all just culture.
The reason why it’s “primitive” in America is because that is what is true in the American context. It just doesn’t map to the European context.