Post: #51

Just like minimum security prison camps in the US, Halden is able to exist as a carrot in a system of increasingly punishing and restrictive prisons. When Halden had one prisoner steal a boat and escape off their prison island, his punishment was to be banished from Halden and moved back to a more conventional prison.

Halden spends a large time screening potential prisoners, and it gets to be choosy. They talk about how they have murderers in their population --but when it's a guy who murdered his wife of 10 years when she said she was leaving him for another guy, the recidivism rate on that is pretty much zero regardless of what prison they attend. When you get to cherry pick of out the entire prison population the prisoners with profiles already known to have the lowest rates of recidivism, your prison program having a low recidivism rate isn't really improving anything. It's just showing your selection bias and the success of your screening program.

I really doubt it's making a net difference, and I'd like to see if the other prisons that Halden is now cherry picking "model prisoners" from are seeing their recidivism rates rise as a result of their better prisoners being stolen away from them.

Post: #52

What works in country A might not work with country B and vice versa. Perhaps the "rehab theory" works in country A as we're all essentially human beings no matter where we live, maybe it will just take a very long time for country B to adapt if "rehab theory" will eventually work there. As HC said, there are cultural nuances with each country that make their approach to crime different.

I'm also with HC that taxpayers shouldn't pay for plasma screens, personal trainers, and private villas...but with Norway being one of the richest countries in the world with high standards of living for the average person and negligible poverty rate, this "punishment" would probably be acceptable to the Norwegians as there is little danger of the poor trying to take advantage of this. God forbid if you were to implement that kind of "punishment" here in the US *now* with the current economic conditions.

I would be ok with prisons providing books, gym equipment, and basic level food. No special amenities. Prison should be unpleasant enough to be a deterrent, but not too inhumane that the danger of torture or rape is imminent--it is these things that hardens the criminal not rehabilitate them. The most serious criminals, however should just stay there indefinitely or executed.

@basilransom
Running a tight ship in a classroom of juvenile delinquents doesn't have to mean being punitive or authoritarian with your methods. I've run a classroom of "at-risk" boys and girls. I'm being broad when I say that the key is to provide a learning environment that you can express yourself (within an agreed-upon set of rules), is accessible, needs satisfying, and you're treated with respect. You can do this without looking like a weak, "nicety nice" person they'll take advantage of. Kids often say to me, "you're different from Mrs. X, I like it."

And for the rest of you, I happen to think the best way to prevent crime is education...with good teachers. Not jails or anti-freedom legislation like the Patriot Act or the NDAA. Most crime is committed because certain needs are not met. Crime happens when people don't learn how to satisfy them in constructive or positive ways. Yes there are other factors such as culture and economics, but I've seen too many teachers (public/private school doesn't matter) run their classrooms/schools like prisons. No wonder we have high crime rates.

See this interesting excerpted essay by Jean Anyon regarding schools from different economic tiers and the type of education they're getting.

Post: #53

(03-02-2012 05:46 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 03:37 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 03:08 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 02:58 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  Americans enjoy way more freedoms than Norwegians.

Ooooook, you really have to show something solid to make this kind of claim.

Post-911 (hello Patriot Act!) I would even argue that Americans enjoy fewer freedoms than Norwegians.

No problem, sir.

Here's your evidence.

I tend to make sure I have some support before I make some kind of claim.

That's an index over economic freedom, the overall score has very little to do with the issue at hand. If this list was an indication the top two scorers that aren't even democracies would be more free than the US. Surely you must see the flaw in this logic?

A better comparison when discussing "free" with regard to the individual would be The Economist's (My fave mag) Democracy Index.


durangotang, you should probably chill. I don't agree with Hen on this particular topic but he's a regular contributor that has more than proven himself.

I see your point, but I think economic freedom is an important aspect to overall freedom--maybe even the most important factor. Norway is definitely a nice country but the taxes people pay over there are oppressive. The government plays a strong hand in the economy and the country's social policies.

The US is probably the most laissez faire western country you'll find. That's what I mean by freedom.

There's also freedom of press, religion, speech, and the right to bear arms. Big Brother has definitely stepped up its surveillance measures and infringement on civ liberties, but I don't think it's as bad as the laws European societies have had on the books for years. The reason is because the US has a freer legal system dependent on common law (case law). Cases decide laws through the multiple levels of appeal and until new circumstances challenge existing law and forces them to be changed again. That way, laws are constantly evolving as society evolves. Look how much the US has changed in its 300 year history. I don't think any country has changed as dynamically. No generation of Americans have the same experience as the previous one.

In Europe (except for the UK), you have civil law, where every tedious violation is codified. Courts don't create laws; they merely apply them.

All of the controversial laws made in the US legislature have been challenged in courts, which have the ultimate authority to evaluate them because it's a right afforded to them in The Constitution....

As for your link, I like The Economist as well. I read it all the time. Norway's democracy is surely more developed than the US--no arguing there. They have what you might call "direct democracy." Citizens can gather signatures on just about any issue and effect a vote on it which government makes into law. This is common in countries like Switzerland as well. A homogeneous group of people who have shared values, customs and traditions carry a social trust in each other and their government.

The US is not exactly one country, but more of a collection of states. Some states, like California, practice direct democracy, while others do not.

Still, I don't think you find the degree of "individual freedom" in Norway that you have in the US. The government in the US doesn't play as a big a role in an individual's life as it does in Norway. This has good and bad outcomes.

This is very good for those who are ambitious, entrepreneurial, innovative, and then find success. If you are rich, it's better to live in the US than in Norway.

But if you are poor or middle class, life will be much more comfortable in Norway. You will work less hours, take longer vacations, and enjoy many social benefits. There's also a strong safety net. The catch is you pay way more in taxes and the incentive to compete isn't as strong as it is in the US. I can't think of many inventions that come from Norway.

The lure of becoming rich simply isn't there. You are pretty much resigned to a middle class existence, for better or worse. It's not a culture that encourages or promotes risk taking.

Which one is better is up to debate, but I think Americans are freer because they are economically and individually freer. If you're rich in the US, you're damn near unstoppable.

You also have way more freedom in the number of choices available to you (just walk into an American grocery store and compare that to Norway) and the number of decisions you can make for your own life.

Post: #54

About the Heritage Foundations Economic Freedom Index, I found the article I remember from the Ludwig Von Mises Institute. Granted, it is from 2005, but here it is:

The Failing of the Economic Freedom Index

Post: #55

There was an excellent article on cracked.com (of all things!) about why Norwegian prisons are much better, with drastically reduced recidivism rates , lower rates of incidents in prison, and overall lower expenses despite a high number of amenities available to prisoners. It concluded with something about "if you encountered a criminal in a dark alley at night with no one else in sight, you'd bet you'd want the criminal to have come from a Norwegian prison, not an American one".

While overall I still agree with it, I am still enraged by war criminals (such as those responsible for Srebrenica and similar massacres of Balkan wars) getting 10-20 yr. sentences in those prisons and living much better than the common citizen around the parts where they've once rampaged. Having nice prisons should be for petty crimes up to assaults, not for deranged mass murderers.

Post: #56

(03-02-2012 06:12 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  There was an excellent article on cracked.com (of all things!) about why Norwegian prisons are much better, with drastically reduced recidivism rates , lower rates of incidents in prison, and overall lower expenses despite a high number of amenities available to prisoners. It concluded with something about "if you encountered a criminal in a dark alley at night with no one else in sight, you'd bet you'd want the criminal to have come from a Norwegian prison, not an American one".

While overall I still agree with it, I am still enraged by war criminals (such as those responsible for Srebrenica and similar massacres of Balkan wars) getting 10-20 yr. sentences in those prisons and living much better than the common citizen around the parts where they've once rampaged. Having nice prisons should be for petty crimes up to assaults, not for deranged mass murderers.

I would agree that there are some people who just shouldn't be allowed back out. Ever. People such as Anders Breivick, Charles Manson, or any other serial killer really. In their case, what is the point of costly rehabilitation? Yeah, I wouldn't provide them with a plasma t.v. either. They are the statistical outliers. They will always exist, and I don't think we should lose sight of the forest for the trees.

Post: #57

(03-02-2012 05:56 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  I see your point, but I think economic freedom is an important aspect to overall freedom--maybe even the most important factor. Norway is definitely a nice country but the taxes people pay over there are oppressive. The government plays a strong hand in the economy and the country's social policies.

The US is probably the most laissez faire western country you'll find. That's what I mean by freedom.

<snip>

Which one is better is up to debate, but I think Americans are freer because they are economically and individually freer. If you're rich in the US, you're damn near unstoppable.

What you are saying is that you personally value the fruits that come with being wealthy higher than the ability to influence the democratic process.

You are contradicting yourself in that you claim that the US offers higher individual freedom yet in the same breath acknowledge that it is wealth that makes you "unstoppable" there. Rich or poor should make no difference in a nation that offers and value true freedom for the individual.

You would rather take your chances in a system that offers unique benefits to people that manage to reach a certain financial position. Such a system certainly has its appeal. Wall Street bankers are a good role models for this. These are people that are essentially untouchable, commanding so much control over the system that they can barely be removed and even if they are, their financial position is rarely compromised. I'm not being sarcastic here, I can certainly see the appeal why anyone would like to become an "untouchable" in a system that allows this kind of practise.

So I see what it is that you value and I respect the people that have the ambition to resign themselves to that kind of economical playground.

But don't call it freedom. It is not.

Post: #58

(03-02-2012 06:46 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 05:56 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  I see your point, but I think economic freedom is an important aspect to overall freedom--maybe even the most important factor. Norway is definitely a nice country but the taxes people pay over there are oppressive. The government plays a strong hand in the economy and the country's social policies.

The US is probably the most laissez faire western country you'll find. That's what I mean by freedom.

<snip>

Which one is better is up to debate, but I think Americans are freer because they are economically and individually freer. If you're rich in the US, you're damn near unstoppable.

What you are saying is that you personally value the fruits that come with being wealthy higher than the ability to influence the democratic process.

You are contradicting yourself in that you claim that the US offers higher individual freedom yet in the same breath acknowledge that it is wealth that makes you "unstoppable" there. Rich or poor should make no difference in a nation that offers and value true freedom for the individual.

You would rather take your chances in a system that offers unique benefits to people that manage to reach a certain financial position. Such a system certainly has its appeal. Wall Street bankers are a good role models for this. These are people that are essentially untouchable, commanding so much control over the system that they can barely be removed and even if they are, their financial position is rarely compromised. I'm not being sarcastic here, I can certainly see the appeal why anyone would like to become an "untouchable" in a system that allows this kind of practise.

So I see what it is that you value and I respect the people that have the ambition to resign themselves to that kind of economical playground.

But don't call it freedom. It is not.

Vic, is it possible to separate economic liberty from personal liberty? If the state uses force to take 50% of your labor through taxation, how can you be free?

Post: #59

(03-02-2012 06:53 PM)durangotang Wrote:  Vic, is it possible to separate economic liberty from personal liberty? If the state uses force to take 50% of your labor through taxation, how can you be free?

Well as long as you are free to emigrate that's perfectly ok, it's part of the citizenship contract to pay tax.

Tax rate by itself is not a good indication of liberty (or lack thereof). Norway for instance might have a high tax rate, but it is also less corrupt (according to the earlier linked economic index) so in the end the US citizen is likely paying more than the Norwegian for the same services.

Post: #60

Economic liberty should be connected to personal/civil liberties.
The ideal would be that government doesn't dip its hand too deep or at all in your pockets and affairs, gives you free choice with what to do with that money and your life as long as you don't violate other people's rights/liberties.

Neither the USA nor the Norwegian system is perfect in implementing both, I think that's at the root of disagreement between Vicious and HC.

Post: #61

(03-02-2012 07:06 PM)Enfant_Terrible Wrote:  Economic liberty should be connected to personal/civil liberties.
The ideal would be that government doesn't dip its hand too deep or at all in your pockets and affairs, gives you free choice with what to do with that money and your life as long as you don't violate other people's rights/liberties.

Neither the USA nor the Norwegian system is perfect in implementing both, I think that's at the root of disagreement between Vicious and HC.

Not exactly, personal wealth falls well within the realms of civil liberties. Economic liberty however is more a measure of corporate and entrepreneurial freedom from accountability.

Post: #62

(03-02-2012 06:46 PM)Vicious Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 05:56 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  I see your point, but I think economic freedom is an important aspect to overall freedom--maybe even the most important factor. Norway is definitely a nice country but the taxes people pay over there are oppressive. The government plays a strong hand in the economy and the country's social policies.

The US is probably the most laissez faire western country you'll find. That's what I mean by freedom.

<snip>

Which one is better is up to debate, but I think Americans are freer because they are economically and individually freer. If you're rich in the US, you're damn near unstoppable.

What you are saying is that you personally value the fruits that come with being wealthy higher than the ability to influence the democratic process.

You are contradicting yourself in that you claim that the US offers higher individual freedom yet in the same breath acknowledge that it is wealth that makes you "unstoppable" there. Rich or poor should make no difference in a nation that offers and value true freedom for the individual.

You would rather take your chances in a system that offers unique benefits to people that manage to reach a certain financial position. Such a system certainly has its appeal. Wall Street bankers are a good role models for this. These are people that are essentially untouchable, commanding so much control over the system that they can barely be removed and even if they are, their financial position is rarely compromised. I'm not being sarcastic here, I can certainly see the appeal why anyone would like to become an "untouchable" in a system that allows this kind of practise.

So I see what it is that you value and I respect the people that have the ambition to resign themselves to that kind of economical playground.

But don't call it freedom. It is not.

I wasn't talking about corruption when I meant "unstoppable" but that certainly can apply to some Americans who make up the global super elite. Wall Street (NYC) just happens to be very good at high finance, but the people involved come from all over the world, even Scandinavia. These people, like the corporations they often serve, are multinational. Nationality doesn't apply to them in the sense it does for you and me.

What I mean is that once you've "made it" in the US, your dreams are often your only limitation. You can really explore your creativity and produce good things and create jobs for many people. In countries like Norway, you are actually taxed at a higher rate the more money you earn. This disincentivizes people from reaching their full potential as innovators, risk takers, and entrepreneurs.

What you thought I meant by "unstoppable" has to do with corruption, which is a big problem in the US. Much of that has to do with promise of riches that acts as a "revolving door" between our government and corporate interests. Many politicians and their staff often go into the private sector when they are done with public life and vice versa. We've seen ex-Goldman Sachs CEOs become governors and US Treasurers, among other public roles. This is something I am confident will be addressed in the coming years.

These various indexes list countries according to where they rank on freedom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_freedom_indices

Anyway, I'm not sure we'll come to any agreement on this, so we should probably just move on now that we've made our points. I don't think I've ever seen guys from different points of view become persuaded by the other side in a political thread. Game and women is something we seem to be more open-minded about, so lets just move on, like Mixx said earlier.

Post: #63

Maybe that prison system works in Norway because Norway is just a more peaceful place with more peaceful people. I know the American prison system is a fucking disgrace to modern humanity. A "for profit" business that houses people like animals and treats them worse then animals in alot of places. That place looks like heaven compared to American prison which is hell.

Post: #64

(03-02-2012 08:08 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  Anyway, I'm not sure we'll come to any agreement on this, so we should probably just move on now that we've made our points. I don't think I've ever seen guys from different points of view become persuaded by the other side in a political thread. Game and women is something we seem to be more open-minded about, so lets just move on, like Mixx said earlier.

I would say that while I have never been convinced on-the-spot from a political thread it might have made me more informed for a time in the future when similar topics come up.

In any case we'll have to agree to disagree, the differences in our values will not permit any agreement on this topic.

Post: #65

"Blackhawk Wrote:When you get to cherry pick of out the entire prison population the prisoners with profiles already known to have the lowest rates of recidivism, your prison program having a low recidivism rate isn't really improving anything. It's just showing your selection bias and the success of your screening program.

I've just read this excellent (if not all-explaining) argument in disfavor of the luxury prison and wanted to point it out. I dunno, is it good for a prison system to have carrots? I'd say yes, it separates the irredeemable from their opposites, but then again, courts should already do that while handling the cases given to them.

Post: #66

(03-02-2012 02:39 PM)houston Wrote:  Durangotang - hahaahahaha I hope you're joking. You think a serial rapist who gets out of Neverland compared to TDC is going to be any different? A criminal might, just might have a doubt about doing something illegal again if he hates hard prison life. What the fuck does someone in Norway have to lose? Shit, he can go around raping girls and shanking people and live in paradise!

Houston ended this debate many posts ago.

It's so obvious how flawed Norway's prison system is, I can't even believe people are debating this.

Post: #67

(03-03-2012 01:19 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 02:39 PM)houston Wrote:  Durangotang - hahaahahaha I hope you're joking. You think a serial rapist who gets out of Neverland compared to TDC is going to be any different? A criminal might, just might have a doubt about doing something illegal again if he hates hard prison life. What the fuck does someone in Norway have to lose? Shit, he can go around raping girls and shanking people and live in paradise!

Houston ended this debate many posts ago.

It's so obvious how flawed Norway's prison system is, I can't even believe people are debating this.

Go back and find the youtube video Skywalker posted in this thread. It's about another liberal "prison" in Norway. They sent a savage chainsaw murderer there for "rehabilitation." In fact, the psychologist who worked at that "prison" lost his parents to that murderer who chopped them up into pieces.

They even let that guy work in the "prison" farm using a chainsaw.

I wish I was making this stuff up. Unbelievable.

Post: #68

[/quote]

Houston ended this debate many posts ago.

It's so obvious how flawed Norway's prison system is, I can't even believe people are debating this.
[/quote]

Well, I think the arguments put foward by the pro-Norway camp, at the very least, have merited the debate. To me the conclusion seems to be that what system is best depends on what you prioritise (justice and revenge or rehabilitation, security and lower costs). I assume you value justice/revenge ahead of rehabilitation, but not everyone does.

I admit I first agreed thoroughly with the OP, but then reading the whole thread I realised that the US system (which seems to be the reference point) creates a vicious circle of more crime, more victims and higher costs (assuming the stats put forward are correct).

On a personal level I can totally understand if a person close to the victim values justice/revenge ahead of rehabilitation, though (I would too).

Post: #69

(03-02-2012 02:58 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 02:53 PM)durangotang Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 02:39 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 02:33 PM)durangotang Wrote:  I'll play along. Would you guys rather have your mother, wife, or girlfriend walking down a dark street next to a guy who came from one of our maximum security prisons in America, allegedly rehabilitated, or next to a guy who commit the same crime but came out of Halden prison, allegedly rehabilitated?

For me, the answer is simple.

That's not only a red herring, but also a false dichotomy as well.

The problem with American prisons surely aren't the lack of plasma TVs, rock climbing walls, and gourmet cooking classes.

All I'm saying is those Halden prisoners can be "rehabilitated" without all those amenities. Those luxurious conditions for lawbreakers--on the taxpayers' dime--are a slap in the face to all the hard working, law abiding citizens that toil for their own keep.

I don't think so. Whatever Norway is doing appears to be working. Only a 20% recidivism rate within two years. According to the Time article, the U.K. and the U.S. is between 50% - 60% depending on the year. Perhaps showing them how to live and get their self-respect back is more effective, after all (according to the article), Norway's rate of prisoners is 69 per 100,000 people. America's is 753 per 100,000 people.

The math is simple, we incarcerate over 10 times the amount of people as Norway. Our criminals get into society and return at 3x the frequency within two years. America's prison system is a slap in the face to us and our wallets.

I think that has more to do with culture.

Norwegians are for the most part a homogeneous group of people who have lived together for a very long time. They have shared values, social norms, and trust, as well as trust in their public institutions.

That is not the case for the US. We are the most diverse country in the world and among the youngest in the developed world. This is also a place where free will, individualism, and liberty reigns.

Americans enjoy way more freedoms than Norwegians.

We are also one of the most unequal nations in the world with many social problems such as drugs, crime, poverty, and unemployment.

Freedom coupled with bad environments can lead to bad decisions.

Post: #70

(03-02-2012 02:37 PM)basilransom Wrote:  You also have to take into account the people. I don't have the statistics available, but I'm pretty sure that Scandinavian Americans have among the lowest crime rates of the various white ethnicities. Think Minnesota. Having a generous, light prison system is a lot more feasible with a less criminal population.

Classic!

This is what Milton Friendman said.

You might also note that crime-rates in Scandinavian countries has been increasing steadily the past decades, especially violent crime. This has more to do with Muslim immigrants (can I say this and not get in trouble?) than anything else.

One could also speculate that lax criminal systems have encouraged the increase in crime levels in Scandinavian countries the past decades?

Crime in the US on the other hand, has since the early 90's been going the other way. Today you are three times as likely to get murdered in London as New York. In 1990, New York was six times as lethal.

As Basil says... this "friendly" system could just as well be causing the upward surge in crime in Scandinavian countries, and tough American system, more specifically the high frequency with which criminals are caught, could explain the decline in American crime the past couple of decades.

Post: #71

(03-04-2012 10:00 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  

(03-02-2012 02:37 PM)basilransom Wrote:  You also have to take into account the people. I don't have the statistics available, but I'm pretty sure that Scandinavian Americans have among the lowest crime rates of the various white ethnicities. Think Minnesota. Having a generous, light prison system is a lot more feasible with a less criminal population.

Classic!

This is what Milton Friendman said.

You might also note that crime-rates in Scandinavian countries has been increasing steadily the past decades, especially violent crime. This has more to do with Muslim immigrants (can I say this and not get in trouble?) than anything else.

One could also speculate that lax criminal systems have encouraged the increase in crime levels in Scandinavian countries the past decades?

Crime in the US on the other hand, has since the early 90's been going the other way. Today you are three times as likely to get murdered in London as New York. In 1990, New York was six times as lethal.

As Basil says... this "friendly" system could just as well be causing the upward surge in crime in Scandinavian countries, and tough American system, more specifically the high frequency with which criminals are caught, could explain the decline in American crime the past couple of decades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_a...ime_effect

Post: #72

Yeah, I read Freakanomics. I'm not 100% I agree with this. It's still just a theory - interesting one, but I'm wary. But you just gave me an idea for my next paper! Thanks!

Post: #73

It seems that the operating philosophy on crime & punishment in this thread are that many posters are equating justice with harsh punishment.

Looking at the US prison population, how is that working out for you? Especially since a good portion of these people are incarcerated on victimless crimes (possession probably being the main culprit).

For a board with so many free-thinking individuals I'm surprised no one has yet recognised that US prisons are mainly a private industry that is making a lot of money and has a very sizeable lobby.

People here are pulling out ABB and that chainsaw guy as examples. The thing is that individuals and isolated events can not be allowed to influence system-wide changes. ABB alone killed more people than was murdered in all of Norway for the last year. How is a harsher penal code supposed to do anything about such an event other than providing a temporary satisfaction for the victims? In the US you are more likely to die by getting into your car, walking across the street, in a fire or drowning than by a terrorist attack. Yet the US has widely accepted the infringements in civil liberties that the Patriot Act and its ilk has spawned. Did you know that since last year in the US you can be indefinitely held without trial?

So what many of the posters here are saying in effect is that they accept fewer rights and less security in order to exact a higher punishment on a criminal. To me that is entirely in character with the spirit of the US - the addiction to quick-fixes and feel-good solutions but lacking a long-term strategy. On this forum we attack this mindset when it comes to people's personal health and how the economy is handle for example. Why is it that we are accepting the same erroneous behaviour when it comes to crime & punishment?

Don't get me wrong here - I love the US, the friendliness of its people, their character and what the nation has to offer. It is that love that is causing me to express concern. I couldn't give two figs about Argentina being a corrupt shithole that's seizing citizen's investments for example.

(03-04-2012 10:00 AM)ElJefe Wrote:  As Basil says... this "friendly" system could just as well be causing the upward surge in crime in Scandinavian countries, and tough American system, more specifically the high frequency with which criminals are caught, could explain the decline in American crime the past couple of decades.

A surge in crime in Scandinavian countries? This sounds like standard fare extreme-right anti-immigrant scare.

According to Eurostat both violent and total crime in Europe is on a downward trend. The Scandinavian countries crime index has been virtually stagnant for the last few years. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/I...006-EN.PDF

For the record I'm also troubled by the growing numbers of Muslims in northern Europe but I'm reluctant to place blame.

Post: #74

(03-03-2012 10:37 PM)solo Wrote:  I admit I first agreed thoroughly with the OP, but then reading the whole thread I realised that the US system (which seems to be the reference point) creates a vicious circle of more crime, more victims and higher costs (assuming the stats put forward are correct).

On a personal level I can totally understand if a person close to the victim values justice/revenge ahead of rehabilitation, though (I would too).

Best summary of the thread so far.

Breaking this vicious cycle is damn near impossible, it requires you to put the collective above yourself. US culture doesn't easily facilitate this, it's just not in the culture. But I think it's important to make people recognise this, we are all too often operating on auto-pilot in this kind of topic.

Post: #75

On the danes side: