Topic: Why We Should Hate Crime, Not Criminals ? (Read 277 times)
Failures in Education – Creating opportunity lays a foundation for success, reducing the number of individuals turning to crime for sustenance. Job training, access to higher education, entrepreneurial coaching and other forms of guidance lead to successful outcomes, rather than criminal activity. Adequate public education provides a cornerstone of opportunity, breaking criminal patterns and placing kids on the right path early-on. Until we extend a guaranteed foundation of education evenly across society, criminal enterprise will prosper.
how do we eliminate crime without touching criminals? We should rather get rid of criminals and crime will come to a halt
Like snowflakes, no two criminals are alike. But their crimes share common threads; especially when viewed strictly in terms of the outcomes they provide. A loss is a loss, regardless of which criminal brings it upon a victim, so crimes, unlike criminals, are the same.
It isn’t as black and white as it’s portrayed there, but it does provide a strong argument for reserving our harshest disapproval for the crimes we encounter, rather than the criminals who commit them. Until the playing field evens out for all participants, society lends itself to criminal acts. In the meantime, we should continue striving to eliminate crime, rather than personalizing the revolving door of criminals that perpetrate them.
It isn’t as black and white as it’s portrayed there, but it does provide a strong argument for reserving our harshest disapproval for the crimes we encounter, rather than the criminals who commit them. Until the playing field evens out for all participants, society lends itself to criminal acts. In the meantime, we should continue striving to eliminate crime, rather than personalizing the revolving door of criminals that perpetrate them.
I agree with this concept completely it is easier to judge the person. Sadly it is in our nature. It is easier to do this than to think of the concept of crime and that potentially anyone can commit a crime.
It also depends on the crime as well, it is a very complex situation and can never be black or white sadly. That is why we have judges that cast the punishment, and why in different countries / cultures crimes are punished more severely / less harshly.
It isn’t as black and white as it’s portrayed there, but it does provide a strong argument for reserving our harshest disapproval for the crimes we encounter, rather than the criminals who commit them. Until the playing field evens out for all participants, society lends itself to criminal acts. In the meantime, we should continue striving to eliminate crime, rather than personalizing the revolving door of criminals that perpetrate them.
Like snowflakes, no two criminals are alike. But their crimes share common threads; especially when viewed strictly in terms of the outcomes they provide. A loss is a loss, regardless of which criminal brings it upon a victim, so crimes, unlike criminals, are the same.
It isn’t as black and white as it’s portrayed there, but it does provide a strong argument for reserving our harshest disapproval for the crimes we encounter, rather than the criminals who commit them. Until the playing field evens out for all participants, society lends itself to criminal acts. In the meantime, we should continue striving to eliminate crime, rather than personalizing the revolving door of criminals that perpetrate them.
It isn’t as black and white as it’s portrayed there, but it does provide a strong argument for reserving our harshest disapproval for the crimes we encounter, rather than the criminals who commit them. Until the playing field evens out for all participants, society lends itself to criminal acts. In the meantime, we should continue striving to eliminate crime, rather than personalizing the revolving door of criminals that perpetrate them.
Jump to: