The other day at work, somebody compared me to Hitler. Somehow me voicing my desire to not have junkies in my backyard equates me with being a genocidal maniac (context: a co-worker noted an uptick in heroin usage in a neighboring city, and the possibility of a drug that could counteract heroin overdoses. I merely asked if such people that required said drug would be worth saving).
OK, there may have been other things, like my belief that the world is overpopulated, and that I should be in charge of trimming down the world citizenry (latter half kind of in jest). So yeah, I can kinda see how that is Hitler-esque.
Then I just read this ints little article that presents a positive turn in the quest to lower murders in Chicago. Note that "positive turn" denotes the amount of murders being lowered.
Basically, much in the same way marketers and companies track your purchasing habits, this Chicago police chief is tracking gang activity and criminal habits. His data and science driven approach is saving lives by seeing gang members not as predators OR prey, but as both at the same time. Apparently this puts the focus not on arrests, but on saving lives, regardless.
Naturally, there are stop and frisk aspects involved in the decline. I don't know, I' fancy myself a bit Libertarian, and I feel like SaF isn't the worst thing in the world. Then again, I'm a pretty chilled out dude with not a whole lot to hide from the po and if a cop really thought I was worth a frisk, yeah, go ahead, but don't tickle my sack tho.
Assuming that the violence and murder rarely spills out of a certain area of the city, and it sounds like there are certain areas that house most of the crime, I think I'd be OK with that demographic shooting the shit out of each other.
I'm not sure what kind of resources should be applied to segments of the population that have no regard for human life, or any desire to not commit crimes.
Much like my views on abortion (they should be mandatory and much more common), I believe in implementing a Compelled Crime program, where I take unsavory groups of people, re-populate them in a biodome-like structure and feed them all the guns, drugs, and fast food they can handle.
Naturally, this would be filmed and broadcast. But here's the catch: because I am (kind of) against human suffering for monetary profit, I would put it on antenna broadcast, free of commercials, free of interruption. Tell me the idea of a bunch of uneducated, overweight, poor people fighting and killing each other wouldn't be awesome.
I have actually proposed a similar idea to various animal rights groups, but failed to gain traction.
Wait, kinda sounds like a more dystopian Hunger Games. Anybody see Catching Fire?
Point of Reference
3 years ago