Leaving a murder unpunished, treating a murderer like a naughty child would be a moral abomination. Incarcerating a murderer is certainly not a moral abomination. I am shocked by Vincent Lloyd's very naive and much too ideological approach to crime and prisons. I also disagree with his belief that people harm others because they were earlier harmed themselves - this is true in many cases, maybe even in most cases, but not in all cases. There are also many people who have experienced serious abuse, but who don't commit violent crimes against others.
The primary context of victimization of young children is the family household. Children who have been abused and/or neglected by parents or other caregivers have higher odds of ending up in prison than children who haven't been, and the risk goes up with the number of different kinds of abuse the children have experienced in their homes.
See research on Adverse Childhood Experiences, originally conducted by Kaiser-Permanente:
Children in large, lower income black neighborhoods also experience more violence from peers in their neighborhoods than do children in other circumstances. The ACE Scale used for measuring exposure to childhood trauma does not measure violence outside the family environment. What is remarkable about the ACE results is that mental health issues, physical health issues and illegal behavioral problems are so strongly associated just with familial abuse and neglect.
This means that if incarcerated people are viewed as victims, then there should be a major amount of focus on what they experienced within their families. There is in fact evidence that children growing up in black homes in low income black neighborhoods are exposed to more domestic violence than children growing up in other situations. Black children more likely than other children, relative to their percentage of the population, to be killed by an abusive adult living within their family home.
That is a different perspective from the one that attributes incarceration of black men primarily to "racism." Unfortunately, it is a perspective that has been resisted when child trauma specialists (such as Bessel van der Kolk) have tried to get funding from the government to study child abuse in black families.
I would add that familial abuse in childhood is of course not the only reason why men end up in prison as adults. There is some evidence (from the Minnesota Twin Study) that some personality traits found in people diagnosed as "antisocial personality disorder" (sociopathy) are heritable.
There is also the fact that many ethnic groups in the U.S. and elsewhere have developed crime cultures in ethnic neighborhoods. Ethnic neighborhoods that are on lower rungs of the socioeconomic ladder have been prone to this, with some notable exceptions (immigrants from some Asian countries). Young men in these neighborhoods who lack other job skills and opportunities seek a way to earn a living and a sense of pride where money and status are not easily available from legitimate employment. Creating a job selling illegal products and services could be seen as resourceful from this perspective.
All that being said, however, we do not know much about how to rehabilitate young men who have become established in a criminal career by the time they are eighteen. And we do have to prevent them from hurting and killing more people. So whether they got into jail by being victims or by being opportunists, what else are we going to do with them?
I really appreciate your deep and thoughtful comments. The problem of child abuse certainly deserves much more attention and funding. Let's remember, too, that there are many Black children who are brought up in foster families where they can face abuse, so it is not a "Black family problem".
The role of "crime cultures" and of harmful masculinity models in poor neighbourhoods should also be considered. I am glad that you have also mentioned the fact that poor men can see e.g. drug trade as an attractive "career" compared to the available legal job opportunities. In the same way poor women can be interested in various types of "sex work" despite its dangers.
As to the role of genetic factors, I think that one has to be very careful. Genetic explanations for all kinds of things are very popular because of their seductive simplicity. There is the risk of jumping much too quickly to the assumption that a man is breaking the law because he has inherited an "antisocial personality disorder". It can lead to excessive pessimism.
There are psychological and sociological reasons why poor men are much more likely to display "antisocial" behaviour than middle-class men. The poor may feel forced to break the law by their life circumstances. They also often see the law as a force serving the interests of the powers that be. Finally, they can feel that breaking the law can benefit them e.g. in the form of increased social status among their peers.
I personally tend to trust police officers and I am not afraid of them. My attitude is completely different from the visceral mistrust and often hatred boys and men from poor backgrounds - and especially poor Black boys and men - frequently feel towards the police. This difference in attitudes is largely (if not mainly) caused by a difference in experiences. The poor can also see the law itself as an alien and oppressive force.
First off, it’s ALL about OPENLY setting the rules and making the consequences known to everyone from birth! What comes as a result of abhorrent behavior must be ingrained into the American psyche from the very first stages of life.
That understood, then after a citizen commits these crimes and after being tried and legally convicted in a just court of law, we publicly, on broadcasted television, punish them physically via caning or lashing. After both the physical pain they endure coupled with the humiliation suffered knowing all their friends/family witnessed them being caught and punished we then shitcan, poleaxe and banish them to our very own Gulag of brutally hard labor commensurate with their crimes/repetition of their crimes.....
If they’ve raped, they have their testicles chopped off. Simple as.
Look at the utter lack of any relevant crime in Singapore! They Government doesn’t fuck around there and guess what? The known repercussions for breaking the law are so mortally frightening to even the most hardened of evil-doer that any dregs of society think twice before committing these atrocious acts. As has been righteously stated for thousands of years - “Violence, or threat thereof, solves 99.9% of the world’s problems” !
Until the USA stops being a bunch of gutless, spineless, SJW turds thus constantly turning the, statistically speaking, overwhelmingly black perpetrator into the victim, we’ll be mired in exponentially worsening crime! Glenn himself knows how damaging this inversion of reality is and the toll it’s verifiably taking on the average, honest, tax-paying, law abiding White citizen. It is radicalizing the very people who just so happen to be in the majority and possess by far and away, the most firearms, ammunition and hands-on knowledge/experience with said weapons.
It’s high time WE take our country back!
⬇️ Something to consider ⬇️
“The most terrifying force of death, comes from the hands of White Men who wanted to be left alone.
They try, so very hard, to mind their own business and provide for themselves and those they love. They resist every impulse to fight back, knowing the forced and permanent change of life that will come from it.
They know, that the moment they fight back, their lives as they have lived them, are over. The moment the White Men who wanted to be left alone are forced to fight back, it is a form of suicide. They are literally killing off who they used to be. Which is why, when forced to take up violence, these White Men who wanted to be left alone, fight with unholy vengeance against those who murdered their former lives.
They fight with raw hate, and a drive that cannot be fathomed by those who are merely play-acting at politics and terror. TRUE Terror will arrive at these people’s door, and they will cry, scream, and beg for mercy… but it will fall upon the deaf ears of the White Men who just wanted to be left alone.”
Agreed 100% ! This Prof Vincent chump is an absolute embarrassment to any self-respecting, upstanding black citizen! How DARE him just dismiss the plight of the victim out of hand! It’s insulting and dehumanizing to the person who actually deserves empathy and yet he grants clemency to these subhuman, mongrel ghetto birds “cause their dads beat them up”.
When it’s MY family or MY friend or ANYONE else innocently harmed, maimed or killed, I DON’T GIVE A RAT’S ASS ABOUT GOLD-TOOF, SAGGING PANTS, JAMAL FROM DA’ HOOD !!! That dirtbag needs to be locked AWAY from society or put to death if his crimes warrant it! Ever wonder why this abhorrent behavior doesn’t remotely happen in Singapore? Cause they don’t have these insipid, bleeding heart Shitlibs like Prof. Vincent making excuses for hood rat thugs. You get outta line even slightly in Singapore you get publicly caned! Yeah, Tyrone, try stealing from a grocery store or beating up a kid on a school bus and they’ll cane your ass immediately and lock you up in solitary! You won’t like it and will be deterred from your shitty thug behavior!
Frankly, I’m disgusted with both Glenn and John’s feckless lack of any real response to this immoral parasite they chose to have on their otherwise vaunted show! If they’re going to desecrate their hallowed and sacred show by inviting Vincent on in the first place they both should’ve at least had the stones to eviscerate Vincent’s shameful argument against incarceration! I swear, lately whenever any black pundit with an absurd, crazed ‘protected’ worldview comes on, Glenn and John give said charlatan WAY too much leeway. They should have politely listened to Vincent’s drivel and then proceeded to mercilessly obliterate his pathologically vile worldview! It pains me to say it but I’ve watched both Glenn and John’s balls drop off as of late. Wouldn’t want to upset the ‘woke’ Gods huh, fellas? I expect this cowardice from McWhorter but when Loury meekly shies away from facing the enemy head on, you know we’re in deep shit......Sad.
I have to say that the things you are saying about Vincent Lloyd ("immoral parasite") and Black men from poor neighbourhoods ("subhuman, mongrel ghetto birds", "gold-toof, sagging pants, Jamal from da'hood") are shockingly hateful. The things you say about Black men from poor neighbourhoods actually sound openly racist.
We seem to be living in an age of ad hominem attacks. Do they advance anyone's cause? Do they move the ball forward? It seems they polarize and make enemies. I'm not speaking of here in these comments but in our wider society. They seem to describe the speaker more than the targets. It's hard to consider the merits of a comment when it's salted with such words. Removing that distraction, the question remains: do we need prisons?
Prof. Lloyd seems high in two psychological traits, if I may say so. One is Agreeableness and the other is Openness. His agreeableness seems evident in his apparent willingness to go along with the prevailing flow of thought and assumptions in his particular academic environment. His echo chamber, if you will. To my ear, he seems to parrot a lot of the approved language of the group of whom he seeks approval and their feathers he hopes not to ruffle. Does this contribute to public safety? Does it contribute to a stable society where people can get on with life and create lives for their families? No. So does it suggest we don't need prisons? No.
Indeed, he seems to be endangering his students and our communities by perpetuating tropes which just aren't real. And the farther we are led down imaginary paths, the farther away we get from practical solutions.
The Openness thing seems evident in a willingness to abandon the present way of seeing and doing things. I get it. There has always been and will always be a (hopefully) healthy tension between traditions and the past vs. new ideas. It's the depiction of the ying and yang we often see. Unbridled Openness, however, especially when matters of community safety are concerned, and especially cooked up in environments where unreal orthodoxies are worshipped and dissent is effectively outlawed, can be very dangerous.
Once again, it seems Prof. Lloyd has very little experience in the sometimes violent communities he speaks much about. The ordinary person might well just shake their head and say, "You just don't know what you're talking about. You clearly have no real solutions and therefore have no business popping off or teaching rubbish to our young people." We need to move on.
As for Glenn and John's questions, some might greatly benefit from going back and listening again. What they did was give Prof. Lloyd all the rope he needed to make very plain what his views are, as impractical, perhaps horrifying and wrong headed as they are. It's actually a very effective cross examination technique. No one put words in his mouth. He said it all. It gives we, the jury, so to speak, a very clear picture of his case and makes our choice clear. I don't think any of us could have done better.
We still need prisons. For many offenders the present model is a lost opportunity. But to Glenn's question, the answer remains yes.
I agree with everything you are saying. As to prof. Lloyd, I would not say that he talks in this way merely because of his lack of experience with violent communities. I think that because of the popularity of the prison abolition ideology he fails to understand that "community solutions" to crimes such as murder have nothing in common with justice.
How would he feel if someone killed one of his family members and then merely had to listen to the rebukes of the community elders/leaders and do some community work? One does not need any experience with violent communities to understand that the feelings of the murderer are not much more important than the feelings of people s/he has harmed and that there are far worse things than being incarcerated.
I, too, really liked Glenn and John's questions. I think that it would have been a great idea to ask Vincent Lloyd why he centers the feelings and the vulnerability of the person who has committed a serious crime like murder. Even if a murderer is a victim of e.g. childhood sexual abuse, one can't assume that s/he was unable to control his/her actions.
The murderer (or the rapist, or the domestic abuser etc.) should not be centered at the expense of the victim. The incarceration of a violent criminal should never be seen as a tragedy, especially if the crime has been ruthless. The incarceration of people who kill or seriously hurt others should not be portrayed as "putting someone in a cage". And prisoners can actually learn and change their lives, they are not merely kept in cages.
And I agree with your points. I do believe Prof. Lloyd is out of touch but agree his ideologies are the stronger drivers. They do seem to come from a place of unreality, which is why it seemed to me he lacked certain life experience.
Yes, he most probably lacks certain experiences, but one does not need these experiences to realize that killing someone is a very serious crime and telling a killer "return to your community, do some community work and try to become a better person" is not only extremely utopian, but also shockingly unjust to the victim and the victim's loved ones.
And of course the belief in the healing power of the community is dangerous in itself. Even if a community happens to be close-knit, it can be very lenient towards popular people and harsh or even cruel towards people with a low status. People - especially family members and friends - can be very influenced by their emotions and can perceive even dangerous individuals in a distorted way. It is often very difficult to accept that one's grandson, cousin or neigbour may be a deeply damaged and ruthless person.
And what about crimes such as rape or sexual abuse? How many victims would be ready to inform their own community about what happened to them? And how many people would try to defend the perpetrator or even claim that the victim must be lying?
The precise description I provided was EXACTLY the kind of dirtbag Vincent was wantonly excusing for the most heinous of crimes! I take nothing back and make absolutely zero apologies! Those heathen thugs I meticulously described ARE the ones committing those crimes. It’s NOT black Harvard students perpetrating those crimes. It’s rancid, soulless, pathologically cursed cretins destroying innocent family’s lives. If you take offense to my accurate description then it only proves I’m directly above the intended target and spot-on in my assessment! Perhaps YOU should stop living in fantasy land about the dregs of society carrying out this unwarranted evil. We call balls and strikes here as ‘facts DO NOT care about your feelings!” If that’s a source of tension or embarrassment for you - I don’t give a shit! Every single one of those vile turds destroying innocent lives should face unspeakable repercussions for their actions!
Leaving a murder unpunished, treating a murderer like a naughty child would be a moral abomination. Incarcerating a murderer is certainly not a moral abomination. I am shocked by Vincent Lloyd's very naive and much too ideological approach to crime and prisons. I also disagree with his belief that people harm others because they were earlier harmed themselves - this is true in many cases, maybe even in most cases, but not in all cases. There are also many people who have experienced serious abuse, but who don't commit violent crimes against others.
The primary context of victimization of young children is the family household. Children who have been abused and/or neglected by parents or other caregivers have higher odds of ending up in prison than children who haven't been, and the risk goes up with the number of different kinds of abuse the children have experienced in their homes.
See research on Adverse Childhood Experiences, originally conducted by Kaiser-Permanente:
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/aces/about.html
Children in large, lower income black neighborhoods also experience more violence from peers in their neighborhoods than do children in other circumstances. The ACE Scale used for measuring exposure to childhood trauma does not measure violence outside the family environment. What is remarkable about the ACE results is that mental health issues, physical health issues and illegal behavioral problems are so strongly associated just with familial abuse and neglect.
This means that if incarcerated people are viewed as victims, then there should be a major amount of focus on what they experienced within their families. There is in fact evidence that children growing up in black homes in low income black neighborhoods are exposed to more domestic violence than children growing up in other situations. Black children more likely than other children, relative to their percentage of the population, to be killed by an abusive adult living within their family home.
That is a different perspective from the one that attributes incarceration of black men primarily to "racism." Unfortunately, it is a perspective that has been resisted when child trauma specialists (such as Bessel van der Kolk) have tried to get funding from the government to study child abuse in black families.
I would add that familial abuse in childhood is of course not the only reason why men end up in prison as adults. There is some evidence (from the Minnesota Twin Study) that some personality traits found in people diagnosed as "antisocial personality disorder" (sociopathy) are heritable.
There is also the fact that many ethnic groups in the U.S. and elsewhere have developed crime cultures in ethnic neighborhoods. Ethnic neighborhoods that are on lower rungs of the socioeconomic ladder have been prone to this, with some notable exceptions (immigrants from some Asian countries). Young men in these neighborhoods who lack other job skills and opportunities seek a way to earn a living and a sense of pride where money and status are not easily available from legitimate employment. Creating a job selling illegal products and services could be seen as resourceful from this perspective.
All that being said, however, we do not know much about how to rehabilitate young men who have become established in a criminal career by the time they are eighteen. And we do have to prevent them from hurting and killing more people. So whether they got into jail by being victims or by being opportunists, what else are we going to do with them?
I really appreciate your deep and thoughtful comments. The problem of child abuse certainly deserves much more attention and funding. Let's remember, too, that there are many Black children who are brought up in foster families where they can face abuse, so it is not a "Black family problem".
The role of "crime cultures" and of harmful masculinity models in poor neighbourhoods should also be considered. I am glad that you have also mentioned the fact that poor men can see e.g. drug trade as an attractive "career" compared to the available legal job opportunities. In the same way poor women can be interested in various types of "sex work" despite its dangers.
As to the role of genetic factors, I think that one has to be very careful. Genetic explanations for all kinds of things are very popular because of their seductive simplicity. There is the risk of jumping much too quickly to the assumption that a man is breaking the law because he has inherited an "antisocial personality disorder". It can lead to excessive pessimism.
There are psychological and sociological reasons why poor men are much more likely to display "antisocial" behaviour than middle-class men. The poor may feel forced to break the law by their life circumstances. They also often see the law as a force serving the interests of the powers that be. Finally, they can feel that breaking the law can benefit them e.g. in the form of increased social status among their peers.
I personally tend to trust police officers and I am not afraid of them. My attitude is completely different from the visceral mistrust and often hatred boys and men from poor backgrounds - and especially poor Black boys and men - frequently feel towards the police. This difference in attitudes is largely (if not mainly) caused by a difference in experiences. The poor can also see the law itself as an alien and oppressive force.
First off, it’s ALL about OPENLY setting the rules and making the consequences known to everyone from birth! What comes as a result of abhorrent behavior must be ingrained into the American psyche from the very first stages of life.
That understood, then after a citizen commits these crimes and after being tried and legally convicted in a just court of law, we publicly, on broadcasted television, punish them physically via caning or lashing. After both the physical pain they endure coupled with the humiliation suffered knowing all their friends/family witnessed them being caught and punished we then shitcan, poleaxe and banish them to our very own Gulag of brutally hard labor commensurate with their crimes/repetition of their crimes.....
If they’ve raped, they have their testicles chopped off. Simple as.
Look at the utter lack of any relevant crime in Singapore! They Government doesn’t fuck around there and guess what? The known repercussions for breaking the law are so mortally frightening to even the most hardened of evil-doer that any dregs of society think twice before committing these atrocious acts. As has been righteously stated for thousands of years - “Violence, or threat thereof, solves 99.9% of the world’s problems” !
Until the USA stops being a bunch of gutless, spineless, SJW turds thus constantly turning the, statistically speaking, overwhelmingly black perpetrator into the victim, we’ll be mired in exponentially worsening crime! Glenn himself knows how damaging this inversion of reality is and the toll it’s verifiably taking on the average, honest, tax-paying, law abiding White citizen. It is radicalizing the very people who just so happen to be in the majority and possess by far and away, the most firearms, ammunition and hands-on knowledge/experience with said weapons.
It’s high time WE take our country back!
⬇️ Something to consider ⬇️
“The most terrifying force of death, comes from the hands of White Men who wanted to be left alone.
They try, so very hard, to mind their own business and provide for themselves and those they love. They resist every impulse to fight back, knowing the forced and permanent change of life that will come from it.
They know, that the moment they fight back, their lives as they have lived them, are over. The moment the White Men who wanted to be left alone are forced to fight back, it is a form of suicide. They are literally killing off who they used to be. Which is why, when forced to take up violence, these White Men who wanted to be left alone, fight with unholy vengeance against those who murdered their former lives.
They fight with raw hate, and a drive that cannot be fathomed by those who are merely play-acting at politics and terror. TRUE Terror will arrive at these people’s door, and they will cry, scream, and beg for mercy… but it will fall upon the deaf ears of the White Men who just wanted to be left alone.”
Agreed 100% ! This Prof Vincent chump is an absolute embarrassment to any self-respecting, upstanding black citizen! How DARE him just dismiss the plight of the victim out of hand! It’s insulting and dehumanizing to the person who actually deserves empathy and yet he grants clemency to these subhuman, mongrel ghetto birds “cause their dads beat them up”.
When it’s MY family or MY friend or ANYONE else innocently harmed, maimed or killed, I DON’T GIVE A RAT’S ASS ABOUT GOLD-TOOF, SAGGING PANTS, JAMAL FROM DA’ HOOD !!! That dirtbag needs to be locked AWAY from society or put to death if his crimes warrant it! Ever wonder why this abhorrent behavior doesn’t remotely happen in Singapore? Cause they don’t have these insipid, bleeding heart Shitlibs like Prof. Vincent making excuses for hood rat thugs. You get outta line even slightly in Singapore you get publicly caned! Yeah, Tyrone, try stealing from a grocery store or beating up a kid on a school bus and they’ll cane your ass immediately and lock you up in solitary! You won’t like it and will be deterred from your shitty thug behavior!
Frankly, I’m disgusted with both Glenn and John’s feckless lack of any real response to this immoral parasite they chose to have on their otherwise vaunted show! If they’re going to desecrate their hallowed and sacred show by inviting Vincent on in the first place they both should’ve at least had the stones to eviscerate Vincent’s shameful argument against incarceration! I swear, lately whenever any black pundit with an absurd, crazed ‘protected’ worldview comes on, Glenn and John give said charlatan WAY too much leeway. They should have politely listened to Vincent’s drivel and then proceeded to mercilessly obliterate his pathologically vile worldview! It pains me to say it but I’ve watched both Glenn and John’s balls drop off as of late. Wouldn’t want to upset the ‘woke’ Gods huh, fellas? I expect this cowardice from McWhorter but when Loury meekly shies away from facing the enemy head on, you know we’re in deep shit......Sad.
I have to say that the things you are saying about Vincent Lloyd ("immoral parasite") and Black men from poor neighbourhoods ("subhuman, mongrel ghetto birds", "gold-toof, sagging pants, Jamal from da'hood") are shockingly hateful. The things you say about Black men from poor neighbourhoods actually sound openly racist.
We seem to be living in an age of ad hominem attacks. Do they advance anyone's cause? Do they move the ball forward? It seems they polarize and make enemies. I'm not speaking of here in these comments but in our wider society. They seem to describe the speaker more than the targets. It's hard to consider the merits of a comment when it's salted with such words. Removing that distraction, the question remains: do we need prisons?
Prof. Lloyd seems high in two psychological traits, if I may say so. One is Agreeableness and the other is Openness. His agreeableness seems evident in his apparent willingness to go along with the prevailing flow of thought and assumptions in his particular academic environment. His echo chamber, if you will. To my ear, he seems to parrot a lot of the approved language of the group of whom he seeks approval and their feathers he hopes not to ruffle. Does this contribute to public safety? Does it contribute to a stable society where people can get on with life and create lives for their families? No. So does it suggest we don't need prisons? No.
Indeed, he seems to be endangering his students and our communities by perpetuating tropes which just aren't real. And the farther we are led down imaginary paths, the farther away we get from practical solutions.
The Openness thing seems evident in a willingness to abandon the present way of seeing and doing things. I get it. There has always been and will always be a (hopefully) healthy tension between traditions and the past vs. new ideas. It's the depiction of the ying and yang we often see. Unbridled Openness, however, especially when matters of community safety are concerned, and especially cooked up in environments where unreal orthodoxies are worshipped and dissent is effectively outlawed, can be very dangerous.
Once again, it seems Prof. Lloyd has very little experience in the sometimes violent communities he speaks much about. The ordinary person might well just shake their head and say, "You just don't know what you're talking about. You clearly have no real solutions and therefore have no business popping off or teaching rubbish to our young people." We need to move on.
As for Glenn and John's questions, some might greatly benefit from going back and listening again. What they did was give Prof. Lloyd all the rope he needed to make very plain what his views are, as impractical, perhaps horrifying and wrong headed as they are. It's actually a very effective cross examination technique. No one put words in his mouth. He said it all. It gives we, the jury, so to speak, a very clear picture of his case and makes our choice clear. I don't think any of us could have done better.
We still need prisons. For many offenders the present model is a lost opportunity. But to Glenn's question, the answer remains yes.
I agree with everything you are saying. As to prof. Lloyd, I would not say that he talks in this way merely because of his lack of experience with violent communities. I think that because of the popularity of the prison abolition ideology he fails to understand that "community solutions" to crimes such as murder have nothing in common with justice.
How would he feel if someone killed one of his family members and then merely had to listen to the rebukes of the community elders/leaders and do some community work? One does not need any experience with violent communities to understand that the feelings of the murderer are not much more important than the feelings of people s/he has harmed and that there are far worse things than being incarcerated.
I, too, really liked Glenn and John's questions. I think that it would have been a great idea to ask Vincent Lloyd why he centers the feelings and the vulnerability of the person who has committed a serious crime like murder. Even if a murderer is a victim of e.g. childhood sexual abuse, one can't assume that s/he was unable to control his/her actions.
The murderer (or the rapist, or the domestic abuser etc.) should not be centered at the expense of the victim. The incarceration of a violent criminal should never be seen as a tragedy, especially if the crime has been ruthless. The incarceration of people who kill or seriously hurt others should not be portrayed as "putting someone in a cage". And prisoners can actually learn and change their lives, they are not merely kept in cages.
And I agree with your points. I do believe Prof. Lloyd is out of touch but agree his ideologies are the stronger drivers. They do seem to come from a place of unreality, which is why it seemed to me he lacked certain life experience.
Yes, he most probably lacks certain experiences, but one does not need these experiences to realize that killing someone is a very serious crime and telling a killer "return to your community, do some community work and try to become a better person" is not only extremely utopian, but also shockingly unjust to the victim and the victim's loved ones.
And of course the belief in the healing power of the community is dangerous in itself. Even if a community happens to be close-knit, it can be very lenient towards popular people and harsh or even cruel towards people with a low status. People - especially family members and friends - can be very influenced by their emotions and can perceive even dangerous individuals in a distorted way. It is often very difficult to accept that one's grandson, cousin or neigbour may be a deeply damaged and ruthless person.
And what about crimes such as rape or sexual abuse? How many victims would be ready to inform their own community about what happened to them? And how many people would try to defend the perpetrator or even claim that the victim must be lying?
The tide is turning Joanna.....people are done with these scumbags.....watch till the end- sound ⬆️ UP!
https://gab.com/WesternChauvinist1/posts/109914374559521983
The (slow, but steady) education of Scott Adams is one of my favorite processes to witness.
The precise description I provided was EXACTLY the kind of dirtbag Vincent was wantonly excusing for the most heinous of crimes! I take nothing back and make absolutely zero apologies! Those heathen thugs I meticulously described ARE the ones committing those crimes. It’s NOT black Harvard students perpetrating those crimes. It’s rancid, soulless, pathologically cursed cretins destroying innocent family’s lives. If you take offense to my accurate description then it only proves I’m directly above the intended target and spot-on in my assessment! Perhaps YOU should stop living in fantasy land about the dregs of society carrying out this unwarranted evil. We call balls and strikes here as ‘facts DO NOT care about your feelings!” If that’s a source of tension or embarrassment for you - I don’t give a shit! Every single one of those vile turds destroying innocent lives should face unspeakable repercussions for their actions!
We’re done here...