Comments by "Luredreier" (@Luredreier) on "BBC News" channel.

  1. 11
  2. 6
  3. 5
  4. 5
  5. 4
  6. 4
  7. 4
  8. 3
  9. 3
  10.  @matthummel8306  Yet we have both lower recidivism rates and lower overall overall crime pr capita then most other countries out there. Our crime rate is lower then all but 11 countries in the world. There's hardly anywhere that's safer. I mean, sure, perhaps Iceland... If you don't mind living on top of a vulcanic hot spot... And they have pretty much the same approach anyway... And that's down from quite a high crime rate and recidivism in the eighties by the way... Back when we did have the old school justice system of countries like the US or UK... That said, our system isn't perfect. There has been cases of people being released from either jail or psychiatric hospital who have then commited murder. But at the same time, because we have our system that actually tries to help people the bar is also lower for seeking help, either for the person in question or for their next of kin. In the US for instance, if you suspect that a relative might be mentally ill, on drugs or have commited a crime and you care about them, then the treshold for actually reporting that to the authorities is pretty high as the consequences for the individual in question is pretty high. Here it's not nearly as severe to be reported to the authorities as they genuinely are trying to help. And our prison system and psychiatric hospitals are essentially extensions of our welfare system, that is already using many of the same techniques, except in a jail people don't have the freedom to actually comit a crime, so they might as well make use of the services made available. It's essentially a time out, a removal from society while people are getting ready to deal with society again. That said, there are individuals who end up sitting in jail or mental hospital for the rest of their lives... But by having laws that defaults to never giving up on people we avoid what we call "justismord" ("justice murder", I think it's something like "misscarriage of justice" in English). We have more people who actually contribute to society. We have more people consenting to getting help. We have more people reported in by next of kin etc. And we have less crimes overall. Less victims. And we're a better society because of it.
    3
  11. 3
  12. 3
  13. 3
  14. 3
  15. 3
  16. 3
  17. 3
  18. 2
  19. 2
  20. 2
  21. 2
  22. 2
  23. 2
  24. 2
  25. 2
  26.  @User-hx2jg  Okey. So let's say that Norway for whatever reason turned into a authoritarian state. Heck, for examples sake, lets say that all of Europe fell into chaos and authoritarianism. With the current demographics that's not a completely inconcievable idea. And lets say that Africa actually overcame its issues and became as democratic as we currently are. Lets say that say Nigeria (except a perfectly democratic version of Nigeria with no corruption) lead a African Union mission with some other nations into Norway to reinstate democracy here. I'm not going to lie. It would hurt losing friends, perhaps even family. It would be painful to experience all that hardship. And I most likely would have mixed feelings about those soldiers fighting here without knowing the local culture. But I still think it would fundamentally be the right thing to do if democracy actually had fallen here. I'd still expect anyone responsible for avoidable civilian deaths to be held accountable though. There needs to be proper rules of engagement. I'm not going to downplay what's going on in any of the nations you're mentioning. People are being hurt and scared for life. And the west is absolutely not doing enough to actually help people and ensure that people get a better life instead of harming them. And yes, there's people in the west making some truly unbelivably stupid choices. And who are quite frankly cowardly, choosing to use indirect forms of combat instead of endangering western lives despite the risk of that leading to increased civilian casualities. There's no excuse for that. And the way the west pulled out of Afganistan leaving the local population high and dry? It's inexcusable. We had and still have a responsibility there. And the US worrying about China and wanting to redeploy troops eastwards in Asia does not justify just packing up and leaving like they just did. As for the terrorist attacks in the west. Honestly while I think the choice of targets is fucked up we've kind of brought it on ourselves in some cases. And things like Al Qaidas attack on Pentagon, that was actually a justified target in my book. If they had dropped off the civilians on the plane in some way, say with parachutes then I don't really see that much that's ethically worse then US actions there as such. The US goverment had done things that caused a lot of harm for Afgan civilians in the past, helping the Pakistani intelligence organizations with training and equipping various factions in Afganistan in order to fight the USSR, without taking responsibility for the civil war in the aftermath. Intentionally targetting civilians, is unacceptable. Even if you're feeling hurt. No matter how much pain they may have caused that pain isn't lessened by intentionally trying to hurt them back that much. Besides it doesn't work. Germany and Britain tried to target civilians with their bombing raids on eachothers cities. And all it caused was renewed resolve in the war.
    2
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42.  @IrishLadASMR  The UK parliament is able to veto Scottish calls for independence. UK courts (and its unwritten constitution) applies in all the member nations... Ergo, it's a country no matter how much you dislike it... It might not stay a country, but right now it is. Look up the definitions for country etc and you'll see that there's no doubt about the UK being a country. Now Scotland, Wales etc being countries or not is a different matter and depends on the definitions for "country" in use. If you use a definition of "country" that requires a country to be a sovereign state then they're not. But to a large degree because of the UK there's also other definitions of "country" at play. Since Scotland and Wales have the ability to make separate laws, have many separate state apparatuses as well as having separate national identities and historically have been separate sovereign states even though they're not currently sovereign states and since they have a great deal of autonomy etc they may qualify as it a country as well under some definitions... But the UK as a whole definitely does as long as it has the final say when it comes to Scotland and Wales. As for northern Ireland... God, that's its own mess... But I believe no one is claiming that is a country yet since those that want it separate from the UK wants it to merge with the Republic of Ireland rather than be its own independent country and its population tends to identify as either Irish or British rather than differentiate between Irish and Northern Irish in terms of identity, although I'm sure that there's some exceptions...
    1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1