Lethal Injection Under Fire Again

[Chaerophon]

Apples to pine forests. Those are all relatively tiny countries compared to the US. Even canada, given that most of canada's landmass is just... wilderness.

In terms of population, thinking of Germany, France, and the U.K. as "relatively tiny" is laughable (I won't comment on Japan since the cultural differences there are so pronounced, but... :whistling:). The U.S. may have a larger mass of people to administrate, but that is one purpose of its federalist structure and division of powers. On the other hand, all of these countries exceed the U.S. in terms of percentage of population in urban settings and population density... It's convenient to think of the U.S. situation as "outside comparisons"...of course, that might be perceived as an effort in stubborn insularity.

You'll find that that not everyone is a supporter of the world bank. Some of us criticize it, to the point that it is a bane on our existence. Certainly there's doubt towards the world bank's motives. I don't disbelieve the Bank finds itself a benefactor to the poor and poverty stricken, and that it is in the world bank's own self interest to support findings that its actions, supposedly to loan money to improve an economic situation, would supposedly alleviate crime.

Personally, I am not a fan of the World Bank, although it has started to clean up its act. However, most of those articles are not their own publications, but are from reputable academic sources.

Let's see.. browsing your titles, I see Paris... not comprable to US concerns. Latin and south americas, those areas have a lot more problems and lawlessness than just poverty leading to criminal behaviour. Russia... beyond my ability to judge.

If you consider only the articles that deal with developed western contexts, you'll find a common theme: under conditions of inequality, impoverishment in particular sectors of society leads to increased rates of violent crime.

You'll also find that there are millions of poor homeless people that aren't murdering each other. 

And we're back to this again. Trends are the key. Would you be more comfortable walking through the projects, or an upper middle class neighbourhood? Why? Is the reason that you are more likely to be the subject of a violent crime in the projects because the its residents are simply incapable of "moral fibre", or does it potentially have to do with systemic bias? Do you see the line that you walk in making such a claim???

Occhi's point of correlation is not causation is the real matter.

The data is there - you seem to have just admitted it. Now in making such distinctions, the key is to point out factors outside of my present consideration that would distort the correlative/causal relation. As I've said, this is not "definitively" a causal relation - I'm sure that there ARE intervening factors. However, the sheer size of the difference between U.S. and other contexts and the convergence of multiple sources of evidence in support of my hypothesis leads me to believe that, although you might make the classic "correlative, not causal" claim, you had better have some specific facts / intervening factors of your own to back it up. Simply saying "these countries are different" amounts to a cop out in my eyes. Comparison has to be relevant in such context; often, it is the basis for institutional reform.

Ultimately, your contention seems to be that this correlation is the result of "behavioural" factors. I find the conclusion that such a belief entails to be beyond repugnant - I refuse to believe that the poor (who are, it must once again be noted, disproportionately made up of disadvantaged racial minorities) are, as a group, inherently lacking in the capacity for "moral fibre".