The Glade 4.0

It is not the government's job to prevent crime, either. Only to punish it.

That's true. Do you feel the government should not try to deter, prevent, or retaliate against attacks from other nations? You do realize that, unlike in law enforcement, a government can prevent an attack by striking first?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I think attacks can be prevented, but I don't think that the Patriot Act and things like the NSA spying should be allowed in the pursuit of that goal.

I think you are confused to how things work, Diamondeye. We, whoever 'we' happens to be, do not do these to 'our' people. It is perfectly to do such things to people who are not 'us' by fact they reside, live, work, and die beyond our borders.

_________________

Obviously multiple have responded to various posts since you asked this, so I'm a little lat e to the respond party.

But the answer is both. First, you cannot prevent crime, short of eliminating all laws so there is nothing to violate (concept of inherent laws put aside for the moment). You can however deter crime, via a host of actions. Most of it revolves simple actions that "keep honest people honest", such as locking your door, putting up alarm signs, etc. In terms of the police, it generally involves visibility. The police officer on the side of the road doesn't prevent speeding, but it has been shown to cause more people to drive closer to the speed limit by reminding them of the consequences for speeding. Of course there are correlations between the number of visible officers in an area and crime rates, but that should not be confused with prevention. it is more akin to relocation, as the determined criminal will just find a more vulnerable target.

So for the second part of your question, the answer is also yes. The deterrence of crime is a positive side effect of the police being around, but their duty is to respond when a crime has been committed. That is unless you believe in a position of guilt by default.

I previously stated that I was not defending either of those things specifically as proper means. Regardless, they are not pertinent to he question of crime prevention specifically because they are aimed at external forces, regardless of their propriety. They may be bad policy, but for a different reason.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Im not confused about anything.

You're not saying anything relevant to what Im saying.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."