"And cops also have guns, tear gas, the right to pull people over, arrest them, etc. etc. If they cannot be trusted with a licence plate database, then they can't really be trusted with those either."

now you're getting it.

"cops are the only reason we don't all have delicious cartel boots (or their bullets) in our mouths already"

citation needed.

And since you're looking for some solutions to these problems, here are a few: end qualified immunity, make peace officers obtain licensure and insurance so when the shitheads fuck up they are personally liable for their corruption, dissole internal affairs and move the investigations to a third party. In terms of reducing crime: tax the ever loving fuck out of anyone worth more than a million, dump those taxes into public services like education and healthcare so people aren't forced into deviance (further reading: https://www.simplypsychology.org/mertons-strain-theory-devia...)

> tax the ever loving fuck out of anyone worth more than a million, dump those taxes into public services like education and healthcare

Have you met California? That's literally the exact thing we do here. Yet our crime is terrible. And if you think throwing money at schools will translate automatically into better outcomes, it really isn't that simple. Schools with 50% more money hire more administrators and consultants and build way nicer facilities, but they don't just automatically turn out kids who are 50% more moral.

Healthcare is a similar joke. We spend more on healthcare than any nation! Yet we're not the most healthy. Why should we run up the score even more on how much tax money we spend on that when we've already proven it to be inefficient?

> people aren't forced into deviance

With respect, I do not believe that anyone is forced into deviance. People will always come from a diversity of levels of privilege (unless we convert to an economy like North Korea where the leader and their friends live well and everyone else is in poverty). Those who start out with the least will always have a choice to try to get ahead through crime or by honest means, just like everyone else does.

Wouldn't you say the rich aren't any more likely to actually follow the law as the poor? Why do they have agency, but poor criminals were predestined for crime?

[Edited to add the following: I believe that denying people's agency and treating them as helpless victims drawn irresistibly to crime, does a disservice to the disadvantaged. It tells those who are tempted, or those who have made mistakes, that they may as well do crime, since society expects them to anyway and says they are 'forced to.' And it erases/ignores those from poor backgrounds who did make something of themselves.]

> licensure and insurance

This doesn't seem like a serious idea to me. Licensure is no magic wand. The effect of malpractice insurance in medicine has arguably brought most of society very little benefit (other than attorneys).

A nationwide standard on censuring officers proportionally (up to and including suspension or ban from serving as a peace officer anywhere) for offenses of misuse of power makes sense and could be good policy. Most of the rest of this just sounds like unserious wishing that will never go anywhere.

This comment gives pretty wild middle manager/micromanager vibes and it is more offensive than whatever it is you think you're policing.

you shouldn't take it into consideration, they aren't a mod and clearly have nothing better to do with their time. the pedantry on this site sometimes...

"It's reportedly associated with hip hop culture"

Yeah about 35 years ago.

a whooooole lotta professionals on their feet, like nurses, dental hygenists, teachers, etc, are wearing Hokas.

show us on the doll where the evil democrats touched you. are they here in the room with us now?

skill issue.

Charlie Kirk, the trans activist? never heard of her.

'I could play for two hours and still feel like I accomplished nothing except for "interacting with the world"'

Funny how this is exactly the same sentiment I feel about NMS. Go figure, different strokes, ya know?

I think maybe you're discounting that people have agency and can decide that a game they are playing actively doesn't tick their boxes. I reinstalled it last week and put in about two hours before uninstalling again. Mile wide and inch deep is exactly the way to describe it.

> I think maybe you're discounting that people have agency and can decide that a game they are playing actively doesn't tick their boxes.

> Mile wide and inch deep is exactly the way to describe it.

Aren't you doing the same thing you're saying? Plenty of comments in this thread disagree with your assessment. If the game isn't for you, that's one thing, but it's a factually untrue thing to say "there's nothing to do, game is sparse after a few hours and novelty wears off" like many comments say. This suggests the person did not actually see a lot of the game, which is fine, but it's still not a trustworthy evaluation to me.

> If the game isn't for you, that's one thing, but it's a factually untrue thing to say "there's nothing to do, game is sparse after a few hours and novelty wears off" like many comments say.

Every time I come back to the game and try a new update, the game is indeed sparse after a few hours, and the novelty wears off...

"There's nothing to do" is a straw man. There are about 6 things to do over and over and over and over.