> Arguing for laws that are "tough on crime" is regressive and doesn't even solve the actual problem.
There are definitely tough on crime laws that would solve or mostly solve the problem. Unfortunately these will mostly be cases of the cure being worse than the disease (e.g. panopticon with facial recognition and use of face coverings leading to jail time).
I always wonder why we don’t use decoys more. Have seemingly tipsy girls stand waving their phone around for a cab and a cop a few feet hidden away. Then stiff penalty. It’ll make people think twice about whether their “mark” is legit.
> Unfortunately these will mostly be cases of the cure being worse than the disease (e.g. panopticon with facial recognition and use of face coverings leading to jail time).
Not necessarily. Even if we didn't catch any more criminals than we do now, you could probably reduce the problem a lot just by making sure the ones we do catch actually go to jail.
There are definitely tough on crime laws that would solve or mostly solve the problem. Unfortunately these will mostly be cases of the cure being worse than the disease (e.g. panopticon with facial recognition and use of face coverings leading to jail time).