Worldbuilding Realism Consultation Thread Mk. 4

[Kouralia]

Drug dealers giving out 'free drugs to hook you' is the stuff of propaganda aimed at children.

I get lots of drugs off of drug dealers and I've never paid them a penny.

I lie, I have a shit record with stop searches and do not work in a unit that investigates organised crime

[The Antarctic Sphere]

I hope this place ain't dead yet. Could use some help if anyone is open to suggestions. Right now, my curiosity is lingering in geology, specifically seismology.

EDIT: OK, so maybe that was a half-truth: I'm also correctly attracted to volcanology as well.

[Nazbol England]

Why is Locard's exchange principle not used by the police forces of the southern US to investigate illegal abortions? Would it be ineffective or is that most police officers in all US states (including those with restrictive laws) consider the law unjust?

[Nazbol England]

Does a “right to bear arms” deter home invasions when comparing across two nations with equal per capita welfare spending?

What is a better deterrent to sexual war crimes in the military?:
1. Life in the general population of civilian prisons.
2. Life in a sex offender-only section of a civilian prison.
3. Life in the general population of military prisons.
4. Hanging in private or
5.hanging in public.

[Ky-telstein]

I hope this place ain't dead yet. Could use some help if anyone is open to suggestions. Right now, my curiosity is lingering in geology, specifically seismology.

EDIT: OK, so maybe that was a half-truth: I'm also correctly attracted to volcanology as well.

I mean, people may or may not be able to advise - but you need to actually pose questions or topics for debate.

[Ky-telstein]

Why is Locard's exchange principle not used by the police forces of the southern US to investigate illegal abortions? Would it be ineffective or is that most police officers in all US states (including those with restrictive laws) consider the law unjust?

What does this question even mean? On what grounds do you propose that 'locard's exchange principle' is not used under these circumstances?

Locard's exchange principle is a pithy little way of describing the general idea that an interaction between X and Y will leave some evidence of that interaction on X, and Y. Whether that be paint-transfer at a road traffic collision, unique tool marks left in the doorframe of a burgled cottage, or clothing fibres left on the driver's seat of a getaway vehicle. It underpins almost all conventional forensic processes - and, to be fair, even if it's a bit of a rhetorical stretch, a large number of forensic accounting and digital forensic processes.

[Nazbol England]

Why is Locard's exchange principle not used by the police forces of the southern US to investigate illegal abortions? Would it be ineffective or is that most police officers in all US states (including those with restrictive laws) consider the law unjust?

What does this question even mean? On what grounds do you propose that 'locard's exchange principle' is not used under these circumstances?

Locard's exchange principle is a pithy little way of describing the general idea that an interaction between X and Y will leave some evidence of that interaction on X, and Y. Whether that be paint-transfer at a road traffic collision, unique tool marks left in the doorframe of a burgled cottage, or clothing fibres left on the driver's seat of a getaway vehicle. It underpins almost all conventional forensic processes - and, to be fair, even if it's a bit of a rhetorical stretch, a large number of forensic accounting and digital forensic processes.

Someone told me that US abortion laws are unenforceable/“won’t work”.
I’m wondering why abortion-providers couldn’t be convicted by being found with microscopic traces of the relevant drugs (induced abortions) or cells from the foetuses themselves (surgical abortions), is it because it’s not particularly prioritised in the states where it is illegal?

[Nazbol England]

Does a “right to bear arms” deter home invasions when comparing across two nations with equal per capita welfare spending?

What is a better deterrent to sexual war crimes in the military?:
1. Life in the general population of civilian prisons.
2. Life in a sex offender-only section of a civilian prison.
3. Life in the general population of military prisons.
4. Hanging in private or
5.hanging in public.

The impact of the legal right to keep arms in one's home on the level of home invasions is a complex and debated topic. While there is no direct and universally accepted answer, several factors come into play.

1. Cultural and Societal Differences: Home invasion rates can be influenced by cultural attitudes towards violence, crime, and the use of firearms. Different societies may have varying norms and values that impact criminal behavior.

2. Access to Firearms: The legal right to keep arms in one's home means that there is greater accessibility to firearms. This can potentially deter criminals, knowing that homeowners have the means to defend themselves.

3. Gun Control Laws: Even if the legal right to own firearms exists, the level of home invasions can also be influenced by the stringency of gun control laws, which regulate who can possess firearms and under what circumstances.

4. Socioeconomic Factors: The level of poverty, inequality, and economic opportunities in a country can also contribute to crime rates, including home invasions.

5. Law Enforcement and Justice System: The effectiveness of law enforcement in preventing and responding to crimes, as well as the efficiency of the justice system in prosecuting criminals, plays a crucial role in deterring potential offenders.

6. Other Crime Prevention Measures: The presence of other crime prevention measures, such as community policing, neighborhood watch programs, and security systems, can also influence the rate of home invasions.

Therefore, while the legal right to keep arms in one's home may have some influence on home invasion rates, it is just one among several factors that collectively shape the crime landscape in a country. It's essential to consider the broader societal, cultural, and economic context when analyzing crime rates and their relation to firearm ownership.

[Kouralia]

What does this question even mean? On what grounds do you propose that 'locard's exchange principle' is not used under these circumstances?

Locard's exchange principle is a pithy little way of describing the general idea that an interaction between X and Y will leave some evidence of that interaction on X, and Y. Whether that be paint-transfer at a road traffic collision, unique tool marks left in the doorframe of a burgled cottage, or clothing fibres left on the driver's seat of a getaway vehicle. It underpins almost all conventional forensic processes - and, to be fair, even if it's a bit of a rhetorical stretch, a large number of forensic accounting and digital forensic processes.

Someone told me that US abortion laws are unenforceable/“won’t work”.
I’m wondering why abortion-providers couldn’t be convicted by being found with microscopic traces of the relevant drugs (induced abortions) or cells from the foetuses themselves (surgical abortions), is it because it’s not particularly prioritised in the states where it is illegal?

Firstly, I imagine most legitimate abortion providers... JUst sort of stop. Any abortion providers within such a shit place are going to be operating covertly, as they know their activities are criminal. I have no idea if there are 'proper' illegal abortion providers who give a service akin to what one would expect from a legitimate medical provider, versus the stereotypical back-alley surgery with a non-zero chance of 'guess I'll just die, lol.'

Secondly I imagine this has procedural issues such as 'how do you carry out the necessary searches to gather that evidence.' You would need to locate an alleged abortion-provider within a shit state, gather sufficient evidence they were providing abortions, and then convince a judicial authority to grant a warrant to search the premises. Then you actually need to locate sufficient evidence to bring about a prosecution. If the drugs in question are there, do they have alternate uses? Do the presence of the drugs actually prove the illegal act? Can you actually find evidence of pregnancy remains there? Forensic examination and testing is incredibly expensive, so to what extent of forensic exam/search is the budget-holder going to deem to be a proportionate expenditure of public funds per warrant executed?

Mostly I suspect they are unenforceable because the US has free movement of people between 'places with no abortions allowed' and 'places with abortions allowed'. I understand that the US also has weird mismatches, like Federal military personel having a right to access abortions, even if they are stationed within shit states. I suspect most people circumventing the ban are doing that, rather than attending top secret 'Street Countdown' abortion clinics.

These are all issues at play. The idea that Police just casually pretend to not know about the basic principles of forensics under certain circumstances is unlikely to have merit. I also think that 'is that most police officers in all US states (including those with restrictive laws) consider the law unjust?' is probably a misrepresentation - I think it's less that they consider it unjust, and more that it is not exactly a policing priority.

[Nazbol England]

Someone told me that US abortion laws are unenforceable/“won’t work”.
I’m wondering why abortion-providers couldn’t be convicted by being found with microscopic traces of the relevant drugs (induced abortions) or cells from the foetuses themselves (surgical abortions), is it because it’s not particularly prioritised in the states where it is illegal?

Firstly, I imagine most legitimate abortion providers... JUst sort of stop. Any abortion providers within such a shit place are going to be operating covertly, as they know their activities are criminal. I have no idea if there are 'proper' illegal abortion providers who give a service akin to what one would expect from a legitimate medical provider, versus the stereotypical back-alley surgery with a non-zero chance of 'guess I'll just die, lol.'

Secondly I imagine this has procedural issues such as 'how do you carry out the necessary searches to gather that evidence.' You would need to locate an alleged abortion-provider within a shit state, gather sufficient evidence they were providing abortions, and then convince a judicial authority to grant a warrant to search the premises. Then you actually need to locate sufficient evidence to bring about a prosecution. If the drugs in question are there, do they have alternate uses? Do the presence of the drugs actually prove the illegal act? Can you actually find evidence of pregnancy remains there? Forensic examination and testing is incredibly expensive, so to what extent of forensic exam/search is the budget-holder going to deem to be a proportionate expenditure of public funds per warrant executed?

Mostly I suspect they are unenforceable because the US has free movement of people between 'places with no abortions allowed' and 'places with abortions allowed'. I understand that the US also has weird mismatches, like Federal military personel having a right to access abortions, even if they are stationed within shit states. I suspect most people circumventing the ban are doing that, rather than attending top secret 'Street Countdown' abortion clinics.

These are all issues at play. The idea that Police just casually pretend to not know about the basic principles of forensics under certain circumstances is unlikely to have merit. I also think that 'is that most police officers in all US states (including those with restrictive laws) consider the law unjust?' is probably a misrepresentation - I think it's less that they consider it unjust, and more that it is not exactly a policing priority.

Thank you.

[Allanea]

I don’t know what is meant by the idea that abortion laws are unenforceable.

The process that people think about when they talk about ‘abortion’ is a medical procedure. I’m not being coy here: to carry out an abortion in a way that is safe for the woman, you need to have a medical facility where you observe all manner of safety rules and have qualified medical personnel and so forth. If you ban these facilities from operating, then most of them will not operate. Some will probably operate illegally but it’s much more complicated to have an illegal medical facility than it is, say, to buy and sell drugs.

Now, there are ways to induce an abortion without getting a doctor involved, but those either involve buying a medication that is fairly involved in its production (i.e. you can’t cook it up like meth) or they are really hazardous to the person who’s doing it. (After all, people did have abortions in Ancient Rome – there are two Ovid poems about his mistress getting sick as a result of an abortion)

So I imagine that if you banned abortion there’d be less abortions. On the other hand the abortions that you would still have would be more hazardous to the people attempting them. (But perhaps a sufficiently ruthless anti-abortion lawmaker would view this as a positive).

[The Corparation]

Mostly I suspect they are unenforceable because the US has free movement of people between 'places with no abortions allowed' and 'places with abortions allowed'. I understand that the US also has weird mismatches, like Federal military personel having a right to access abortions, even if they are stationed within shit states. I suspect most people circumventing the ban are doing that, rather than attending top secret 'Street Countdown' abortion clinics.

This is the main one. US states can generally only prosecute crimes that occur within the boundaries of their states and generally cannot prevent residents from traveling to other states. Say State A bans abortion and State B does not, If a person in State A wants an abortion, State A cannot legally prohibit that person from traveling to State B to obtain one nor can State A prosecute the patients / providers for actions that occurred in State B. Some states have passed bans ob aiding someone in traveling to obtain an abortion, but I am skeptical that such laws will hold up in court for long.

[Azadistan-Saranidia]

Has a joyrider ever caused a lethal traffic collision whilst being driving away from the police? If so considering this, and that e-bike fatalities sometimes happen, why is there objection in some to the police pursuing these offenders by cars?

[Juansonia]

Has a joyrider ever caused a lethal traffic collision whilst being driving away from the police? If so considering this, and that e-bike fatalities sometimes happen, why is there objection in some to the police pursuing these offenders by cars?

High-speed police chases - especially for warrants and ticket evasion - usually cause more danger than they could ever prevent, due to both the escapee and the police trying to drive as fast as possible in a chaotic environment. Because of this, most countries have abandoned high-speed chases where the driver getting away isn't a threat to public safety.

E-bikes aren't anywhere near as fast or dangerous(to pedestrians) as police cars are, and police cars can't reasonably fit in narrower bike paths.

[Azadistani Sweden]

High-speed police chases - especially for warrants and ticket evasion - usually cause more danger than they could ever prevent, due to both the escapee and the police trying to drive as fast as possible in a chaotic environment. Because of this, most countries have abandoned high-speed chases where the driver getting away isn't a threat to public safety.

E-bikes aren't anywhere near as fast or dangerous(to pedestrians) as police cars are, and police cars can't reasonably fit in narrower bike paths.

You’ve failed to factor in that if ever joyrider who survived was apprehended the same day,
that might be a deterrent, especially if given 3 years at hard labour (as a young man death was relatively low on my list of fears).

---

How to ensure there are no (0) dayooths in one’s nation?

[Allanea]

High-speed police chases - especially for warrants and ticket evasion - usually cause more danger than they could ever prevent, due to both the escapee and the police trying to drive as fast as possible in a chaotic environment. Because of this, most countries have abandoned high-speed chases where the driver getting away isn't a threat to public safety.

E-bikes aren't anywhere near as fast or dangerous(to pedestrians) as police cars are, and police cars can't reasonably fit in narrower bike paths.

You’ve failed to factor in that if ever joyrider who survived was apprehended the same day,

Ignoring whatever ethics concerns, in a modern society it is sufficient to have a photograph of the suspect.

Run this through the national database (outside some narrow circumstances, countries will have either a database of images of its citizens collected through the national ID program, the driver's licensing program, or failing that, from traffic cameras) - send out an arrest warrant - they cannot get away now. Then you go to court.

The inevitabiltiy of punishment (real or at least perceived) is a much greater deterrent to crime than any 'strict' punishments. (And indeed having strict punishments can even counter the need for inevitability, e.g., if you insist on really long sentences then the issue of prison capacity soon runs up on you).

[Sarakka]

How do I figure out what Geography to use or what nations and cultures to take inspiration from when worldbuilding?

How do I avoid cultural appropriation while doing it.

[New Visayan Islands]

How do I avoid cultural appropriation while doing it.

The oversimplified answer is to make an entirely new culture from scratch. Can't appropriate a culture that doesn't exist IRL, after all. This...is the difficult option. Best bet when creating such cultures is to make a mishmash of multiple (operating on the premise that appropriating from everyone means appropriating from no one) cultures that correspond to what you have in mind for your homebrew--the melting pot concept taken to its logical extreme.

[Sarakka]

How do I avoid cultural appropriation while doing it.

The oversimplified answer is to make an entirely new culture from scratch. Can't appropriate a culture that doesn't exist IRL, after all. This...is the difficult option. Best bet when creating such cultures is to make a mishmash of multiple (operating on the premise that appropriating from everyone means appropriating from no one) cultures that correspond to what you have in mind for your homebrew--the melting pot concept taken to its logical extreme.

Thank you for your post. If you are willing to give the long answer I am willing to hear it.

[Randomnian State]

Quick question: in a hypothetical anarchist society, would business and economic freedom be guaranteed or would it stick to a planned economy? I'm fine with answers based only on theory.

[Allanea]

Quick question: in a hypothetical anarchist society, would business and economic freedom be guaranteed or would it stick to a planned economy? I'm fine with answers based only on theory.

There's no good answer to this because even among anarchist theorists there is a significant degree of disagreement what constitutes an anarchist society. (And who constitutes an anarchist theorist - people slinging shit over who is a real versus a non-real anarchist).

Obviously, non-anarchist theorists will often suggest either that an anarchic society would rapidly devolve into an ultraviolent scenario (their reference point to this is often the brutality of Neolithic warfare - you can go from political thinkers like Thomas Hobbes to modern thinkers like Steven Pinker about it), or that it would not per se devolve into warfare but would be less efficient at securing people's rights and economic progress (in Ye Olden Times, you had Hume cleaving to this idea, of course more recently you have Nozick that believes this). In the past anthropologists and historians beileved that the only stateless societies that existed were those of the Neolithic, today we know that this isn't very true (James C. Scott is a semi-anarchist but also a mainstream anthropologist and he has various books about early stateless societies).

None of this of course pertains to your question, which pertains to how a theoretical anarchic society would function. Now, anarchy as defined by anarchists themselves is no mere 'statelessness', but rather an absence of oppressive hierarchies. Anarchists evidently differ among themselves in terms of what hierarchies constitute oppression.

Most famously in the modern day, some anarchists reject property at all - they argue that the definition and existence of property depends entirely on state authority, and that all property is fundamentally acquired by oppressive means, or acquired from someone who acquired it by such means (Proudhon's dictum 'property is theft' refers to this - if you want to read a witty and well-written arguemnt for this worldview, I think Kropotkin is the best representative of this viewpoint). Others will argue that property is in fact the foundation of individual liberty, and that under anarchy private, non-oppressive mechanisms would exist that protect your right to property. Some people argue Samuel Adams is a kind of early prophet of this, but most often this worldview is credited to Lysander Spooner and some of his contemporaries, and has been carried through today by thinkers like Rothbard and Robert LeFevre. Today of course left- and right-anarchists hate each other but in the past there was a significant exchange of ideas between them.

So the answer to your question is: "It significantly depends what you want to base your worldbuilding on".

Hope that helped.