CRIME IS THE ULTIMATE REDPILL

Being a criminal generally means you have less self control as you can not conform yourself to the rules of society. Less self control = more "muh dick". Also explains why more blacks and mozzies have more children. Crime and more children are not cause and effect on eachother, they both stem from one cause.>>8598044

Don't you think that is the sign of a sick society?

How the FUCK is it fair that criminals have more children than hard-working people?

It isn't.

The way to fight back is to REJECT the orthodoxy that "you should get a job!"

And instead you should commit WHATEVER ACTIONS NECESSARY (probably illegal) to have AS MANY CHILDREN AS POSSIBLE

I'm right aren't I? Can any of you give me a LOGICAL ARGUMENT that disputes what I'm saying?

By the way I'm a philosophy graduate, so I know my way around a logical argument.

that's because all the criminals are niggers who have a fuckton of babies for more gibs money

Criminals ARE impulsive, WAY MORE than ordinary people! They do whatever the fuck they want!

…does that present any sort of REASON why I shouldn't commit crime? NO, it doesn't!

you first

Fuck off Holla Forums, I know you want to cap this to say "lol le Holla Forums is le so illogical"

-you
take your false equivalences elsewhere; theres more to life than just sleeping around you brood of vipers

why don't you just consume all of the resources in the environment until your people start dying of starvation while you're at it? Rhodesia did that and look how well it worked out for those blacks

just mindlessly having kids isn't going to guarantee the survival of your DNA

THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT!

More "muh dick" = MORE CHILDREN!

Can you prove that?

The study I linked showed that criminals have more children. So if you engage in criminal behaviour, YOUR LIKELIHOOD OF HAVING CHILDREN INCREASES.

Again - why shouldn't I commit crime?

Or maybe it's because CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR LENDS ITSELF TOWARDS HAVING MORE CHILDREN

Can you disprove that? No you can't.

I can't prove that criminal behaviour is THE CAUSE of having more children.

BUT that study says that IF YOU ENGAGE IN CRIMINALITY, your chances of having children INCREASES.

So, one more time - why SHOULDN'T I engage in criminality? Please present proper reasons.

What the hell user, you wouldn't even download a car I bet

I don't disagree. We should rob and vandalize leftist homes and businesses

Good luck having a bunch of kids while you're locked up in prison.

because you could go to prison and get raped by bubba three times a week

A study shows that criminals have more children than non-criminals.

So if I become a criminal, my STATISTICAL LIKELIHOOD of having children increases, doesn't it?

I can't prove that criminality is THE CAUSE of having more children… but THAT DOESN'T MATTER. The LIKELIHOOD still INCREASES! And that's what's important.

The fuck? How is this a leftist position?

Surely criminality is a RIGHT-WING position?

If you're going for the quantity over quality argument, it doesn't matter, Asia and Africa are going to breed you out no matter how much you rape. They do the same but on a societal level. The white reproduction strategy is selecting for quality offspring to conquer and rule over the retarded masses. For quality, you need both parents, single mothers raise defective offspring. Either be bred out regardless and have nothing but worthless progeny or shack up with a single woman and raise your children for excellence. It's a no-brainer unless you're dead set on muh dick.

okay okay tell me this
why are you telling other people to commit crime? it'll decrease the likelihood that YOU reproduce, because killing you and all of your children is a crime, which YOU don't want to happen because it results in YOUR bloodline being extinguished

in fact, by your logic, i should kill you and all of your children right now because you're competition and would certainly do the same to me if i let you do it

From an evolutionary perspective, the ONLY thing that matters is the offspring that you have.

If I could then I WOULD! Are you seriously doubting that people don't consume as many resources as they can, subject to the constraints of other people's power and influence?

What's wrong with you! Society is a race towards resources! How the hell have you not learned that yet!

Having as many kids as possible will INCREASE THE PROBABILITY that your DNA will survive.

Sure, educating your children, and providing them with wealth and opportunities, will ALSO increase this probability.

But sheer QUANTITY can overtake QUALITY can't it? If a person has 1,000 children then their genes are FAR more likely to survive than if they have ONE child, who is educated well!

You're not giving me GOOD REASONS to doubt my thesis!

also, pic related

well what do you do when you run out of resources huh?
also answer this , or just leave the thread because you should after reading that

1) Maybe I do own such terrabytes; maybe I don't! Who's to say.

2) I am talking about criminal behaviour that increases your chances of your genes surviving. For example:

a) Rape
b) Violent crime (chicks will see you as a bad boy, and will want to have sex with you)
c) ANYTHING that makes you TOUGH (the strongest survive don't they?)

So, yet again, what are the LOGICAL REASONS why I shouldn't commit crime?

R/K Selection theory.

Watch this OP and you will understand:

jewtube /watch?v=W8N3FF_3KvU&list=PLMNj_r5bccUw40CpD-JYXJyVsDYsj7ITD

Having many children is R selection and commiting crime to gain ressources is R selection as well.

As

pointed out having more children doesn't make you smarter or redpilled.

FBI thread

I think you belong here OP >>>Holla Forums

The first person who has sense! I respect you.

As the study that I quoted shows: CRIMINALS STATISTICALLY HAVE MORE CHILDREN

So who cares if you're locked up? YOU STILL HAVE MORE KIDS!

You haven't presented a reason why I should doubt my thesis!

Ahhhhh, FINALLY we have someone who is CAPABLE OF ARGUING!

Unfortunately, that ISN'T a reason that is relevant to the issue of CHILDBEARING!

It certainly IS a reason not to commit crime. It is a RISK that any criminal has to take.

But given that criminal behaviour OBJECTIVELY INCREASES YOUR STATISTICAL LIKELIHOOD OF BEARING CHILDREN (given the study that I quoted), surely these benefits OUTWEIGH the risks?

In fact THEY HAVE TO. The risk of getting raped DOESN'T MATTER, from an evolutionary standpoint, because the ONLY thing that matter is IF YOU HAVE KIDS.

And criminality, according to that study, INCREASES your likelihood of having kids.

So, despite the dangers, criminality is still MORE LOGICAL than non-criminal behaviour!

Give me evidence to show that this isn't true!!!

Are you a dumbass?

If you just be yourself and do what you want, when you want and how you want you give no fucks and build self confidence. I'm not arguing that you shouldn't commit crime, I'm all for it. Its stupid to commit crime for the sole purpose of reproducing though. Petty theft, traffic violations, drunken brawls, not reporting car incidents, ect are ok in my book, rape is pushing it..? But when you get into the morality of committing crimes, there is no honor among thieves, cowmen, and the likes so the quality of the women you attract aren't worth it.

*Con-men

Looks like reddit spacing, sounds like reddit, smells like newfag…

You need to go back.

No.

You are giving a good argument - perhaps the best in this thread so far. And I respect you for that.

The strategy of any race is to WIN. Sure, it is the case that whites have won due to our intelligence. But whether this is sustainable - who knows? Sheer NUMBERS of Chinese and Indians can outweigh us. Look at pic related - Chinese/Indians used to outperform us many times over, PURELY because they had more people! This was before the Industrial Revolution - the ONLY thing that gave us an edge - PURELY because it gave us MORE EFFICIENCY - which allowed us to produce MORE ECONOMIC VALUE PER PERSON!

The rest of your argument is therefore invalid, BECAUSE it rests on the premise that quality is more important than quantity. And I am saying that it DOESN'T NECESSARILY. History has shown that quantity can outweigh quality - as happened between the years of 1AD and 1500AD! (Again, see graph.)

The graph gives a convincing case for why QUANTITY is more important than QUALITY.

Do you have any more reasons why quality is more important? If so, please present them. My thesis can only be doubted if there are GOOD REASONS to do so!

Because those kids turn out to be fatherless mental cases. Jesus Christ, at least try to think of decent bait. With your logic, sterilizing men and euthanizing children would reduce crime.

I want to debate with you guys whether crime is the logical thing for a human to do. And I think it is.

Very true. The MOST logical thing for me to do would be for me to go out and commit crime, and not help any of you in your own quests for reproduction.

But I wish to debate the merits of crime - probably because I am too pussified to just go out and do it. This is why I am presenting the case to Holla Forums, so that we can discuss this.

This is what chimps and gorillas do. It definitely IS logical.

The only reason that people don't do this these days is because we have laws in place that would punish you for such acts.

And the only reason that such laws exist is because humans have agreed to them. Clearly there was a critical mass of people that believed such laws were in their interest.

You CAN disobey these laws if you want. It just creates more RISK. But if you can get away with, there is no logical reason not to!

That's my opinion anyway. But if you give me a good reasoned argument why I'm wrong, then please do!

hes not trying to reduce crime; hes trying to encourage it and make decent people become criminals

he's also not going to respond to because hes a paid poster who isn't going this genuinely

Have you considered that people who have more children might just be more likely to commit more crime?

That's why I mentioned R/K selection theory.

Alternatively people who commit crimes might be more brazen, more fit on average, more confident. Traits that makes it easier to find a women, especially certain kind of women.

But honestly read on R/K selection in theory in humans. That is the true redpill.

does correlation=causation?

Holy SHIT, you are a FUCKING NIGGER and you are UNABLE to DISTINGUISH BETWEEN CORRELATION AND CAUSATION.

This. You missed the forest, faggot.

Because we are not animals

killyourself

correction: We evolved the capacity to act contrary to instincts when beneficial to the whole tribe, therefore we don't have to act like animals, albeit technically we still are animals

What argument is that picture supposed to present?

Here's my response to it anyway.

Society only came about when people agreed that peace was beneficial to them.

We see it in chimps, gorillas, elephants.

In these societies, beta males accept their position, because it is SECURE. It means that they avoid violent confrontations with the alpha male. They secure the possibility that they might be able to challenge the alpha male in the future. In fact, in chimp societies, beta males form groups in order to try and overthrow the alpha male:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_chimpanzee

Your picture only presents a case of society before peace is reached. I don't see the significance of it.

Do everything you can to get more. How is that a question?

I did, here:

I'm not going to watch an hour long video from Molymeme just to respond to you.

Can you give me a short argument that I can respond to?

Again, please give me reasons why it doesn't.

Nope.

Again, how is this a leftist issue?

Surely right-wing people commit more crime, don't they?

Criminality is r-selected behavior that demonstrates a lack of in group loyalty and a propensity for producing high quantity, low quality, low investment offspring. Niggers and Spics do produce more children (the biological twinning rate of nigs is higher than whites and asians), but they mature faster and reach (a lower) peak intelligence earlier. In addition to that, nigs and spic children actually walk earlier than white children. White and Asian children take longer to mature, but it pays off in terms of a more complex organism with larger brain volume and superior problem solving abilities.

Think Zerg vs Terran. One clutch produces two Zerglings, but they're lower quality, less technologically capable units - the upside is they're cheaper and you can produce more of them more quickly. You're never going to get a stable, peaceful, high tech society from such beginnings. The Protoss are very high tech and the units are individually powerful, but they are also more expensive (higher investment cost) and take longer to develop.

Does the criminal behavior produce more children? They're related concepts. A low intelligence child will have trouble fitting into a high tech society because its operations are completely opaque, so they will react in the only way they can manage - by employing violence against it. In effect, the r-selected nig is essentially trying to transform a Terran base into a creep, to change the environment to suit itself and its low-tech means. This is why niggers always riot, loot and live in shitholes. They're out of their element and want to make civilization look more like home. It's their biological imperative.

So as to why you shouldn't commit crime, I can only tell you that if this environment is unsuitable to you, perhaps you are nigger-tier and your interests would be better served in Africa where you can freely murder and muh dick all day.

I want our people to be quality people, to become stronger and better than all of the others. We're not going to accomplish that by fucking each other over, but by ensuring the best of our genes are passed on to the next generation. A million niggers can't stop a nuclear launch created by a handful of scientists and engineers.

In effect, if you want quality you have to have a mind for the future and choose quality mates. If you want to have a lot of offspring, fuck any wet hole you can stick your dick in - they'll be nigger-tier.

If you think about it, most of criminal law is about securing reproductive rights for the best representatives of society. What you own is, in effect, a reward for your loyalty, intelligence, initiative, etc. This attracts higher quality mates to you. Niggers don't care about selective breeding so they fuck anything that moves, including animals, and their reproductive preferences are reflected in the kind of shitty mud hut villages they produce during their short ass lifespans.

Reported.

So what you're saying is babies are formed in the womb from commiting crimes?

...

oh yeah, theres another point
not only do those "jews" not reproduce that much, but they commit alot of crimes

also, again, correlation does not equal causation

You have argued well - far better than most in this thread.

You have presented:
a) risks associated with criminality ("there is no honor among thieves, cowmen")
b) a concern of QUALITY over quantity ("the quality of the women you attract aren't worth it.")

I object to the first point on the grounds that the study I mentioned shows that criminals are more likely to have children.

So even if you're an unsuccessful criminal who ends up having no children, your statistical likelihood of having children was still higher than if you had been a non-criminal.

I object to the second point on the grounds that I don't see convincing reasons why quality is better than quantity.

Genghis Khan. That guy had many offspring, and most people in Asia today have some of his DNA.

There's one reason why I think quantity is better than quality.

Focusing on quality may well increase your chances of having children at all (I don't know, I'm just guessing). But I would still argue that quantity increase your chances of your genes passing down through the generations. I think that aspiring for quality is just a safe, pussified reproduction strategy. Quantity seems, to me, to be the objectively better strategy. You are objectively increasing your chances of having grandchildren, great-grandchildren, so on.

If you think I'm wrong though, please do respond.

Sorry, this was a response to you:

Granted I doubt you understood how retarded you sound with this halfchan type of thread.

I like spacing. I've been on infinity chan a while though.

Literally the absence of an argument.

Fixed your pic for you OP.

Indeed a good reason.

But surely having more children still increases the chance that THEY will have children? Sure they might live lives of crime, but that doesn't matter, as long as they still have children.

As we already established from that study - criminals have more children! So if your children become criminals, THEY'RE more likely to have children as well!

Notice this too from the article I quoted:
ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138(14)00077-4/abstract

Clearly the researchers think there IS causation, not just correlation.

Also, what's up with these insanely low effort cuckchan threads lately?

They

also

have

curious

formatting

TRS

No I'm not paid. I'm a confused guy who wants clarity.

Just read it on Wikipedia. Quantity vs. quality. I see.

If that's true then committing crime will still increase your statistical likelihood of having children won't it?

And I think there is causation, not just correlation, due to the next point you present…

That's EXACTLY what I think.

The study I quoted doesn't show this, but I think it is true.

I reckon that committing crime means you're someone who doesn't give a fuck. You'll do WHATEVER IT TAKES to have as many children as possible. You make a conscious decision that you will only let FORCE (usually enacted by police officers) stop you from doing what you want to do. Rather than guilt/shame, which is what many people let stop them (when they think "oh, I shouldn't do that, it would be wrong.")

I don't have proof of that theory. But crime still increases your statistical likelihood of having children. So regardless of my theory, committing crime is still the logical thing to do, isn't it? Since it increases your statistical likelihood of having children.

...

No, it doesn't.

But if your statistical likelihood of having children is increased by doing X, then it is logical to do X, isn't it?

Let's say "X" was "piercing your ballsack". If piercing your ballsack REALLY DID increase your likelihood of having children, then piercing your ballsack would be the logical thing to do, wouldn't it?

Any reason that you give for NOT piercing your ballsack would be outweighed by the fact that doing so will increase this probability.

of having shitty ( ie. also criminally inclined) children maybe

The comic is missing ghe jew off frame that convinced the goyim that the universe is meaningless by creating context.

I answered this, but I'll answer it again (original answer here: )

Let's say that drinking coffee increased your statistical probability of having children.

It would be logical to drink coffee, wouldn't it?

Personally, I think that there IS an element of causation. As this guy said - :

The study I citied in OP does not prove this theory. But it does show a correlation.

So 1) I think there is an element of causation. I hope you will agree with me. 2) Even if you don't, it doesn't matter. If X increases the probability of Y, and you desire Y, then doing X is logical, isn't it?

Please see my answer to that post, here:

Erm, yes we are.

You think that somebody else's interests are more important than yours? What sort of a cuck are you?

I think this is the best answer in this thread. But I will still respond to it.

How do you know that blacks won't inherit the Earth? Given the current cuckoldry of whites, I wouldn't be surprised.

Your argument only holds if whites are objectively more successful. Historically we have been, but who knows if we will be in the future? Especially given white cuckoldry?

Can you give any convincing reasons why whites are sure to prosper over blacks in the future? I wish I could recognise some right now, but I don't think I can.

thats_the_joke.jpg

"robbery=gets you laid" is a meme we can sail right past the crimethinkstop filters in most peoples' heads. Though to what end I'm not sure.
sage because op uses reddit spacing

Please kill yourself because you are fucking retarded.

And your answer is more retarded.
Yeah, it's called being a nigger. Being a criminal and even less so a prison inmate ==DOES NOT INCREASE YOUR REPRODUCTIVE POTENTIAL YOU FUCKTARDED DOUBLE NIGGER==

The wikipedia articles focuses on animals and not humans, but yes, that is the short verstion.

It's not just that, for example in animals that are R selected the differences among genders is very small and in K selected ones it's big.

It's very hard to differentiate a female from a male Rabbit for example.

But it's very easy to differentiate a female from a male lion.

Now, we currently have a society that promotes R selected behavior/breeding and surprise surprise, the differences between males and females are getting smaller…

But if committing crime makes the environment around your children more shitty and distroys the quality of your children then you pretty much destroyed your last name. Your goal should create a good strong family name not ruin it

For what? What rule did I break exactly?

No, I'm saying this:

1) Humans should perform whatever increases their chances of having children.
2) Criminality increases your chances of having children (refer to the study I quoted in OP)
C) Humans should perform criminal activity.

Are you saying I implied this, and if so how?

They're still here, aren't they?

I answered this here:

It's not the causation you're claiming it is.
Let me enlighten you: there are essentially 4 possible reasons for a correlation:
1) X causes Y
2) Y causes X
3) X and Y have a common cause Z
4) It's a coincidence.
You are adamantly claiming that case 1 explains your correlation, when in actuality we know from r/K selection theory that case 3 explains it. Indeed, both the crime and the high rate of birth are caused by a certain type of personality innate in those from an r-selected lineage. If I just started committing crimes, I would therefore not benefit from the claimed advantages. Instead, I would need to brainwash myself into becoming essentially a fucking nigger. The disadvantages of being a fucking nigger clearly outweigh the few advantages.

That's called "begging the question". You have not shown that X increases the probability of Y (causation), just that there's a correlation.

tl;dr you're a fucking subhuman and you need to kill yourself.

Crime as in ten commandments offense, or (((crime))) like drug laws?

*Fewer

It seems logical that causation is taking place though, doesn't it? As this - - guy said:

I think that's probably true.

yes because the majority of whites tend to vote on the right and shitskins tend vote on the left

meant to quote

You talk like a fucking kike. That's reason enough to tell you fuck off.

But if criminals are more likely to have children, then it behooves you to father criminals, doesn't it?

The most red-pilled, and anti-Jewry thing you can realise is that having as many children as your balls will allow is the purpose of your life.

You can learn this by watching nature documentaries and studying evolutionary biology for two seconds.

Ergo if being criminal increases your likelihood of having children then you should become a criminal.

I hope the next time you visit Israel a Palestinian sand-nigger rocket lands on your bus

That's my whole point - people only dismiss crime because they think "oh, that's bad, I'll go to prison - and I don't really know what prison would be like, but I've been told to fear it"

If you dispel illogical emotions like fear, and think about things logically, then why shouldn't you commit crime, when doing so will statistically increase the number of children you'll have?

Not an argument.

The study I cited says IT DOES.

What are your arguments against the study?

Maybe one day you'll get a reply.

It is if the matter of discussion is how to increase the fitness of our gene pool.

Multiple anons explained to you how you are completely retarded. Suicide is the only option you are left with.

This is one of those cases where the statement "correlation does not equal causation" applies. You have to have more evidence or more reasoning than "there's a correlation" to prove a direct causation. Using your logic, I could point out that as America gets browner, M. Night Shyamalan's movies get worse, and I could therefore claim that if M. Night Shyamalan simply made better movies America would get Whiter. I mean, given statistics, it must be true. But it's not true. There are other factors involved that have correlation also, and it's possible to make a much more coherent argument proposing that those other factors are what's actually making America browner.

Essentially, you have no solid reasoning to base your claims off of other than the existence of a correlation. That's not enough. You need some reasoning to explain why crime and childbirth are directly linked.

I never say this but reddit spacing mother fucker holy shit

Why haven't the mods banned this nigger

People that cant plan ahead commit crime. This also explain more children. That is all nigger. Now go back to 4chan and lurk two years before posting something like this painfully retarded thread.

You haven't quoted the study to tell us how you got to your conclusion

This whole board is total cancer tonight. I think the mods have taken Christmas off.

Even Hitler broke the law, and ended up in prison, so I don't believe the law is always correct. For example Eurocucks, and Russians can't deny the holocaust, or else it's a crime, but that doesn't make somebody calling out the Jews lies "criminal scum". I also think the US needs to bring back dueling, so we wouldn't need to rely on the Jewdicial system so much.

correlation is not causation dear user

hmm….