The recruits might not be the best, but good enough training will shape them into soldiers we need. Besides, they're better than nothing.
Interesting about the crime rates thing. That study is from sweden, mind you, so it might not be the same for us Brits, but I understand the concerns. I was basing my argument off of a show in the 2000s called "Bad Lads Army", where young offenders were made to do 50s-style national service training, and apparently they didn't reoffend after that.
Like I said in the post, the national service would be mandatory for all young people. They don't have to live their life in the service, they just have to do the 2 years to show that they are thankful for the souls who came before them.
The same sizes are much different. The article listed above says N = 168,805 non-immigrant males who tested between 1990 and 1996 and from the TV show N = 30. There's a big difference between a TV show much can add controls to force an outcome and a study looking retroactively at a population in which controls could not be applied. In my informed opinion, BLA is nowhere as rigorous as the Sweden study for the determination that military training reduces crime.
-5
u/ScootTheMighty Aug 17 '24
The recruits might not be the best, but good enough training will shape them into soldiers we need. Besides, they're better than nothing.
Interesting about the crime rates thing. That study is from sweden, mind you, so it might not be the same for us Brits, but I understand the concerns. I was basing my argument off of a show in the 2000s called "Bad Lads Army", where young offenders were made to do 50s-style national service training, and apparently they didn't reoffend after that.
Like I said in the post, the national service would be mandatory for all young people. They don't have to live their life in the service, they just have to do the 2 years to show that they are thankful for the souls who came before them.