How not to translate cinnamon buns to Swedish

I’m from Sweden. We’re known for being among the top consumers of coffee in the world (second only to the Finns).

We’re also, in some less particulate, places, known to eat lots of cinnamon buns while we’re doing “fika” (which, I’ve been told, was a 1700s construction of coffee “kaffi” used to circumvent the coffee bans of that time while planning to have some “fika”… however, the Internet disagrees, at least on the date (the early 1900s), and perhaps the cause… and why that may be is a long story with only Swedish references… so… moving on…)

With our fika we have cinnamon buns. Their spelling, however, is not at all as easy to get right as the “fika”, and, here are a couple of examples where the misspelling actually means something, I am sure, was not intended:

  • “Kanylbullar” (syringe buns) — if you ever wondered if you could get HIV from cinnamon buns… now you know
  • “Kanelbuller” (cinnamon noise) — this would be the noise traffic makes… or thunder… not the noise a stale cinnamon bun might make when you chew it… or, for that matter, the noise you make when you break a tooth on that stale cinnamon bun (not that it happens often, but still… not that noise…)
  • “Kanelbullar” (cinnamon buns, kanel = cinnamon, bullar = buns), right! The ones we’re always having with our “fika” (no, we’re not —  mostly we just have the coffee… it’s way easier to install a coffee machine than a cinnamon bun machine… — and the coffee will always be fresh longer… and the number of workplace accidents involving teeth will also be kept on a level that won’t excite the international rumor mill overly much…)

The Death Penalty: Almost as Dumb as Letting Murderers Off Without Consequence

The death penalty is almost as dumb as letting murderers get off without a consequence.

Here’s the reasoning:

The death penalty is a 100% permanent punishment. You cannot take it back. Once a person is executed they are dead.

So, it stands to reason that if a country wants to use the death penalty the judicial process for sentencing people to death in that country should also be 100% — correct, fair and fault free.

This means 100% correct and honest witnesses and evidence. 100% honest and competent police officers, judges, lawyers, and prosecutors.

In case you were unaware; the people listed above are also human beings. They are not gods, so, they are not 100% correct 100% of the time.

So why use a 100% permanent punishment and allow people and systems that aren’t 100% fault free decide when and on who to use it?

Is the reasoning that a few innocent people sentenced to death and executed are an acceptable cost?

If you answer yes to that question, remember the murder victims were also innocent.

Why spend all this money on a justice system, trials, and retrials, lawyers and prosecutors, just to risk sacrificing some more innocent people?

Why not just drop the whole prosecute-murderers-thing and tell the victims families that some innocent people dead is an acceptable cost?

OK. That’s obviously an exaggeration. I am sure in most cases actual murderers are executed.

The problem is that nobody knows who’s innocent and who’s guilty with a faulty justice system (not 100% correct 100% of the time, you know, like, run by imperfect humans).

I think it’s common sense and decency to not dole out 100% permanent punishments in an imperfect world.