"Why is it reasonable to believe in prisons, but not in the hell?"

[RozzerusUnrelentus]

My bold.

I pointed out that sweeping statements wouldn't help you, and you come back with a sweeping statement. What would you have society do? Forget Karl Popper - he wasn't voted in to run any country or play any part in societal norms.

What is a "sweeping statement"? English is not my native language, my native language is Croatian.
As for what should a society do with criminals, my suggestion is to simply do nothing. Do nothing until there is a consensus among social scientists what they are about to do actually helps.
What difference does it make if Karl Popper was voted to run any country? He was a social scientist whose ideas are widely accepted today, to such a degree that social scientists get ridiculed for questioning them. Newton never controlled how the planets move, but his theories accurately predict that.

Sweeping statement - tarring all with the same brush. In other words, stating that the qualities/circumstances of one are the same of all, rightly or wrongly. For example, all Irishmen are thick. All left-handers are artistic. All priests are paedophiles. Politicians are altruistic. Prison never helped anyone.

Now justify, 'As for what should a society do with criminals, my suggestion is to simply do nothing...' And say what you'd do in the interim with the criminal dregs that need locking up for public safety and peace of mind.