Subject:
|
Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 16 Nov 2000 00:47:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1341 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> I think that most criminals are first caught during their youth. That aside,
> I'm sure there are some who live long full lives of crime and never get
> caught. I still suspect that if someone can be hardened, they can be softened.
An optimistic notion, to be sure, but I don't know that it's consistent with
reality. The process by which someone becomes hardened into a life of crime is
insidious and *very* long term (or at least potentially so); I cannot
imagine, nor has anyone to date imagined, a process by which criminals are
fully reclaimed from such lives with any more than anecdotal success.
Are you advocating forcible "behavior modification" against the will of a
mentally competent but criminal adult? Or are you assuming that anyone who
pursues a life of crime is mental imbalanced?
If you're suggesting the former, I don't know how such a suggestion is
morally any better than theft, rape, or murder, since it presumes to alter a
person's mentality against that person's will. If the latter, then I think
you're stacking the rhetorical deck in your favor by ignoring the possibility
that a sane person can in fact pursue a life of crime.
> > What compassion, then, is due a so-called hardened criminal, or even
> > a soft-and-cuddly criminal, who, as a a self-responsible adult, has
> > nonetheless chosen to flout the legal system?
>
> The compassion that we would have for any person who has lost their way.
Lost their way only from the path society as a whole has chosen; are you
suggesting the forfeiture of criminals' civil rights of choice? For that
matter, maybe they haven't lost their way but have instead chosen to pursue a
different way.
> One who is unrepentent, is either innocent, or broken. If they are broken they
> require mental therapy. Once they no longer require such therapy, they will
> want to make amends.
I'm not sure what to make of this statement, because it's amazingly naive and
I know that you're not naive. You're stating, in effect, that everyone either:
A:) wants to be what society calls productive
B:) would want to be what society calls productive if they weren't "broken"
this is self-fulfilling reasoning unless you include:
C:) some people aren't "broken" and nonetheless don't want to be "productive"
A great number of criminials, I suspect, fall into this final category and
would not be redeemed by any proposed system of rehabilitation, and certainly
not by any yet put forth in history.
> > How would a system accomodate and/or treat the criminal who is literally
> > unrepentant and who truly has no intention of working off his debt?
>
> Help him to see that working off his debt is the right course of action.
Help in what way? And what if he still refuses to work it off? I'm not
trying to sound nitpicky, but this seems fundamental to your stance on
rehabilitation.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
279 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
