In Reply to: No policy swing……….. posted by three_sox on April 23, 2005 at 08:40:46:
You mistook me, and vice versa. I thought you were implying that left to a group, it would revert to a sort of mob rule which always gets out of hand. I wasn't thinking you were thinking the innocent would get punished.The difference in the two crimes is cause and effect.
The swindler is guilty in the 1st degree because from the get go he knew he was going to hurt someone, and he proceeded with his crime of duplicity. The drunk smashing into the cop car was simply imbalanced or out of his head at the moment, and never had an intention of doing what he did.
However, the net result of these crimes vary as well. The swindler only cheats one out of money or an item. The car crasher could actually take an innocent life. One has a guiltier cause but less dire effect, and the other is the opposite. Should they be considered of the same consequence then?
As for the death penalty, if you are going to do it there can't be all the haggling. If you are certain, and the person gets it, it should be done within a month of sentencing.
Those not getting it, but getting life, should go to prison yards in new mexico with no conveniences. That or hard labour camps to repay their debt to society thru work.
It's all about the music...
Edits: 20/51/01
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: No policy swing……….. - Peter Gunn 07:33:04 04/24/05 (3)
- I think there has been some misunderstanding but I suspect we have similar views about criminals………. - three_sox 18:21:35 04/24/05 (2)
- Colonial Measures - Peter Gunn 18:45:43 04/24/05 (1)
- We are only good when it comes to “doing the business†……… :o)……… - three_sox 19:23:30 04/24/05 (0)