Thought Crime

[Biggreenfellow]

Do you think that, should technology advance sufficiently to make it possible, 'thought crime' should be persecuted?

[Playfishpaste]

No, because you don't know if they'll reconsider.

[Barry Goldwater]

to the ing no.

[Imperator Romani]

I don't really understand the question so I picked the one that sounded the best.

[Hilarion]

Hey, remember that book 1984?

[Biggreenfellow]

I don't really understand the question so I picked the one that sounded the best.

I thought it was pretty straight forward

How can you even tell if that is what someone is thinking? You cannot get technology to know this.

Yeah yeah, I know that, but try to get in the spirit of things.. Suppose that this technology does exist, and we can use it to pick up murderous intent, Pedophilia etc.. Should we use it?

For example..

If someone is thinking actively about raping a child, shouldn't that person be put under some kind of surveillance? Or perhaps even admitted to an institution?

@ Lord_vamp

Yeah, it came up in another thread, that's why I thought about this question

[Kogen]

I thought it was pretty straight forward



Yeah yeah, I know that, but try to get in the spirit of things.. Suppose that this technology does exist, and we can use it to pick up murderous intent, Pedophilia etc.. Should we use it?

For example..

If someone is thinking actively about raping a child, shouldn't that person be put under some kind of surveillance? Or perhaps even admitted to an institution?

@ Lord_vamp

Yeah, it came up in another thread, that's why I thought about this question

Being a paedophile and being a rapist are two different things. Someone might feel that way, but it does not mean they will act upon it.

It just does not work. People should be judged by their actions and their open intent.

[GuineaPig]

No.

[Mr. Pink]

Hey, remember that book 1984?

Yeah, look how happy and free everyone turned out as a result of thought crime.

[Biggreenfellow]

Yeah, look how happy and free everyone turned out as a result of thought crime.

Who's to say the world would end up like it did in that book? Maybe, by purging all violent thought, we would actually benefit from it, as a race. No more crime, everybody only having pleasant, fuzzy feelings.

Why would it inevitably have to lead to a doomsday scenario?

[dogukan]

Who's to say the world would end up like it did in that book? Maybe, by purging all violent thought, we would actually benefit from it, as a race. No more crime, everybody only having pleasant, fuzzy feelings.

Why would it inevitably have to lead to a doomsday scenario?

It would mate...you never know what those who lead your government will do. Give too much power to them and yoU're **** up. Humanity is not awesome.

Thinking crime? I can think of anything.....even becoming a terrorists to my state if I think I'm not given rights or not enough freedom. It is a relative thing after all. Whose thought is a crime and whose is not? A thought that is crime once could turn out to be a good thing for society in future...etc

[Mr. Pink]

Who's to say the world would end up like it did in that book? Maybe, by purging all violent thought, we would actually benefit from it, as a race. No more crime, everybody only having pleasant, fuzzy feelings.

Why would it inevitably have to lead to a doomsday scenario?

Human nature.

[Kogen]

How can you even tell if that is what someone is thinking? You cannot get technology to know this.

'Thought crimes' are an excuse to arrest anyone with no reason. Nothing more.

[Djûn]

Absolutely not. Never in any case. Thought crime is a breathtaking in-road into the rights of individuals and should never be considered an option by any state.

[Biggreenfellow]

Yet a few have opted for the 'in some cases'.. What are their arguments for that? Isn't there anyone interested in playing the devils advocate here?

I'd do it meself, but I'm not that good a reasoner

[Braenn]

Actually pedophillia isn't illegal. Abusing a child and "consuming" (Couldn't think of a better word) materials which contribute/are derived from abusing a child is illegal.

Anyway, humans cannot help their biological impulses, punishing people for thoughts out of their control is absurd, which is why it is only right to punish if they have turned those impulses into actions.

[Babur]

lol hell no

only the Russians on TWC would support it.

[Manco]

I certainly hope not, my mind is quite depraved and sadist.
Laws on thought crimes would get me put in jail for my entire life.

(or who ever monitors it, might contact me fro some raunchy sex)

[magickyleo101]

Do you think that, should technology advance sufficiently to make it possible, 'thought crime' should be persecuted?

Yes, but it's going to depend on why you think we punish people.

If you think that when we punish a person we're doing so to prevent that person from committing crimes in the future, and if you think that that rational is by itself sufficient to justify punishing someone, then there's nothing really to stop you from saying that a thought crime is a sufficient ground for punishment.

Call the justification stated above the "incapacitation" justification of punishment.

On the incapacitation theory we're justified in punishing a person for a crime they've committed in the past because that past action serves as evidence for their likely future behavior. It tells us something about their value system, or their dispositions, or the crowd they run with and the peer pressure they're likely to face. Actions that are in some ways similar to crimes which don't have this evidentiary value (e.g. a killing in self defense) aren't punished under the incapacitation justification because doing so would prevent a future crime.

The reasoning behind punishing thought crimes, then, would look much the same - we would use the conclusions about their thoughts as evidence about the crimes a person would commit in the future and punish them on the basis of that. As long as you buy the incapacitation theory you're probably going to be OK with punishing thought crimes. [In fact, you might be willing to punish thought crimes even more that traditional crimes if you think that the thought crime is better evidence of a future crime than past behavior...]

[Aldgarkalaughskel]

Thought as a crime would compromise the freedom of thought, a basic freedom the Western civilization rests on. Crime is linked with illegal action, thoughts can't be illegal. Nuff said.