|
|
irossall Special user Snohomish, Washington 529 Posts |
Http://www.prisonplanet.com/mind-reading......ard.html
Saw this a couple of years ago on CNN It's a Brave New World. Thought crimes anyone? -Iven
Give the gift of Life, Be an Organ Donor.
|
Starrpower Inner circle 4070 Posts |
I'd tell you what I think but somebody might already know.
As for "thought police", we have that already. A prime example is "hate crimes". We now not only punish people for the actual crime, but for what they were thinking while doing that crime. |
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Don't know what the burden off proof in hate crimes is, do you? What we just saw in Charleston was a federal hate crime because it was motivated purely by the race of the victims.
It has nothing to do what they were THINKING when they commit the crime. It requires simply that the prosecution PROVE motivation. In the Charleston case, the defendant's own statements clearly established that. No mind reading required. In the Roof case, the question is really moot, because he is facing the death penalty at the state level. There is no need to prove a hate crime. BUT, if he had simply burned a cross on the church's lawn, a consequent hate crime prosecution would result in a much more severe penalty than a property damage crime would carry. And that's a good thing. |
Starrpower Inner circle 4070 Posts |
Quote:
On Jun 19, 2015, mastermindreader wrote: I am not commenting on whether it is good or bad, but whether or not we are crawling inside someone's head and basing our punishment on what they were thinking. I say we are. Motivation was typically used for evidence as to guilt, which is whether or not someone committed a crime. Once it is used to establish severity of punishment, that is going a step further. We are claiming to know an emotion behind the crime, that emotion being hate. |
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
It is a well accepted fact that hate crimes are among the most difficult to prove simply because the prosecution must PROVE what the motive was in order for the enhanced penalties to kick in. "Mind Reading" plays not part in that. But, as in the Roof case, when the defendant has written a racist and hate filled manifesto that clearly states his motive, and when, additionally, he states at the crime scene that blacks are "raping our women," "taking over our country," and, consequently, they "have to go," the proof comes from the defendant's own statements. No mind reading required.
As I said, it probably doesn't matter in his case, because the death penalty applies at the state level. But if he had, instead, written the same manifesto and then burned a cross on the grounds of the church, the enhanced penalties for committing a hate crime would result in a far more severe sentence than he'd receive for trespassing and property damage. Additionally, if, by some fluke, a judge only sentenced Roof to say 20 years for each murder, each sentence to be served concurrently, the feds could step in with a hate crime/civil rights case, for which he could get life in prison without parole. In any case, it is simply not true that hate crime statues punish people for what they merely think. They apply only when the hate/racist motive can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. |
Starrpower Inner circle 4070 Posts |
We'll have to disagree on this one. We claim to know that someone was HATING. It's in the very name of the crime -- a HATE crime. Hate is an emotion, a thought. You are not longer punishing them just for their actions, but the thoughts and emotions behind those actions
|
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Well you can't have a crime without the thought to go with the action.
The terms actus reus and mens rea developed in English Law are derived from the principle stated by Edward Coke, namely, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea,[1] which means: "an act does not make a person guilty unless (their) mind is also guilty"; hence, the general test of guilt is one that requires proof of fault, culpability or blameworthiness both in thought and action. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actus_reus
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
Starrpower Inner circle 4070 Posts |
"an act does not make a person guilty unless (their) mind is also guilty"
So you agree we prosecute based on thoughts, what is going on in their mind? |
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
No! We had not ought to prosecute based on thoughts alone. A conspiracy normally requires an act in furtherance of the crime. You and I may simply talk about robbing Fort Knox all day long.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Quote:
On Jun 26, 2015, Starrpower wrote: In his written manifesto and in the words he spoke as he committed the murders, Roof CLEARLY STATED what his thoughts and emotions were. Why are you ignoring that? |
Starrpower Inner circle 4070 Posts |
I'm not, Bob. I am talking in more general terms regarding hate crimes. Who care if "hate" caused it. Would you feel better about it if he killed innocent people because his girlfriend broke up with him?
|
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Mind Reading Technology? (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.02 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |