RE: Most of a nation on probation?
Sampo Syreeni wrote:
The difference is that most of the people around here seem to be arguing from the societal point of view. (Cheap) parole, even if sheer bliss for the felon, is a bad thing when thought about with due respect to what it does to whole communities.
Yes, that's correct. I am arguing against that collectivist viewpoint. It's the individual's suffering I'm most concerned with. I think it would be great to reform the whole shebang; let's do it, but let's not put the cart before the horse and harm the individual "for the greater good." Yeah, laws are tough to repeal, but that's where our efforts need to be placed, not on some indirect, "we'll really make it costly for the state" approach. Of course, as Cypherpunks we REALLY should be thinking how to make the laws irrelevant. And for what it's worth, that comes easier when we are dealing with someone who is relatively freer due to being on parole. Now let's put some Cypherpunk brain power towards those tattletale ankle transponders... S a n d y
At 1:30 PM -0700 7/5/01, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
Sampo Syreeni wrote:
The difference is that most of the people around here seem to be arguing from the societal point of view. (Cheap) parole, even if sheer bliss for the felon, is a bad thing when thought about with due respect to what it does to whole communities.
Yes, that's correct. I am arguing against that collectivist viewpoint.
Oh, puh-leeeze! My argument is not a collectivist viewpoint. It's just like any argument that drug laws are bad. (Being one of those who doesn't use drugs, and who never has, honest!, is any argument from me that drugs should not be illegal a "collectivist viewpoint"?) Ditto for thousands of other examples where the societal and legal and ethical implications dominate. --Tim May -- Timothy C. May tcmay@got.net Corralitos, California Political: Co-founder Cypherpunks/crypto anarchy/Cyphernomicon Technical: physics/soft errors/Smalltalk/Squeak/agents/games/Go Personal: b.1951/UCSB/Intel '74-'86/retired/investor/motorcycles/guns
Sandy proposes:
Now let's put some Cypherpunk brain power towards those tattletale ankle transponders...
What are other technological devices used to track parolees? Are there any limits on what can be used? Is the parolee less subject to pan-surveillance than the prisoner? Or is the parolee subject to greater surveillance than the prisoner due to being outside physical enclosure? The use of parolees as snitches is another issue, as with citizens who greatly fear prison, even more so the threat of prison, even more than that being seen as inadvertently swept up in an operation that lumps all in a heap. Pre-emptive ass-saving snitching by anyone subject to fear of authoritarian punishment: before and after a subpoena arrives, before and after a grand jury appearance, before and after appearing as a witness, before and after being named as an unindicted co-conspirator, before anda fter being named indiscriminately diffusely as a participant in an activity the government chooses to suspect of planning something that might become a chargeable offense which warrants pre-emptive spying and gathering pre-evidence by pre-legal means against those who need to watched closely, with purposeful clues left and rumors dropped to maximum self-policing effect. Did I leave anyone out the realm of suspicion which may well induce running to officials to relieve anxiety with a tale to tell? Even fabricating such tales if that pleasures the protectors ever able to spot a snitch aching to clear the record. A tall tale such as this one -- but how to tell who's quietly transponding beneath cover of technological simulators.
At 01:30 PM 7/5/01 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
with someone who is relatively freer due to being on parole. Now let's put some Cypherpunk brain power towards those tattletale ankle transponders...
"Search the archives" for discussions about assuring that your server hasn't been moved. In the anklet case, you play the opposite role. dh
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 01:30:06PM -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
Yes, that's correct. I am arguing against that collectivist viewpoint. It's the individual's suffering I'm most concerned with. I think it would
I haven't followed this discussion closely, and I am sympathetic to the position that far too many non-violent activities are crimes. But if someone is a violent offender, I don't see why we should be concerned at all with their "suffering" in prison. We can argue about mandatory minimums, rehabilitation, and whether violent crimes should be state or federal offenses, but my instinct is to say I'd far rather see violent criminals behind bars than on parole. Right? Or am I just going collectivist-conservative in my advancing old age? -Declan
There are two aspects which need to be considered. 1. Rehabilitation must be a goal that is worked toward, else we will need to give life sentences to all participants in every bar brawl, for where would we place the line over which one shan't cross. 2. Scaled punishment is necessary, else one may as well kill as punch. Rapists may as well kill the victim - no witnesses, etc. Between the two, "violent offended" becomes too vague a grouping. PHM Declan McCullagh wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 01:30:06PM -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote:
Yes, that's correct. I am arguing against that collectivist viewpoint. It's the individual's suffering I'm most concerned with. I think it would
I haven't followed this discussion closely, and I am sympathetic to the position that far too many non-violent activities are crimes. But if someone is a violent offender, I don't see why we should be concerned at all with their "suffering" in prison.
We can argue about mandatory minimums, rehabilitation, and whether violent crimes should be state or federal offenses, but my instinct is to say I'd far rather see violent criminals behind bars than on parole. Right?
Or am I just going collectivist-conservative in my advancing old age?
-Declan
-- Paul H. Merrill, MCNE, MCSE+I, CISSP PaulMerrill@ACM.Org
participants (6)
-
David Honig -
Declan McCullagh -
John Young -
Paul H. Merrill -
Sandy Sandfort -
Tim May