|
CRIME & PUNISHMENT From what I have said under ‘Free Will’
it can be argued that no crime can be committed because the perpetrator has
no control over his/her actions. That argument is true! Nevertheless, it is my humble opinion
that it is predetermined that society will never accept this. If I am wrong,
and society accepts that we have no free will, then society is set to have a
violent future! What I am going to set out here is a
proposal to eliminate crime from society. It will be provocative.
Nevertheless, it is my humble opinion that it is predetermined that this will
not be accepted! Sorry if the above confuses you. The
problem is that although everything is predetermined, nothing can be
predicted with certainty. We can view the world as ‘normal’ people, or have
fun assuming that we have no free will. ========================================================================================== To let you know that I have personal experience
of being a criminal, this is my criminal record :-
Let’s assume that we are viewing the
world as rational, normal people, and that everyone is responsible for their
actions and have free will. There are about 75,000 people in jail,
over 56,000 are recidivists. Nothing will deter, or educate this 56,000 away
from crime. For the past fifty years, or more, every man & his wife have
had a go at ‘curing’ recidivists. All have failed. All they have to show is a
solitary success now and then. They then hold up this success as proof of the
efficacy of their pet solution. For me, the solution is obvious ….. we
have to cull recidivists! Let’s look at those already in prison.
How do we determine who are recidivists. My definition is, “If they have been
sentenced to three or more terms in prison, then they are recidivists.” I use the term ‘recidivist’ to denote
that I do not consider them human. I determine that normal humans do not
repeatedly commit crimes against their fellow humans. Once we accept that
recidivists are not humans, it makes it easier to cull them. It is not for us
to find excuses for these recidivists. Recidivists are a sub-human species …
Homo-Inferior. The fact that either nature, or
nurture, has made them recidivists, confirms that they have no expectation of
ever being humans. A mad bull elephant has to be put down. There’s no point
in talking to him! The argument to cull recidivists is
argued against on the grounds that, “Innocent people will be killed.”
However, innocent people are being killed now. Firstly by the recidivist murderer. Secondly, by the
judicial system that we have. It is just that different innocent people will
be killed. So, the first step is to cull all those
prisoners that are recidivists. The next step is to set free all other
prisoners, on the understanding that if they commit further crimes, then they
will be culled. The resources released by this cull
would be enormous. No prisons, no prison officers, no probation service,
reduced court & police service. The saving would be in the four to five
billion a year. Intangibles would be the benefits of crime being 1% of that
now. There would also be a complete
reformation of criminal law. All statutes relating to crime would be
superseded by one statute, “It is a crime to harm a person.” That would be
the only crime. A jury would be used to establish whether a person had been
harmed. Punishment would be apportioned on a
points basis, as is now for points on the driving licence. Say one point for
shoplifting, and ninety-nine points for murder. The only punishment would be execution.
This would occur when a person accrued a hundred points. There would be no
prison. The allocation of points would be
decided by a group comprising five judges and four lay persons. The person is executed if a hundred
points are accrued. Past criminality would be considered in sentencing. Let me know
how many points I would have accrued with my criminal record, as above! My other criminal record is here! ========================================================================================== I started the provocative proposals
above with :- “Let’s assume that we are viewing the
world as rational, normal people, and that everyone is responsible for their
actions and have free will.” I now have to present my ideas for the
situation if society DID accept the principle that we have no free will. My arguments are the same as those above! |
⨪