Reason.com
New at Reason
Would the treatments in a therapeutic state be worse than the punishments in a law-and-order state? Ron Bailey uses his last drop of free will to think about it.
Most Popular Stories
- St. Louis Cops Worry That In-Car Cameras 'Are Being Used Against Them' (5.23)
- Here Are the 15 Senators Who Voted to Stop Armed FDA Agents From Conducting Warrantless Raids on America's Farmers (Not One of Them is a Democrat) (5.24)
- Reason "Hero of Freedom" Larry Flynt's Latest Stunt? Photoshopping a Penis into Mouth of Conservative Pundit S.E. Cupp (5.24)
- When Government Privileges Trump the Rights of Citizens (5.25)
- Plastic Bag Ban Will Put Los Angeles In Landfill (5.23)
Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey
- Reason-Rupe: Wisconsinites Favor Increasing Public Union Retirement Contributions to Address Budget Deficit (5.25)
- Reason-Rupe Poll Finds Support for Public Union Reforms (5.25)
- New Poll: Obama Leads Romney In Wisconsin, But Gary Johnson Could Impact the Race (5.24)
- Wisconsin Recall: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42 Among Likely Voters (5.24)
- Reason-Rupe Poll: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42, Obama Leads Romney 46-36 (5.24)
advertisements
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsSite comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.
|4.20.05 @ 2:34PM|#
Um is it just me or does Ron ignore the detterence aspect altogether? You can subscribe to the determinism theory yet (or amoral theory) while still maintaning the current punish those who commit crimes system by noting that you are altering the persons environment, in particular promising to punish bad behavior.
|4.20.05 @ 2:51PM|#
Question: Anyone ever read "Queen Of Angels" by Greg Bear? I think it looked into a lot of the questions that Ron brought up.
|4.20.05 @ 4:12PM|#
If you feel you are not properly sedated, call 348-844 immediately. Failure to do so may result in prosecution for criminal drug evasion.
Mike|4.20.05 @ 4:13PM|#
For example, it's not too far of a stretch to imagine a future no-fault therapeutic society in which people who had not yet committed a crime but who have brain scans indicating higher risk for antisocial behavior might be restrained in various ways.
It's not too far of a stretch? Ok, yea, we can imagine it, but how likely is it to come into existence? This seems about as likely as the earth being swallowed by strangelets.
|4.20.05 @ 4:45PM|#
I wouldn't call it too far of a stretch. Not when I recall a case a couple of years back regarding a potential pedophile who was arrested (and convicted? Does anyone remember this?) based upon fantasies written in a journal, but no actual crime committed.
And didn't we just recently discuss something similar here in this forum, about a kid from KY who wrote a story, and his grandparents turned him in, and he was arrested for terrorism?
No, not too far a stretch at all...
Mike|4.20.05 @ 5:08PM|#
In both of those cases the person wrote down their fantasies or whatever. What Ron is suggesting is not acting on what people *say* or *write*. He's suggesting that we will be able to predict, with some reasonably cheap test, what people are predisposed to do. That's a VERY VERY different thing, and so vastly more complex that it doesn't even compare.
|4.20.05 @ 5:17PM|#
Excuse me but we're already at the point where kids are given psychoactive drugs based on 3rd person accounts of their behavior and the parents can be punished for refusing to drug their kids.
BTW Tim, nice bondage pic...got any more?
|4.20.05 @ 6:24PM|#
Anyone ever take any Criminal Justice classes? The theory of 'selective incapacitation' has been around for a long while. There are always freaks out there who think it'd be just great if we could somehow figure out who was a criminal before they commited a crime! Self determinism? Bah! Putting people in jail before they've done anything wrong is just what we need to protect the children!
|4.20.05 @ 7:54PM|#
One problem with Ron's ideas here is that he seems to think that most people will recoil at the idea of giving people drugs to prevent prospective crimes. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that many people will think that it's a great idea.
|4.20.05 @ 10:45PM|#
In about 50 years things will be just like Minority Report
|4.20.05 @ 10:54PM|#
I always figured it was just fine if someone was predetermined to commit a crime as long as the judge and jury were predetermined to mete out justice.
Larry A|4.21.05 @ 12:04AM|#
Mike: [He's suggesting that we will be able to predict, with some reasonably cheap test, what people are predisposed to do. That's a VERY VERY different thing, and so vastly more complex that it doesn't even compare.]
Well, yes. Accurately predicting behavior is a complex task. However, at what point would people accept an inaccurate test if the guys in white coats said it would work?
Consider that for the first couple of hundred years in the USA, having dark skin was considered sufficient evidence that you were incapable of exercising the responsibilities of citizenship.
|4.21.05 @ 9:03AM|#
Mike has apparently forgotten what grades K-12 are really for.
Mike|4.21.05 @ 9:52AM|#
Well, yes. Accurately predicting behavior is a complex task. However, at what point would people accept an inaccurate test if the guys in white coats said it would work?
Ron is not questioning the accuracy of the predictions, he's questioning the morality. I am saying without accuracy, who cares about the morality? If people trust an inaccurate test, you already have a moral problem.
Consider that for the first couple of hundred years in the USA, having dark skin was considered sufficient evidence that you were incapable of exercising the responsibilities of citizenship.
Yes. That's the point. There are plenty of reasons to worry about the future without resorting to some sort of Phillip K Dick fantasy.