Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pr ... w/13298556
advances in neurotechnology were discussed. Brain - computer interface is getting more sophisticated, and the day will soon come when a judge, instead of ordering the death penalty, or a prison sentence, could have a device implanted in the criminal's head. Whenever the device's monitor detects
'the neural activity which precedes an angry outburst ... instead of letting the anger and impulsivity mount, it just intervenes on the brain to try and calm the person down. And so you can imagine a device which monitors a person's brain all the time, and looks for neural patterns associated with some kind of impulsive outburst, and then intervenes on it. And so the question for the legal system is: Is that something that a court might order as a condition of release into the community, instead of sending someone to jail?' (Dr. Allan McCay, Deputy Director of the Institute of Criminology at the University of Sydney)
What do you think? Should a judge be allowed to order the implanting of such a device into the criminal's head? Or is their a right to "privacy of mind", as some in Chile are arguing and attempting to legislate?
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Robert66 wrote: ↑April 20th, 2021, 3:35 pm There is a great show on ABC radio here in Australia - the Law Report. In a recent episode (in the second half of the 30min show), which you can listen to via this link:
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pr ... w/13298556
advances in neurotechnology were discussed. Brain - computer interface is getting more sophisticated, and the day will soon come when a judge, instead of ordering the death penalty, or a prison sentence, could have a device implanted in the criminal's head. Whenever the device's monitor detects
'the neural activity which precedes an angry outburst ... instead of letting the anger and impulsivity mount, it just intervenes on the brain to try and calm the person down. And so you can imagine a device which monitors a person's brain all the time, and looks for neural patterns associated with some kind of impulsive outburst, and then intervenes on it. And so the question for the legal system is: Is that something that a court might order as a condition of release into the community, instead of sending someone to jail?' (Dr. Allan McCay, Deputy Director of the Institute of Criminology at the University of Sydney)
What do you think? Should a judge be allowed to order the implanting of such a device into the criminal's head? Or is there a right to "privacy of mind", as some in Chile are arguing and attempting to legislate?
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Happily, such a device does not exist, so we are (for now) excused the burden of deciding if such a thing would be desirable. For myself, I agree with the unspoken idea that our thoughts are our own affair, and not subject to the dictates of others. It is our actions for which we are held accountable, and this seems reasonable to me. I think this Mission Impossible scenario is not a desirable one.
"Who cares, wins"
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
So when the implant gets infected, who does the criminal sue? The judge or the surgeon?Robert66 wrote: ↑April 20th, 2021, 3:35 pm There is a great show on ABC radio here in Australia - the Law Report. In a recent episode (in the second half of the 30min show), which you can listen to via this link:
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pr ... w/13298556
advances in neurotechnology were discussed. Brain - computer interface is getting more sophisticated, and the day will soon come when a judge, instead of ordering the death penalty, or a prison sentence, could have a device implanted in the criminal's head. Whenever the device's monitor detects
'the neural activity which precedes an angry outburst ... instead of letting the anger and impulsivity mount, it just intervenes on the brain to try and calm the person down. And so you can imagine a device which monitors a person's brain all the time, and looks for neural patterns associated with some kind of impulsive outburst, and then intervenes on it. And so the question for the legal system is: Is that something that a court might order as a condition of release into the community, instead of sending someone to jail?' (Dr. Allan McCay, Deputy Director of the Institute of Criminology at the University of Sydney)
What do you think? Should a judge be allowed to order the implanting of such a device into the criminal's head? Or is their a right to "privacy of mind", as some in Chile are arguing and attempting to legislate?
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑April 21st, 2021, 10:11 am
Happily, such a device does not exist, so we are (for now) excused the burden of deciding if such a thing would be desirable. For myself, I agree with the unspoken idea that our thoughts are our own affair, and not subject to the dictates of others. It is our actions for which we are held accountable, and this seems reasonable to me. I think this Mission Impossible scenario is not a desirable one.
Oops! Wrong Tom Cruise franchise. Should've been "Minority Report", Yes?
"Who cares, wins"
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
The day will come soon enough. A persons thoughts will increasingly become subject to the dictates of others, if they end up in the criminal justice system. You won't need to worry - chasing patterns not yet a criminal offence. And don't neglect the possible benefits on offer -preventing the violent actions that follow, in some, the problematic thoughts being studied.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑April 21st, 2021, 10:11 am
Happily, such a device does not exist, so we are (for now) excused the burden of deciding if such a thing would be desirable. For myself, I agree with the unspoken idea that our thoughts are our own affair, and not subject to the dictates of others. It is our actions for which we are held accountable, and this seems reasonable to me. I think this Mission Impossible scenario is not a desirable one.
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
We can assume for argument's sake that the judge will be just as immune from prosecution as any judge who imposes a prison or death sentence. Or that the implanting of the device will be agreed to by the criminal, in a win win situation which means they don't go to prison, or the far side, and we dont have to pay for another long term prisoner. Plus the criminal's brain is improved to be like the common kind of brain which doesn't get worked up into a violent frenzy.LuckyR wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 2:07 amSo when the implant gets infected, who does the criminal sue? The judge or the surgeon?Robert66 wrote: ↑April 20th, 2021, 3:35 pm There is a great show on ABC radio here in Australia - the Law Report. In a recent episode (in the second half of the 30min show), which you can listen to via this link:
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pr ... w/13298556
advances in neurotechnology were discussed. Brain - computer interface is getting more sophisticated, and the day will soon come when a judge, instead of ordering the death penalty, or a prison sentence, could have a device implanted in the criminal's head. Whenever the device's monitor detects
'the neural activity which precedes an angry outburst ... instead of letting the anger and impulsivity mount, it just intervenes on the brain to try and calm the person down. And so you can imagine a device which monitors a person's brain all the time, and looks for neural patterns associated with some kind of impulsive outburst, and then intervenes on it. And so the question for the legal system is: Is that something that a court might order as a condition of release into the community, instead of sending someone to jail?' (Dr. Allan McCay, Deputy Director of the Institute of Criminology at the University of Sydney)
What do you think? Should a judge be allowed to order the implanting of such a device into the criminal's head? Or is their a right to "privacy of mind", as some in Chile are arguing and attempting to legislate?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Good point, fiddle with my head, don't have to go to prison. Well folks now won't get a Covid vaccine because they think Bill Gates will be able to track their thoughts. You're proposing brain surgery to specifically influence your thoughts. I'm not seeing acceptance here.Robert66 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 5:17 pmWe can assume for argument's sake that the judge will be just as immune from prosecution as any judge who imposes a prison or death sentence. Or that the implanting of the device will be agreed to by the criminal, in a win win situation which means they don't go to prison, or the far side, and we dont have to pay for another long term prisoner. Plus the criminal's brain is improved to be like the common kind of brain which doesn't get worked up into a violent frenzy.LuckyR wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 2:07 amSo when the implant gets infected, who does the criminal sue? The judge or the surgeon?Robert66 wrote: ↑April 20th, 2021, 3:35 pm There is a great show on ABC radio here in Australia - the Law Report. In a recent episode (in the second half of the 30min show), which you can listen to via this link:
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pr ... w/13298556
advances in neurotechnology were discussed. Brain - computer interface is getting more sophisticated, and the day will soon come when a judge, instead of ordering the death penalty, or a prison sentence, could have a device implanted in the criminal's head. Whenever the device's monitor detects
'the neural activity which precedes an angry outburst ... instead of letting the anger and impulsivity mount, it just intervenes on the brain to try and calm the person down. And so you can imagine a device which monitors a person's brain all the time, and looks for neural patterns associated with some kind of impulsive outburst, and then intervenes on it. And so the question for the legal system is: Is that something that a court might order as a condition of release into the community, instead of sending someone to jail?' (Dr. Allan McCay, Deputy Director of the Institute of Criminology at the University of Sydney)
What do you think? Should a judge be allowed to order the implanting of such a device into the criminal's head? Or is their a right to "privacy of mind", as some in Chile are arguing and attempting to legislate?
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑April 21st, 2021, 10:11 am Happily, such a device does not exist, so we are (for now) excused the burden of deciding if such a thing would be desirable. For myself, I agree with the unspoken idea that our thoughts are our own affair, and not subject to the dictates of others. It is our actions for which we are held accountable, and this seems reasonable to me. I think this Minority Report scenario is not a desirable one.
I'm not convinced, but time will tell...
Phew!
Oh, I think the benefits are obvious to all. It's the drawbacks and possible abuses that worry us, I think.
"Who cares, wins"
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Acceptance won't be required. The state will impose this on criminals. Folks might just vote for a party offering to pacify the violent and save a lot of money into the bargain. As ever you will have the choice of not being a criminal and therefore not needing to worry, or if you are troubled by violent thoughts you could choose to have the Calm Mind device implanted. Police could do random neuro-checks on drivers. A black market might start up, offering victims of domestic violence a solution to their problem way more preferable than current "blow their **** brains out" or cut their dick off methods.LuckyR wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 1:19 amGood point, fiddle with my head, don't have to go to prison. Well folks now won't get a Covid vaccine because they think Bill Gates will be able to track their thoughts. You're proposing brain surgery to specifically influence your thoughts. I'm not seeing acceptance here.Robert66 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 5:17 pmWe can assume for argument's sake that the judge will be just as immune from prosecution as any judge who imposes a prison or death sentence. Or that the implanting of the device will be agreed to by the criminal, in a win win situation which means they don't go to prison, or the far side, and we dont have to pay for another long term prisoner. Plus the criminal's brain is improved to be like the common kind of brain which doesn't get worked up into a violent frenzy.LuckyR wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 2:07 amSo when the implant gets infected, who does the criminal sue? The judge or the surgeon?Robert66 wrote: ↑April 20th, 2021, 3:35 pm There is a great show on ABC radio here in Australia - the Law Report. In a recent episode (in the second half of the 30min show), which you can listen to via this link:
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pr ... w/13298556
advances in neurotechnology were discussed. Brain - computer interface is getting more sophisticated, and the day will soon come when a judge, instead of ordering the death penalty, or a prison sentence, could have a device implanted in the criminal's head. Whenever the device's monitor detects
'the neural activity which precedes an angry outburst ... instead of letting the anger and impulsivity mount, it just intervenes on the brain to try and calm the person down. And so you can imagine a device which monitors a person's brain all the time, and looks for neural patterns associated with some kind of impulsive outburst, and then intervenes on it. And so the question for the legal system is: Is that something that a court might order as a condition of release into the community, instead of sending someone to jail?' (Dr. Allan McCay, Deputy Director of the Institute of Criminology at the University of Sydney)
What do you think? Should a judge be allowed to order the implanting of such a device into the criminal's head? Or is their a right to "privacy of mind", as some in Chile are arguing and attempting to legislate?
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Well on the subject of possible abuses, here is a way of preventing many of the worst kind from occurring. What are the drawbacks do you think?Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 8:16 amPattern-chaser wrote: ↑April 21st, 2021, 10:11 am Happily, such a device does not exist, so we are (for now) excused the burden of deciding if such a thing would be desirable. For myself, I agree with the unspoken idea that our thoughts are our own affair, and not subject to the dictates of others. It is our actions for which we are held accountable, and this seems reasonable to me. I think this Minority Report scenario is not a desirable one.I'm not convinced, but time will tell...
Phew!
Oh, I think the benefits are obvious to all. It's the drawbacks and possible abuses that worry us, I think.
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Sunday's a big day and there she was chatting with her uncle while he finished preparing for church. Well right before he put on the cassock what do you think he strapped around his self? Damn right! It was a big ol' "see ya in hell" pistol.
So my professor is puzzled, especially since the morning's order of events is to get in a pretty much armored tank and drive about a mile from the millionaire gated community to the fortified place of worship in a secured precinct.
It took an almighty effort, she told us, not to stand up in that church and holler "He's got a gun!!!"
So now we have pistol packing preachers in the pulpit, and little people getting around in urban assault vehicles, also packing heat no doubt, and people saying we have a paranoia problem, but nobody's doing a thing about cause they ... just can't ... because freedom, and meanwhile there's a whole section of society who only take off their tinfoil hats and come out in the light when its time to put on the horns and raid the Capitol, but you have an issue with sticking a little device into some swamp donkey's brain when all he's done his whole sorry life is one long cry for intervention. Shoot!
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Well that's why the second word in SciFi is fiction.Robert66 wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 4:54 pmAcceptance won't be required. The state will impose this on criminals. Folks might just vote for a party offering to pacify the violent and save a lot of money into the bargain. As ever you will have the choice of not being a criminal and therefore not needing to worry, or if you are troubled by violent thoughts you could choose to have the Calm Mind device implanted. Police could do random neuro-checks on drivers. A black market might start up, offering victims of domestic violence a solution to their problem way more preferable than current "blow their **** brains out" or cut their dick off methods.LuckyR wrote: ↑April 23rd, 2021, 1:19 amGood point, fiddle with my head, don't have to go to prison. Well folks now won't get a Covid vaccine because they think Bill Gates will be able to track their thoughts. You're proposing brain surgery to specifically influence your thoughts. I'm not seeing acceptance here.Robert66 wrote: ↑April 22nd, 2021, 5:17 pmWe can assume for argument's sake that the judge will be just as immune from prosecution as any judge who imposes a prison or death sentence. Or that the implanting of the device will be agreed to by the criminal, in a win win situation which means they don't go to prison, or the far side, and we dont have to pay for another long term prisoner. Plus the criminal's brain is improved to be like the common kind of brain which doesn't get worked up into a violent frenzy.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
The facts of the case were uncontested, and the judge instructed the jury that the defendants had "no defence in law". Despite that the jury fully acquitted them of all charges.
The is a rare instance of times when the jury rules that the law cannot apply.
Neurotech could not see the point here.
I remember another case some years ago where a couple of people had sprung a prisoner from gaol. When tried they got off scot free, despite having done the crime since the prisoner in question had been falsely accused and subsequently found innocent.
Naeurotech would have missed the subtley.
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Re: Neurotech solution for criminal justice systems
Surely no one will reasonably object to this great progress?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023