, I may have missed it, but I don't think you answered my below question:
Scott wrote: ↑March 26th, 2021, 1:44 pm
Scott wrote: ↑March 25th, 2021, 7:33 pm
If I am understanding correctly (which is never a safe assumption), that means your question is as follows: For someone who steals my identity and ruins my credit score, what punishment seems logical to me?
My answer is that I don't think any punishment for anything would have a logical value one way or other other, so the answer is null
Logical inferences have values of logical (a.k.a. valid) or illogical (a.k.a. invalid).
Propositions have values of true (a.k.a. correct or right) versus false (a.k.a. incorrect or wrong).
Events and behaviors--such as spanking a person on their butt--have neither. Events and behaviors are neither true nor false. Events and behaviors are neither logically valid or logically invalid.
LuckyR wrote: ↑March 26th, 2021, 2:46 am
Ok, that's where we differ.
I am not sure what you mean. Where
specifically is where we differ? Is there a specific sentence from the above post with which you disagree (or most disagree)? Which sentence(s) specifically in the above post do you think are untrue?
I think I could better understand your latter comments once I understand better the precise point in which our views are diverging on the above matter.
As it is now, it is already the case that the majority of inmates in the USA are non-violent.
In other words, violent offenders are the minority not the majority
GE Morton wrote: ↑March 30th, 2021, 9:13 am
Non-violent, but not non-victimizers. You seem to consider property crimes to be of little or no concern. Why is that?
, I think we both agree that crimes can be roughly classified into three categories:
-- 1. violent
(e.g. murder, rape, or a marijuana smoker "resisting arrest" by pulling away while being handcuffed)
-- 2. non-violent but allegedly not victimless
(e.g. scratching a lover's car after catching the person cheating, forgetting to return a VHS movie rental
, or using a relative's address to get your kids in a better school district
-- 3. non-violent and victimless
(e.g. marijuana possession, consensual adult prostitution, pacifistic tax protesting, etc. )
I am very concerned with #3 in that it results in the violent
non-defensive victimization of human beings by the government. I am also very concerned with #1 since it often entails non-defensive violence, similar to #3 but the non-defensive violence happens to be committed by citizen-upon-citizen rather than by a big organized government.
So, yes, I am more concerned with violent victimization (i.e. #1 and #3) than non-violent victimization. Are you not?
Most of Rosa Park's and Martin Luther King's crimes would likely be classified as #2 and/or as "property crimes" by your standards along with other cases of trespassing, right?
What about when someone gets arrested for calling a police offer a "pig", which is usually labeled as "disorderly conduct" or some kind of similar public order offense?
Would those kind of property crimes or public order offenses fall into #2 in your categorization?
Regardless, yes, I am much more worried about #3 and #1, which both by definition entail non-defensive violent
victimization, then I am about nonviolent crimes.