Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (15480)	6/25/2002 5:29:27 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

And when it is determined that, for most criminals, there are no physical causes of criminality? What then? Back to the current system? Or we could go back to the previous system: Minor crimes get a public whipping. More serious crimes get the hangman's solution. Sentencing agreements could include anything of value that the criminal has to contribute toward making amends. You assume there are less costly alternatives to the current system. This is really about cost. Society has other things to do besides deal with these people. Suppose your studies show that poverty is the leading cause of crime (assuming you can define "poverty" in some manner that isn't simply whatever the definer wishes it to be). What then? Pol Pot's Communism to force all to be equal? Pretty high price, I'd say. Tax the rich until they either leave the country with what wealth they cab get out or quit working and let society take the consequences (this would eliminate that inequality that caused all these problems)? What?