CA>> That's what we have _now_. We can know a crime is about to
CA>> happen but we cannot interfere until _after_ the crime is
CA>> committed. How would you feel if I _knew_ your mother or
CA>> father were going to be shot and killed but I stood and
CA>> did nothing waiting for the crime to be committed then
CA>> offerred to 'punish' the perpetrator(s)?

RS> I would not like that; but, stopping them and punishing
RS> them are two different things.

RS> Preventing a crime should not mandate a punishment to make
RS> it happen.

CA> There are mandated punishments for even planning to commit
CA> certain crimes.  Planning a bank robbery or hiring an assassin
CA> are crimes in themselves.  We just didn't carry that conept far
CA> enough to cover other crimes.

 And, I believe the opposite. I don't believe that
thoughts should/could be criminal.

 What makes banks so special? Just another case of
buying the right people off to get their "special
treatment", IMO.

 Hiring an assasin is different in that you've
already committed murder. If you have no more steps
to complete before the murder occurs, you've
committed the act as an acomplice, at the very least.

CA>> 'Punishment' is a word used by people who have no idea how
CA>> inadequate that really is. No punishment can fix the lives
CA>> of children who are abused or raped. No punishment will
CA>> replace lost body parts because someone was allowed to
CA>> drive under the influence until they pushed you into a
CA>> tree or hit you head on. Punishment is impotent, as
CA>> powerless as regret and as useless.

RS> Punishment is not intended to help the injured directly. It
RS> is to help society as a whole. And, yes, this sucks!

CA> It has been proven many many times that punishment does not
CA> prevent crime. Increasing the punishment has occasionally seen
CA> an increase in crime. There is no direct correlation between
CA> the two.

 I can't argue this as an absolute; but, it usually
does reduce crime. Most times, when the punishment
is reduced or eliminated the associated crimes go
up.

 I wish I knew how to correct it; but, it seems
there are always some people who will do wrong to
others no matter what.

RS> Also, your scenario sounds more like self-defence than a
RS> "pre-emptive strike". I'd hate to see people with the right
RS> to kill others "just in case" they might kill them.

CA> It might require some fine tuning here and there but I am tired
CA> of seeing victims of persons everyone knew was going to commit
CA> the crime eventually but no one was allowed to interfere.

 I understand this; but, I don't have the "right"
answer.

CA>> Good girls like 'bad boys', they tend to breed. Some old
CA>> fashioned "eye for an eye" would thin THAT herd real fast!

RS> I wish I were as sure.

CA> We could try it for awhile and find out. What we have been
CA> doing we know doesn't work. Time to make a change.

 Sometimes change makes it worse instead of better.

 I'd rather stay with the known until I'm fairly
satisfied that the change is likely to make an
improvement.

 Perhaps, small scale experiments could help to
speed up the process?

 Nah. What works is often ignored anyway, and what
doesn't work is perpetrated permanently.  :^(

 I don't have the "right" answer(s).

 TTYL.

 Robert

 * SLMR 2.1a * It's only a hobby ... only a hobby ... only a
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5