Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kenjib" data-source="post: 1015357" data-attributes="member: 530">Historical precedent has been the act of almost consistently whittling away our rights guaranteed by the Constitution.&nbsp; The Supreme Court often ignores constitutional rights when it serves what they perceive to be the prurient interests of the State.&nbsp; I understand that this is controversial though, so I won't pursue it any further here.You are ignoring causality.&nbsp; Other people will commit the crime, thus in order to deter them you increase the crime on an individual.&nbsp; A = B.&nbsp; B = C.&nbsp; Therefore A = C.&nbsp; You are increasing the crime on an individual because of what other people will do if you don't.&nbsp; It has nothing to do with the crime actually committed.&nbsp; It has everything to do with what others are doing.&nbsp; If others weren't doing it, the deterrent would not be needed.Anyways, I see your point and I can agree to disagree.&nbsp; There are many ways to interpret the same thing.&nbsp; Very rarely is any one of them objectively correct.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="kenjib, post: 1015357, member: 530"] Historical precedent has been the act of almost consistently whittling away our rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Supreme Court often ignores constitutional rights when it serves what they perceive to be the prurient interests of the State. I understand that this is controversial though, so I won't pursue it any further here. You are ignoring causality. Other people will commit the crime, thus in order to deter them you increase the crime on an individual. A = B. B = C. Therefore A = C. You are increasing the crime on an individual because of what other people will do if you don't. It has nothing to do with the crime actually committed. It has everything to do with what others are doing. If others weren't doing it, the deterrent would not be needed. Anyways, I see your point and I can agree to disagree. There are many ways to interpret the same thing. Very rarely is any one of them objectively correct. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification