Solution to Crime, step 2
I received two comments on reddit:
1)
thats a dumb idea, main reason is to many opportunities for abuse.
why should law abiding/most people deal w/ even more bs beaurocracy/big brother just b/c of the risk few - pose??
What would be a good idea is the following 1. Mandatory education/licensing for all new prospective new parents 2. If potential parent opts out from the education deny the parent all and any state benefits 3. Part of this education should encourage unfit parents to prevent becoming parents - by unfit i mean unemployed/unemployable single mothers with substance abuse problems, recent criminal records shouldnt become parents.
2)
Stupid. Allowing your own government to become the worst kind of voyeuristic criminal doesn't reduce crime, let alone eliminate it.
And if you think that being able to be caught afterward will prevent people from murdering each other, you're rather naive. So, we won't be protected, but we will be spied on. Not the world I want to live in.
I never thought people would jump at the idea because of the quick and easy but...
The first comment raises the first objection that I knew would come out of the idea. Corruption of the system. I ask you, who monitors us now? Ultimately the police are responsible for enforcing the law. Although one could argue that it's the general public that set the tone for what the law enforcers do, ie concentrating on gun laws or drunk drivers and so on. My point is that they, as we have seen, are corruptable. I must strongly point out that the corruption is the exception not the rule and am in no way implying that police forces are corrupt as a whole. So our current system suffers from the same fate.
The rest of the comment talks about licensing parents and those refusing are denied something. I'm not sure that I could defend a system like that, but if you can expand and develop the idea I'm sure we can look at it more closely.
The second comment starts as I expected. My idea is that the group that would administrate such a system wouldn't be sitting infront of monitor watching what you are doing but rather the devices would store the information and only in a case of a crime the information would be pulled from the device, like an eye witness. But this eye witness can only tell the court who was in the area at what time and this witness didn't drink too much that day or is trying to get time cut off their own sentance.
I in no way imagine that this system will stop crime. I must stress that this system could not be used for anything else other than when a crime occurs in the area.
My question now is does the technology exist that this could work?
1)
thats a dumb idea, main reason is to many opportunities for abuse.
why should law abiding/most people deal w/ even more bs beaurocracy/big brother just b/c of the risk few - pose??
What would be a good idea is the following 1. Mandatory education/licensing for all new prospective new parents 2. If potential parent opts out from the education deny the parent all and any state benefits 3. Part of this education should encourage unfit parents to prevent becoming parents - by unfit i mean unemployed/unemployable single mothers with substance abuse problems, recent criminal records shouldnt become parents.
2)
Stupid. Allowing your own government to become the worst kind of voyeuristic criminal doesn't reduce crime, let alone eliminate it.
And if you think that being able to be caught afterward will prevent people from murdering each other, you're rather naive. So, we won't be protected, but we will be spied on. Not the world I want to live in.
I never thought people would jump at the idea because of the quick and easy but...
The first comment raises the first objection that I knew would come out of the idea. Corruption of the system. I ask you, who monitors us now? Ultimately the police are responsible for enforcing the law. Although one could argue that it's the general public that set the tone for what the law enforcers do, ie concentrating on gun laws or drunk drivers and so on. My point is that they, as we have seen, are corruptable. I must strongly point out that the corruption is the exception not the rule and am in no way implying that police forces are corrupt as a whole. So our current system suffers from the same fate.
The rest of the comment talks about licensing parents and those refusing are denied something. I'm not sure that I could defend a system like that, but if you can expand and develop the idea I'm sure we can look at it more closely.
The second comment starts as I expected. My idea is that the group that would administrate such a system wouldn't be sitting infront of monitor watching what you are doing but rather the devices would store the information and only in a case of a crime the information would be pulled from the device, like an eye witness. But this eye witness can only tell the court who was in the area at what time and this witness didn't drink too much that day or is trying to get time cut off their own sentance.
I in no way imagine that this system will stop crime. I must stress that this system could not be used for anything else other than when a crime occurs in the area.
My question now is does the technology exist that this could work?
posted by Steve at 1:53 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home