 Wolfie00My dog is an elitistPremium
join:2005-03-12
kudos:5 | reply to Jackorama
Re: [Serious] As Long As You're Getting An Education... That's cool, but this guy did hit someone. And got punished for it. The appropriate question is what is the punishment that has the most likely best outcome for everyone, including the best interests of society. Hanging a permanent criminal record on someone just starting out in life, or really not even started yet, is likely to turn a promising future down a pretty nasty path, and as a society we have far too many people who have gone down that road.
There's a famous story of another troubled youngster, who at the University of Cambridge was guilty of a much more serious offence -- literally trying to poison his tutor. He could have been expelled and thrown in jail, his life ruined. Instead, university officials opted for leniency and let him stay on and graduate. The youngster's name was J. Robert Oppenheimer, and he never poisoned anyone again. Instead he went on to become one of the most important modern theoretical physicists and was named to be the chief scientist on the Manhattan Project. He developed theories of anti-matter and the gravitational collapse of neutron stars and black holes and was a three-time Nobel nominee. He would undoubtedly have won the Nobel Prize after his gravitational collapse theory was validated, had he only lived long enough.
--
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
― Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
|
peterboroAvatars are for posersPremium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON | said by Wolfie00:That's cool, but this guy did hit someone. And got punished for it. The appropriate question is what is the punishment that has the most likely best outcome for everyone, including the best interests of society. Hanging a permanent criminal record on someone just starting out in life, or really not even started yet, is likely to turn a promising future down a pretty nasty path, and as a society we have far too many people who have gone down that road. I guess the fact this decision is being questioned has to do with the accused being in university and by extension possibly a different social strata than other offenders not offered a conditional discharge. |
|
|
|
Wolfie00My dog is an elitistPremium
join:2005-03-12
kudos:5 | I get that. But this is not an arbitrary judgment based on social strata, like some aristocrat being let off in circumstances where a common peon wouldn't be. This seems more like a rational judgment of where you draw the line on destroying what might be a promising future, to the possible detriment not only of the accused, but of the society making the judgment. |
|
 AnavSarcastic Llama? Naw, Just AcerbicPremium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS
kudos:3 | reply to Wolfie00
I want to adress the serious flaws in arguments here.
First Wolfie, Oppenheimer is known as one of the fathers of the Atomic Bomb, so following your logic if he had been convicted we might not have developed the atomic weapon as we did with all the proliferation and use in Japan........... So what is the downside of having him incarcerated????
Secondly, ironically orderwise, the guy didnt just punch his girlfriend which in plain language is ASSAULT, he punched, ie assaulted her a second time. Getting caught for drinking and driving just once is a very high indicator of alcoholism, imagine twice. In others we already have a repeat offender. Perhaps we should wait before she is punched a third time and lets add kicked for good measure before deciding to protect society.
I dont know about you guys, but if one of my kids was assaulted not once but twice by the same partner, I would be getting my kid counselling to understand why there is no reason on this earth to spend an iota of time more with the ahole, and to address fears and to address any dependency or guilt associations
--
Ain't nuthin but the blues! "Albert Collins".
Leave your troubles at the door! "Pepe Peregil" De Sevilla. Just Don't Wifi without WPA, "Yul Brenner"
LlamaWorks Equipment |
|
Wolfie00My dog is an elitistPremium
join:2005-03-12
kudos:5 | No, my little acerbic llama, there is no flaw in the argument. 
The point about the Oppenheimer story is that he turned out to be an accomplished physicist of Nobel caliber who contributed greatly to the field. Instead, he could have been a jailbird and later a petty criminal, or maybe a major criminal. Which was better for society?
The morality, or lack thereof, surrounding the first atomic bomb is irrelevant. It wasn't his place to make policy, and he didn't make it. You may as well blame Einstein, too. From the perspective of the day, he was one of the nation's leading physicists summoned to play a role in a national mission of great strategic importance.
The bottom line here is simple. If a young person commits an offense, especially a young person working towards a career, are we better off with a knee-jerk reaction that destroys his future, or are we better off carefully weighing the prospects for rehabilitation? Which version of those possible outcomes would you rather meet on a dark deserted street some day -- the college graduate with a career, or the ex-convict who's lost all hope?
--
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
― Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
|
peterboroAvatars are for posersPremium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON | reply to Wolfie00
said by Wolfie00:I get that. But this is not an arbitrary judgment based on social strata, like some aristocrat being let off in circumstances where a common peon wouldn't be. This seems more like a rational judgment of where you draw the line on destroying what might be a promising future, to the possible detriment not only of the accused, but of the society making the judgment. Of course on the surface the sentencing is not based solely on social strata but on the facts specific to the case. Judges do however have inherent bias whether they are cognizant of it or not. As most if not almost all judges were once a young man in university then one cannot deny the correlation to a bias perceived or not. The very fact you went to university and susceptible to a very mild form of intelligentsia means you are likely to be more sympathetic to this guy in this thread for example. To deny these factors is naivety of human nature not commensurate with your education. |
|
peterboroAvatars are for posersPremium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON | reply to Wolfie00
said by Wolfie00: The bottom line here is simple. If a young person commits an offense, especially a young person working towards a career, are we better off with a knee-jerk reaction that destroys his future, or are we better off carefully weighing the prospects for rehabilitation? And he is different than some guy starting out his career by working part time at McDonalds how? |
|
Wolfie00My dog is an elitistPremium
join:2005-03-12
kudos:5 | said by peterboro:said by Wolfie00: The bottom line here is simple. If a young person commits an offense, especially a young person working towards a career, are we better off with a knee-jerk reaction that destroys his future, or are we better off carefully weighing the prospects for rehabilitation? And he is different than some guy starting out his career by working part time at McDonalds how? First of all you're assuming that the McDonald's guy of the same age would have been treated differently. It's back to your social discrimination argument, for which there is no evidence. In fact there's not even a premise -- the kid is just a junior undergrad, not a friggin' faculty member! Yes, I sympathize with the guy to some degree, but not because he's some sort of fellow academic!  I sympathize with him because he's just a kid.
Justice is not about treating everyone the same way. It's about making appropriately balanced judgments, taking into account all the facts and specifics including prospects for rehabilitation, which is especially critical for young people. That's why judges have such a wide range of discretion.
--
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
― Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
|
Reviews:
 ·WIND Mobile
 ·TekSavvy Cable
 ·TekSavvy DSL
| Through my job, I've known people with little or no "promising future" get conditional sentences first go through the justice system. Criminal history, pleading guilty and willingness to work with the crown make a big difference. What I was surprised with is the leniency of the no contact order. Judge would have been justified to effectively make him change schools. |
|
 dirtyjefferAnons on ignore, but not due to fear.Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON | reply to Wolfie00
said by Wolfie00:The point about the Oppenheimer story is that he turned out to be an accomplished physicist of Nobel caliber who contributed greatly to the field. Instead, he could have been a jailbird and later a petty criminal, or maybe a major criminal. Which was better for society?
while it was an intriguing story, it comes from one person with zero evidence it actually happened.
He developed an antagonistic relationship with his tutor, Patrick Blackett, who was only a few years his senior. While on vacation, as recalled by his friend Francis Ferguson, Oppenheimer once confessed that he had left an apple doused with noxious chemicals on Blackett's desk. While Ferguson's account is the only detailed version of this event, Oppenheimer's parents were alerted by the university authorities who considered placing him on probation, a fate prevented by his parents successfully lobbying the authorities.
could it have actually happened???...sure...could it not have happened???...absolutely...but i'm not really so sure i would have used that story as an example...i get your point, but i would have chosen a more "credible" and verifiable example.
--
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
- George Orwell |
|
Wolfie00My dog is an elitistPremium
join:2005-03-12
kudos:5 | Actually, no, DJ, there's more to this than just the Wikipedia version, and Oppenheimer previously had other such antagonisms in his life and suffered from deep depression. It only accentuates the fact that throwing him in jail would probably have driven him to even more extreme acts, while giving him a break turned out one of the most prominent physicists of the 20th century.
We humans are complicated creatures, and "lock 'em up and throw away the key" and "hang 'em high" is not always the answer to every wrongdoing, and not in our best interests. And as I'm sure you know by now, I support stiff penalties when they're warranted, including no possibility of parole, ever. The operative phrase here is, "when they're warranted." |
|
