For example, drug users or a diseaseless prostitute. Basically anyone who did not harm another or steal I think offenders of this sort should only be assigned lots of community service rather than be imprisoned.
2007-06-18 12:12:58 · 17 answers · asked by alex d 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
many of you talk about the potential of a crime has to harm others. That is speculation and not concrete where the law works on things physically provable. Talking on a cell phone while driving is potentially very harmful but not illegal.
Furthermore, these crimes i speak of would not go unpunished but, punished by community, maybe massive amounts of it, rather than imprisonment.
My point is prison is for people harmful to society in a very direct physical way.
2007-06-18 12:55:11 · update #1
There is only one law worth listening to really, and that is the one given to you by your own inner guidance (or sense of what is truly right and wrong ) We all have the ability to hear "god's little voice", if we take the time to be still and listen. When you are following your own divine law then you are unlikely to harm your fellow man (or yourself hopefully!) and the (mainly stupid) rules and regulations imposed upon us by a mainly fearful and paranoid society / government cease to really matter very much...
2007-06-18 12:32:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Everything some does affects someone else. It's impossible to do anything without affecting others.
The problem with these "small" crimes is that they generally lead to larger ones. This is the path that they've chosen and like all paths, you generally don't stop at the beginning.
Some may argue that a law's a law and shouldn’t be broken no matter what the excuse. So, if a man's wife is dieing from Cancer, and there's a drug that they can't afford but will help her - is he wrong to steal it or money for it? That's more of a moral issue than not. I believe that everyone has the right to save themselves regardless. Still, they should realize the costs and accept punishment for their actions if caught.
Additionally, I think the problem with breaking laws is that the punishment isn't severe enough to deter criminals. I know you didn't mention breaking laws that do hurt someone, but why do criminals do break those laws? Well, it could be that they have nothing to lose by breaking those laws. Most of the time punishment for murder, rape, etc is time in jail. When you're living in a sh*t hole, what do you really have to lose by going to jail? You get dependable meals, computers, TVs, and yes, risk of other criminals, but don't they have that risk anyway?
Summing it up, I personally believe that the problem with the law is that it doesn't consider punishment for those that generally break it. Someone with a big house, good job and a family ~has~ something to lose if going to jail for a charge. On that hand though, they aren't the ones doing the majority of the crimes. If we look at the general criminal, determine a punishment ~they~ wouldn't want (they don't have a big house to lose) maybe they wouldn't do what they do because the cost is too great for the crime.
2007-06-18 12:30:54 · answer #2 · answered by Heathen Mage 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sorry yet you may purely convict a individual according to real data. For all all of us understand he's broken each regulation on the e book. yet while all you have is suspension, theories, and you very own own opinion then you've have been given next to no longer something. it quite is purely the way the gadget works, like it or no longer. purely an element be conscious: next time you ask a question like this upload greater element approximately what you think of somebody would desire to be in penitentiary for and you gets a greater unique answer. To be thoroughly undemanding this seems greater like a rant than a extreme question.
2016-09-28 01:29:56 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are 'victims' in prostitution and drug use. Particularly harm to the self.
I liked an episode of Star Trek where any infraction of a law was the death penalty.
Personally, drug users should face life sentences in my view for what they cost society and others.
2007-06-18 13:16:21 · answer #4 · answered by guru 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The only laws that should exist are those that attempt to prevent harm of another person.
There should be no law to break, so of course the person should not go to prison.
2007-06-18 12:21:46 · answer #5 · answered by Mystine G 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The laws are made in order to protect us. There is no crime that is harmless. You never know when that druggie will hurt someone, or when that prostitute will finally catch a disease. The laws are for the safety and order of our society and those who break it should definitely pay.
2007-06-18 12:23:15 · answer #6 · answered by writeaway 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Depends on the severity of the crime. What would our society be like if there were no consequences for breaking the law?
2007-06-18 12:19:31 · answer #7 · answered by llselva4 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It depends on the case. The answer to the cases you mention should be "no", because it would be better for them to go on rehab.
However, other people who don´t harm people physically but morally (filthy material purveyors or drug dealers) should be jailed.
2007-06-18 12:19:30 · answer #8 · answered by alfonso p 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I believe that they should be put in jail for very short sentences, then handed over to counseling centers to try to help them with their issues and ultimately community service so they can give back to the community in some way and evne na ongoing out patient counseling solution for those hwo may need monitoring afterwards. but no i don't think prisons should be so full with so many peopl eon such long sentences for such stupid stuff.
2007-06-18 12:16:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
There is no such thing as a victimless crime. Somewhere, somehow people are harmed when they choose to go against society and its laws.
2007-06-18 12:34:27 · answer #10 · answered by Sophist 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋