Michael Lorrey wrote:
> "Ross A. Finlayson" wrote:
> >
> > KPJ wrote:
> > > The term "poisoned" often implies that the person has ingested a poison.
> > > The definition you used above makes the concept "poisoned" a less meaningful
> > > one. Or maybe you try to make a political statement on the badness of giving
> > > a subject a substance without their consent?
> > >
> > > By your definition above, if you administer any kind of medication to an
> > > unconscious, you either poison that human, or that human lost its citizenship
> > > with its consciousness, both rather uncommon standpoints.
> > >
> >
> > I think if it's administered under the Hippocratic oath or similar moral and
> > ethical standards, that's different. Administering emergency medicine to save the
> > life of another when they would otherwise die against their will is only
> > admirable.
>
> So administering LSD or other drugs to reprogram an incorrigible capital
> murderer/serial killer so that they can be rehabilitated would be more
> acceptable than executing them? When the alternative is execution,
> re-programming is a decent alternative.
>
WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS A HEALTH ISSUE.
>
> >
> > >
> > > I understand that humans in some jurisdictions temporarily lose their
> > > rights when convicted for a crime, so in those jurisdictions you would
> > > find it acceptable to perform that kind of re-programming, then?
> > >
> >
> > It is an ambiguous term. From watching the television show "Cops", I have watched
> > that television show. Some police use immediate intimidation regularly. I do
> > some business with sheriff's departments. If a violent drunk has started a fight
> > and continues, he should be subdued non-chemically and placed in a holding van or
> > cell. The police can carry tasers to incapacitate anyone, almost regardless of
> > whether they are on PCP.
> >
> > Citizens have rights with regards to anyone trying to "reprogram" them.
>
> But felons are effectively 'non-citizens' in many respects. Until a
> felon is judged fit to return to society, judged to be willing and able
> to participate as law abiding citizens, they shouldn't be reintroduced
> into that society. Perhaps 'reprogramming' would be acceptable to you if
> it were merely a choice a prisoner could make as an alternative to
> remaining in prison?
You say some felons some are not citizens, do you say they are not human? I say they
are humans and many citizens.
Reprogramming except in the context of regular education through trade skill and
literary learning and punishments for violent behavior, should not be a focus. It
sounds too cavalier to apply your meat rules to the brains of these prisoners.
If, after valid psychological examination in a psychologically healthy environment, it
is determined a mild sedative will help the prisoner cope with his violence issues, then
that may be prescribed.
In this thread I permuted the subject to "No Parole for Federales" to suggest to apply
the cane to them.
Ross
-- Ross Andrew Finlayson Finlayson Consulting Ross at Tiki-Lounge: http://www.tiki-lounge.com/~raf/ Confucious says, "My name is Confucious."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:34 MDT