A "felon" is simply and only a person convicted of breaking certain
laws, irrational or not, that the government has decided to call
felonies, irrational or not. The *felon* is first and foremost a
person. The argument that a felon is a "non-citizen" and therefore
different rules apply is extremely dangerous. If rights came only from
being a "citizen" then the argument might makes sense. If we believe
they are the gift of the government and can be rescinded when one
committed certain crimes *totally* then not one of us is safe. I and I
do use "totally" advisably because this argument is speaking of
literally reprogramming the very mind that makes you you to better suit
these same government powers. Except for more "humane" and dependable
reprogramming technology how is this different than the Soviets throwing
people into reeducation camps or into psychiatric wards to treat their
"condition"? All the government has to do to totally control and
eliminate any of us is to declare us a "felon" by some law or another
and they are in control of creating the laws and prosecuting them. A
very slippery slope indeed.
- samantha
Michael Lorrey wrote:
>
> 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.
> 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?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:35 MDT