4 ms·

Are we into precrime now? A criminal is one who is proven in court to be a criminal. Civilized societies use courts to decide the truth, not questionnaires fill

Are we into precrime now? A criminal is one who is proven in court to be a criminal. Civilized societies use courts to decide the truth, not questionnaires filled out by shady people.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
grzm 10y ago
likely being the operative word. I'm not defending the effectiveness of these questions, but it's not replacing the legal system.
mamon 10y ago
But they are not deciding about someone's guilt or innocence here, just whether or not investigate them further.
- jononor 10y ago
  ...before a crime has happened.
  - Ensorceled 10y ago
    Yes. That's HOW you thwart terrorist attacks as opposed to arresting them after the fact.
  - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
    While on vacation maybe 15 years ago, I went to a library to get internet access. When I went to Google, the search dropdown box showed me that the previous several searches were all about burglary tools. Should the police be interested in that? (They were. And I don't blame them.)
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
crusso 10y ago
A widely acknowledged function of law enforcement is the anticipation of and prevention of crime. Courts provide some restraint upon information gathering, such as the approval of search warrants - but mostly courts are only involved after an alleged crime has occurred.
burkaman 10y ago
This is not about deciding the truth or convicting criminals. This is "precrime" in the same way that a cop watching someone sneak around an empty house at midnight might identify them as a "precriminal". That's cause to watch them or go ask them what they're doing, not arrest them.
ftlio 10y ago
An enemy combatants gets no such treatment. Since we're in a war against terrorism (the state's words, not mine), the legalese has mainly been argued from that distinction. In an ideal world, it takes a crime to make a criminal. The consequences of commiting a crime are enough to keep most people from committing them. But if your crime involves suicide, what earthly consequence can we invent to reduce the numbers? I'm sure it would be helpful if whatever factors that are developing the perceived rewards of killing a bunch of people could be routed, but other than that, our thinking on the justice system doesn't really net a solution to politically motivated murder suicide. I.e. is this precrime? Under the western ideal of innocent until proven guilty, yes. Do the incentives of that system overcome terrorism? No.

Are we into precrime now? A criminal is one who is proven in court to be a criminal. Civilized societies use courts to decide the truth, not questionnaires filled out by shady people.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

grzm 10y ago

likely being the operative word. I'm not defending the effectiveness of these questions, but it's not replacing the legal system.

mamon 10y ago

But they are not deciding about someone's guilt or innocence here, just whether or not investigate them further.

jononor 10y ago
...before a crime has happened.
- Ensorceled 10y ago
  Yes. That's HOW you thwart terrorist attacks as opposed to arresting them after the fact.
- AnimalMuppet 10y ago
  While on vacation maybe 15 years ago, I went to a library to get internet access. When I went to Google, the search dropdown box showed me that the previous several searches were all about burglary tools. Should the police be interested in that? (They were. And I don't blame them.)

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

crusso 10y ago

A widely acknowledged function of law enforcement is the anticipation of and prevention of crime. Courts provide some restraint upon information gathering, such as the approval of search warrants - but mostly courts are only involved after an alleged crime has occurred.

burkaman 10y ago

This is not about deciding the truth or convicting criminals. This is "precrime" in the same way that a cop watching someone sneak around an empty house at midnight might identify them as a "precriminal". That's cause to watch them or go ask them what they're doing, not arrest them.

ftlio 10y ago

An enemy combatants gets no such treatment. Since we're in a war against terrorism (the state's words, not mine), the legalese has mainly been argued from that distinction. In an ideal world, it takes a crime to make a criminal. The consequences of commiting a crime are enough to keep most people from committing them. But if your crime involves suicide, what earthly consequence can we invent to reduce the numbers? I'm sure it would be helpful if whatever factors that are developing the perceived rewards of killing a bunch of people could be routed, but other than that, our thinking on the justice system doesn't really net a solution to politically motivated murder suicide. I.e. is this precrime? Under the western ideal of innocent until proven guilty, yes. Do the incentives of that system overcome terrorism? No.