> What constitutes guilt is simple, being convicted of transgressing a law. "How was he convicted?" -> "He was found guilty". "How is he guilty?" -> "He was c

> What constitutes guilt is simple, being convicted of transgressing a law. "How was he convicted?" -> "He was found guilty". "How is he guilty?" -> "He was convicted". This is a circular argument. What is the standard that quantifies that a conviction should occur? > The objective measure in my book, is that of real world harm balanced against unintended side effects and limitations on freedom. I see. How is real world harm measured objectively? How are unintended side effects measured objectively? How are limitations on freedom measured objectively? ps. My implication wasn't meant to be subtle. That's my fault.