> If you're starving/high/whatever and you violate someone else's fundamental rights, the reasons/excuses you give as to why your control was compromised seem i

> If you're starving/high/whatever and you violate someone else's fundamental rights, the reasons/excuses you give as to why your control was compromised seem irrelevant. > If you're starving/high/whatever and you violate someone else's fundamental rights, the reasons/excuses you give as to why your control was compromised seem irrelevant. Actions and outcomes count, not intentions. Yes, people _often_ people give rationalizations of dubious merit. These are muddled, complicated 'reflections' of the full reality. So it is wise to not give them too much weight. (But it can be very interesting to try to parse them, but that's another topic...!) Next point. From a predictive point of view about public safety, the context and situation matters. For example, consider the case of an addict who regularly steals because he is driven by the addiction. If he can break the habit (hopefully with help of many kinds), the theft problem largely goes away. Understanding the dynamic helps us understand downstream outcomes.