If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Judges urged to consider genetics as reasons for crime   (story.news.yahoo.com) divider line 72
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

3091 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Oct 2002 at 2:59 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2002-10-03 11:28:27 AM
I was all set to ridicule this as allowing people to opt out of their responsibility etc.etc. Then I read it, and I think the main point they're making is summed up in the line:-

If people are found guilty of criminal behavior it shouldn't be an excuse but it may be relevant to the way in which they are treated

Which seems fair enough. A genetic proclivity to violence doesn't excuse the violence, but may give pointers in the way the person should be treated to prevent recurrence. It certainly shouldn't affect the severity of punishment.
 
2002-10-03 02:37:59 PM

Alrighty, Jay_vee, but this statements seem to indicate a change in the severity of punishment:

If you found that someone had a genetic make-up of this kind together with certain environmental factors, you might find probation plus anger treatment or therapy more appropriate than sending them to prison,"


While I agree that treatment may change based on what may be effective, punishment should be no less for that. Rather than giving them "probation plus anger management" in lieu of prison, I'd recommend prison with anger management classes.

I have to wonder what other statistics go with this:
They found 85 percent of young boys who had a weakened version of the gene and had been abused turned to criminal or anti-social behavior.
What percentage of young boys who turned to criminal or anti-social behavior had a weakened version of the gene and had been abused? Is this a significant statistic?
 
2002-10-03 03:03:29 PM
Yes, more anger-management classes for the criminals. That's just what we need. Pardon me while I BLOW MY FARKING HEAD OFF!!!
 
2002-10-03 03:03:35 PM
How about we don't abuse kids?
 
2002-10-03 03:04:27 PM
I certainly am genetically pre-disposed to committing acts of carnal knowledge with other men
 
2002-10-03 03:04:32 PM
Next they'll want to gas only the Jewish genes.
 
2002-10-03 03:04:34 PM
I've said it before, as have many other Farkers:
correlation does not equal causality.

maybe that doesn't even apply here...feh
 
2002-10-03 03:05:12 PM
So that is why I kicked an state trooper in the “groin area” and spent five days in jail…huh.
 
2002-10-03 03:07:22 PM
If someone has a genetic disposition towards killing people or road rage or whatever they should be in jail!

Above all others THEY should be in jail because if its genetics then you arent going to change them. its in their BLOOD!!!!
 
2002-10-03 03:08:36 PM
Someone needs to put an Algae Eater in that think tank. At least change the water.
 
2002-10-03 03:08:40 PM
AndrewFish

"How about we don't abuse kids?"

Yes, won't somebody please think of the children?!?
 
2002-10-03 03:08:40 PM

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how you would be able to tell if some one is a criminal just by considering gymnastics, unless it's some 30 year old perv eyeballing those prepubescient girls running on the mats, then maybe you would be on to something.


 
2002-10-03 03:09:41 PM
 
2002-10-03 03:12:38 PM
Yes, it was fate your honor, I had no choice in the matter.
 
2002-10-03 03:13:13 PM
i hate gymnastics conspiracy theorists.
 
2002-10-03 03:16:09 PM
I am genetically predisposed to screw off at work and drink beer.

*burb*
 
2002-10-03 03:17:25 PM
I'm of the oppinion that rehabilitation is always a good thing regardless of somsocopathic behaviour. Nobody should be excluded from this, although it's an interesting idea that it might be helpful in determining how to go about it. Obviously someone is not a sociopath completely as a result of their genetic make-up, nobody is born bad, and I don't think their genes should determine the severity of punishment though, that's a bit ridiculous.
 
2002-10-03 03:17:27 PM
In my "sane and compassionate" moments, I think that there should be different medical treatment for the violent criminal. In addition to their jail sentence. Only problem, is that here is the USA, spending any time in the general population of a medium/maximum security prison will undo any good that coucilors or the Ludivico (sp?) Technique might help.

In my more normal times, I say gas anybody convicted of a violent crime. AND the d@mned prison guards. (They seem to me to be at least as bad as those they gaurd)
 
2002-10-03 03:18:26 PM
that should have read "regardless of someones genetic predisposition towards sociopathic behaviour"
 
2002-10-03 03:19:40 PM


Any questions?
 
2002-10-03 03:19:41 PM
Honest officer, it wasn't me - it was my DNA. This all boils down to that old cliche `personal responsibility'.
 
2002-10-03 03:19:57 PM
Genetics? Bah! Phrenology is the way to go!
 
2002-10-03 03:20:17 PM
Thirdrail
What, WORK??? What the he11 is that?

DOH! THAT'S Where I've been these last few hours...

They shouldn't let me outta my group home unattended....

*goes and grabs a couple beers to make up for lost time*
 
2002-10-03 03:20:39 PM
If you found that someone had a genetic make-up of this kind together with certain environmental factors, you might find probation plus anger treatment or therapy more appropriate than sending them to prison,"

You don't have to be a genius to figure out what they mean by that. This "think tank" is obviously full of bleeding heart liberal pieces of amphibian shiat.
 
2002-10-03 03:20:59 PM
so by implication, my genetic structure can be changed simply by going to therapy? cool!
 
2002-10-03 03:21:34 PM
Tomorrow, we present a study showing that judges are genetically predisposed to throw criminals in jail. Potential criminals are advised to take this into account before breaking the law.
 
2002-10-03 03:23:32 PM
What if science finds this gene in an individual who hasn't committed a crime? Should this person be locked away for his own good or for the benefit of society?
 
2002-10-03 03:23:38 PM
Technomancer:

Better a bleeding heart than no heart at all.

And yes, I think the idea is stupid too. I just hate assholes who politicize every damn thing.
 
2002-10-03 03:24:34 PM
I always go back in forth on my thinking of things like this. I mean if treatment can help people, isn't that better than sitting in jail? But on the other hand, some people will never change. I find that I'm usually more on the therapy/treatment side. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. I'm just too damn kind and trusting.
 
2002-10-03 03:25:56 PM
Slikrx, cheers! I love genetics. It's the perfect exuse.
 
2002-10-03 03:26:49 PM
It was my jeans, don't you cretins understand? My jeeeeaaannnnnssssss...!

 
2002-10-03 03:27:00 PM
K-nuk: maybe the person shouldn't be locked away but should start therapy/treatment or whatever at a young age so they won't do something. People who have family histories of certain diseases or conditions can take steps to lessen their chances of getting it. It would be the same thing almost.
 
2002-10-03 03:29:15 PM
I don't think there is any way to not have designer babies when it becomes possible. And whether they (we) do that or not, people will be genetically screened and tracked into certain types of work. I haven't seen anyone, who is in a position to do so, who has the backbone to stand up and say "no" to the march of technological progress. We've completely screwed our planet, we knew we were doing it, and we still do it. As long as our society continues to serve "the machine" (technology) and not the other way around, morals and humanity will continue to be thrown aside.
Oh, and what a lovely day it is.
 
2002-10-03 03:29:24 PM
Prinze: Humbug! Phrenology is useless, anthropometrics will make all other methods of crimefighting obsolete!
 
2002-10-03 03:30:57 PM
I can see it now.

Doctor: Mam we've determined your new born son is the next Charles Manson.
 
2002-10-03 03:31:00 PM
This is yet another reason I pity the people of the UK...between crap like this and the "Cameras with face recognition" software, they assume everyone is some sort of....

umm...

oh, what's the phrase I am looking for?

ah yes

Football Hooligans

Oh...um...ok forget that 1st part.

Damned arbitrary parliamentary monarchies.
 
2002-10-03 03:31:21 PM
Consider whose genetics? The criminals or their own?
 
2002-10-03 03:33:32 PM
Alto_reed_on_a_tenor_sax > i always pictured you as older than 4.
 
2002-10-03 03:41:56 PM
See? I'm NOT respondsible for what I actually do, it was the people before me ... they gave me these genes, it's all I have to work with...

Boobies are cool. I KNOW I'm genetically predisposed to thinking that...
 
2002-10-03 03:45:38 PM
"If you found that someone had a genetic make-up of this kind together with certain environmental factors, you might find probation plus anger treatment or therapy more appropriate than sending them to prison,"

perhaps we should be testing people at birth & euthanizing babies with "criminal genes"

fast track this darwin thing to the point of extinction
 
2002-10-03 03:46:18 PM
Open message to Dylanspurgin and other Farkers: Please refrain from having any imaginings, images, or pictures of me whatsoever. Thank you for not stalking me. kthx.
 
2002-10-03 03:47:04 PM
10-03-02 03:08:36 PM Clarky
Someone needs to put an Algae Eater in that think tank. At least change the water.


Methinks a healthy shot of Clorox bleach would do the job nicely.
 
2002-10-03 03:48:06 PM
"If you found that someone had a genetic make-up of this kind together with certain environmental factors, you might find probation plus anger treatment or therapy more appropriate than sending them to prison," Professor Bob Hepple, chairman of the council's working party, told Reuters.

Exactly the opposite. They're dangerous and they can't help it, so they need to be locked up for good. We can call it 'permanent therapy" to make it sound nicer. And of course, once we can detect this in the genetic makeup we can require genetic screening of the fetus and mandatory abortion if it doesn't pass.
 
2002-10-03 03:50:26 PM
Just_Another_Arsehole: You had me at 'euthanizing babies'..
<dreamy sigh>
 
2002-10-03 03:55:25 PM
Lets test everyone for this gene, those with it will be sterilized. See if we can't put an end to crime in before the next generation, think of the children.


Do I have to soy sarcasm ?
 
2002-10-03 03:56:13 PM
So...no person in here believs in determinism? Not saying that I agree/disagree with any of you, but is there anyone on the determinism side of the fence?
 
2002-10-03 03:58:11 PM
Y'know, there've been philosophers who've debated this and one (whose name I forget) had an interesting point. Even if man has no free will and is therefore not responsible for his actions, we should hold people accountable anyway, because if we believe determinism and that all choices are the inevitable result of the time before it, if we establish a time before people's choice where laws are put in effect to hold people responsible, someone might end up in a different situation (that is, knowing that he can be in trouble) and it won't change what he chooses, but rather, the only choice that he can make.

Yeah yeah, it's hard to explain determinism without going in circles. I don't care
 
2002-10-03 03:58:23 PM
This is why gene therapy is so important. Instead of 20 years of taxpayer funded jailtime - one pill.
 
2002-10-03 04:01:01 PM

alto_reed???
 
2002-10-03 04:01:42 PM
Genetic superiority = Racism . Will we brand all the "defective" people so we can recognize and excuse their behavior?
 
Displayed 50 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report