----- Original Message -----
From: "J. van Baardwijk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: Treatment Of Prisoners (was RE: Tragedy in Israel)


> At 13:58 13-1-02 -0500, John Giorgis wrote:
>
> > >>these are violations of
> > >>human rights of the most minor and insignificant sort.
> > >
> > >And therefore they should not be condemned? Let's say one of your
> > >neighbours gets murdered, and an other neighbour's car is stolen. We
will
> > >all agree that both are crimes, but that the first one is significantly
> > >more severe than the second one. Just because the car theft is a
relatively
> > >minor and insignificant crime, should your local police force only
handle
> > >the murder case, and ignore the car theft?
> >
> >I would actually consider both of them to be major and significant
crimes.
>
> I do not, but feel free to replace "car" with "bicycle" if it helps you
> understand my argument.
>
>
> >A much better example would be a person who's friends suffered a fall in
a
> >rock-climbing accident.   This person then drives at speeds well above
> >posted speed-limits to get the friend to an emergency room vs. murder or
> >grand theft.
>
> No, that would be a very bad example. No matter what reason you give for
> murdering a person or for stealing a car, it will still be considered
> illegal and you will be punished for it. Not so in your example. First,
> exceeding the speed limit is a misdemeanour, not a crime. Second, the need
> to get someone to the emergency room asap justifies exceeding the speed
> limit. No decent police officer will give you a speeding ticket for it;
> rather, s/he will probably give you an escort.
>
>
Exactly why the analogy is appropriate.

xponent
rob


Reply via email to