|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
But that same law would equally protect the guilty as well.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13828
|
|
|
US law is designed like UK law to protect the accused. Sufficient "reasonable doubt" has allowed many guilty people to escape punishment, and I support it despite the apparent need to punish those who commit crimes
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
 |
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
I agree with everything you say, except your suggestion that the store should have been informed. In the circumstances Timmy described, the assumption that the boy was a shoplifter was pure speculation. Leaving aside such considerations as the moral integrity of supermarkets, it seems to me to be very much a question of scale - and by that I mean the level of evidence, not the value of a can of soda.
I'd agree that we all have a duty as citizens to report criminal activity, but only when we have pretty convincing evidence of that activity. If we make allegations based on nothing better than mere speculastion, our self-righteousness may have seriously damaging repercussions upon an innocent person's life. That's not something I'd like to have on my conscience.
So, in general terms I'm with you; I just don't think that there was any sort of adequate evidence in this case. So far as I'm concerned, the boy's physical appearance is of no relevance.
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
|
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
I don't profess any familiarity with Hebrew Law, but it does seem to me that to require the witness to remain silent would suggest a curiously convoluted concept of moral duty.
There is of course the logical implication that an intending murderer need only make sure that no one sees him actually do the deed; if he succeeds in this no-one can bear witness against him. Not perhaps the best way to discourage murder in the community!
I can see the importance of exhorting the 'witness' to report only what he saw, without colouring the facts with assumptions or opinions, but earthly justice would be difficult to achieve if no-one was willing to disclose relevant infornation! The presumption that God will mete out His justice in due course is of little consolation to the victim or his dependents.
I think I'll stick with Scottish Law!
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
|
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
... I'll say a bit more in your other thread, but (with due and obsequious respect, of course!) I can't see the justification for expanding the concept of stealing to embrace other cultures and circumstances.
I don't disagree with what you say, but I don't think it is relevant within the confines of the current discussion. In fact, it seems to me that allowing the trees to proliferate in this way makes it much more difficult to see the wood!
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie wrote:
> ... I'll say a bit more in your other thread, but (with due and obsequious respect, of course!) I can't see the justification for expanding the concept of stealing to embrace other cultures and circumstances.
>
I don't think that the concept of "stealing" in THIS culture is always clearcut - and certainly not clearcut enough to assert as a universal - was the point that I was trying (and obviously failing) to make. It was the introduction of a claimed universal, or "principle of morality" - which I did not make! - that narked me.
We don't know enough about the specifics of the case to make any judgement - specifics are what count!
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger wrote:
Is it not Hebrew law that if you didnt actually see him steal it, you cant accuse him... I know we have a good friend in Isreal who can let us know if Im right or wrong.
See separate thread
J F R
The paradox has often been noted that the United States, founded in secularism, is now the most religiose country in Christendom, while England, with an established church headed by its constitutional monarch, is among the least. (Richard Dawkins, 2006)
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
