Is crime prevention moral?

[Panjandrum]

I was wondering if anyone else was puzzled as to why it is both legal and considered moral to prevent a person from commiting a crime. Suppose, for instance, that the police overheard a man talking with his friends about how he planned to go on a gun rampage, would the police be moraly justified in arresting him? Before he commits any crime?

 

I'm not so much interested in the law here, since that is arbitrary, but in moral issuses. Is it moral to prevent immorality?

[TheBigDog]

It is not immoral to prevent crime. But it is immoral to arrest someone on suspicion without evidence. Overhearing a conversation is not enough. Over hearing a conversation, then seeing people begin to act out the conversation may be enough. It is actions that are illegal, not thougts and spoken words. There are exceptions to this written into law. It is illegal to threaten the life of the President. The threat itself is a criminal act. Otherwise words need to be tied to actions.

 

Bill

[InfiniteNow]

Sort of like making a bomb joke on a commercial airliner these days... they don't dig that at the ticket counter, and you could get yourself into some serious hot water. It's a gray area for sure, as a joke to one is a threat to another.

[Panjandrum]

It is not immoral to prevent crime.

 

It is actions that are illegal, not thougts and spoken words.

 

These comments contradict one another. Could you please clarify your position? I'm not so interested in the legal side of things, purely on matters of morality.

[infamous]

These comments contradict one another. Could you please clarify your position? I'm not so interested in the legal side of things, purely on matters of morality.

Actually Panj. our moral persuasions are the bases for the laws we write. I'm not sure one can completely divorce the two?

[TheBigDog]

These comments contradict one another. Could you please clarify your position? I'm not so interested in the legal side of things, purely on matters of morality.

Infamous is absolutly correct. Personal morality governs how we elect to act, and how we wish to be treated by our fellow man. Laws govern societal decisions about moral standards of action. Every law is founded on a premis of morality.

 

Bill

[Panjandrum]

Really? Interesting. So when you obey a law, do you do so out of fear of punishment or because you think it is 'right', morally, to do so?

[TheBigDog]

Really? Interesting. So when you obey a law, do you do so out of fear of punishment or because you think it is 'right', morally, to do so?

Both, either. It could be out of a sence of civic duty. It could be out of a sence of personal responsibility. It could be out of fear of punishment. When you are ignorant of local laws, it is your personal morality that will help keep you out of trouble.

 

Bill

[infamous]

Really? Interesting. So when you obey a law, do you do so out of fear of punishment or because you think it is 'right', morally, to do so?

Depends on the character of the individual. I obey laws because I understand the wisdom for the majority of written law. It is true that there may be a few laws that sometimes seem a bit strained but by and large, laws are a good thing for the maintenance of society. On the other hand, there are a few individuals that resist being told that their lack of respect for the rights of others will not be tolerated. For those individuals, fear of retribution is a proper restraining force.

[Rebiu]

Depends on the character of the individual. I obey laws because I understand the wisdom for the majority of written law. It is true that there may be a few laws that sometimes seem a bit strained but by and large, laws are a good thing for the maintenance of society. On the other hand, there are a few individuals that resist being told that their lack of respect for the rights of others will not be tolerated. For those individuals, fear of retribution is a proper restraining force.

Everyone disagrees with some laws. I violated antisodomy laws without a second thought but I never tried illegal drugs because they were illegal.

[Panjandrum]

So people only obey laws they find convinient? Doesnt that imply they are indeed entierly arbitrary? And if law follows from morality, doesnt that mean morality is a learnt, arbitrary set of rules?

[TheBigDog]

No, it means that one person who answered has a twisted sense of sexuality and cannot let go of it on any post of any topic.

 

Bill

[Rebiu]

No, it means that one person who answered has a twisted sense of sexuality and cannot let go of it on any post of any topic.

 

Bill

A cheap shot and low blow. My point was that some laws become absurd with changes in cultural norms.

[TheBigDog]

My point was that some laws become absurd with changes in cultural norms.

That is a fine point. What you said before is that you choose to break sodomy laws. Put that together with your Pedophilia posts and draw your conclusions.

 

Bill

[InfiniteNow]

So people only obey laws they find convinient? Doesnt that imply they are indeed entierly arbitrary?

Yep. Just teaches people how to get away with it. I personally don't find the speed limit too convenient, so I used to use a radar detector. I personally find it silly that I cannot buy beer until noon on Sunday (yes, TX blue laws...), so I steal it instead. :eek2: JK. It's silly that I can't cornhole someone in my own home... It's silly that gay marriage is illegal. It's silly that pot is illegal. It's silly that jay walking is illegal (in some places). It's just silly.

 

 

Laws are a manifestation of personal preferences, and trying to force one's own personal preferences on someone else through legislation.

[Rebiu]

That is a fine point. What you said before is that you choose to break sodomy laws. Put that together with your Pedophilia posts and draw your conclusions.

 

Bill

It is more likely that you molded you perception of the facts to suit you preexisting assumption. This is beside the point as your post was inapropriate because it is completely unrelated to this thread.

[TheBigDog]

So people only obey laws they find convinient? Doesnt that imply they are indeed entierly arbitrary? And if law follows from morality, doesnt that mean morality is a learnt, arbitrary set of rules?

If you call constitutional governments, elected representatives debating and wooing voters, reacting to changes in public expectations of safety and morality, whole instituitons of higher educations dedicated to teaching the philosophy and law and our whole civilized history as shaped by our respect for and periodic overhaul of laws completely arbitrary then that is entirly up to you. In countries without elected officials ruled by the whim of dictators then yes indeed, you might interpret some laws as being entirely arbitrary.

 

It is quite evident that a great deal of thought and energy goes into the entire legal system of a democratic society, and the result, while not perfect, is the foundation of civilized society. It does not happen by chance, and is purposful in maintaining peace and order between large and diverse populations.

 

Bill