We Can Work It Out - Politics & Philosophy | Page 102 | Fab Forum | The Beatles Bible

Dark Overlord said

Is there anything enacted because of the coronavirus that you’d like to continue once the virus is over?

While i disagree with any sort of enforcement, there are a few things that i wish would voluntarily continue:

1. I think people should continue to only drive to essential places like work and grocery shopping because it’s had a positive impact on the environment

I agree with this; but I would add that we should have much better public transport to pick up the slack. 

2. I think the police should never return to arresting non-violent offenders because our prisons should only be for those who are a threat to society

Broadly agree, but prior to this you’d need a large scale revamping of the legality of these things e.g. legalisation of recreational drugs. 

3. I think people should continue to use social distancing because it never hurts to do so and you never know when the next pandemic is coming

I just don’t think this would be practical or desirable. Do you really want people to have to queue for miles outside to go shopping, or schools to have to make their students sit two desks apart, or for people never to be able to hug or show physical affection to their friends and loved ones? The good thing is that now people are familiar with social distancing and what it requires, it won’t be too difficult for people to take it up again if the need arises, but to ask that people do it for no good reason in normal circumstances is frankly ridiculous.

4. I think we should stop going to things like rock concerts and football games for the reasons stated above as well as the fact that livestreaming these events from a remote location would make them more accessible to those who live in a place where popular artists rarely perform

Why not both? Going to a sports game or a concert in person is always going to be much more fun because of the atmosphere and I would never want to lose that (okay, not always – I’d rather watch a concert livestreamed than from the back of a huge stadium where you can’t even see the musicians), but for those who aren’t able to, livestreaming is a good alternative. 

Ron Nasty said
Definitely don’t agree on not arresting those accused of non-violent crimes (interesting how your minds jump to drug offences I think, takes another toke on joint ).As an example, most forms of theft are considered to be non-violent with the exception of robbery. Do you really want it that having your house burgled while you’re out is something that the police can’t arrest anyone for, or the pickpocket can’t be arrested, or the shoplifter, or the guy that nicks the bike you’ve chained up, or who steals your car? These would, and are, all considered non-violent crimes unless someone is directly threatened (at which point it becomes robbery)

Is it really being suggested that most forms of theft are, effectively, decriminalised?

That’s before we start getting onto fraud and other forms of white-collar crime…

  

Whilst I admit that I did mostly just think of drugs when reading DO’s point (the phrase non-violent is commonly used in association with drug offences), I don’t necessarily think all of these crimes should lead to prison sentences, which is what DO said in his original post. There’s a distinction between not arresting someone altogether and not putting them in prison. I think in many cases prison is not a constructive solution and can lead to far more problems than it solves. Prison actually increases the likelihood that inmates will reoffend on the outside, and statistically does not appear to act as a deterrent for most types of offence. That’s not even considering the horrendous problems most modern prison systems face, particularly here in the UK. 

Simple misunderstanding, @Ron Nasty . I was agreeing with the second half of DO’s statement (“our prisons should only be for those who are a threat to society”), not the first half (the bit about non-violent offenders not being arrested). Should’ve made that more clear. 

QuarryMan said

Dark Overlord said

Is there anything enacted because of the coronavirus that you’d like to continue once the virus is over?

While i disagree with any sort of enforcement, there are a few things that i wish would voluntarily continue:

1. I think people should continue to only drive to essential places like work and grocery shopping because it’s had a positive impact on the environment

I agree with this; but I would add that we should have much better public transport to pick up the slack.

Free public transport sounds like a great idea, as it both helps out the environment and the people.

QuarryMan said

3. I think people should continue to use social distancing because it never hurts to do so and you never know when the next pandemic is coming

I just don’t think this would be practical or desirable. Do you really want people to have to queue for miles outside to go shopping, or schools to have to make their students sit two desks apart, or for people never to be able to hug or show physical affection to their friends and loved ones? The good thing is that now people are familiar with social distancing and what it requires, it won’t be too difficult for people to take it up again if the need arises, but to ask that people do it for no good reason in normal circumstances is frankly ridiculous.

Not to that extreme but i think it would be nice if people stopped crowding in large areas.

QuarryMan said

4. I think we should stop going to things like rock concerts and football games for the reasons stated above as well as the fact that livestreaming these events from a remote location would make them more accessible to those who live in a place where popular artists rarely perform

Why not both? Going to a sports game or a concert in person is always going to be much more fun because of the atmosphere and I would never want to lose that (okay, not always – I’d rather watch a concert livestreamed than from the back of a huge stadium where you can’t even see the musicians), but for those who aren’t able to, livestreaming is a good alternative.

Because tons of people attend those events with very space inbetween them so if someone with a new, unknown, and potentially deadly disease comes to a major event like the Super Bowl, you can have 100,000 people get infected and then those people can easily spread the disease.

Ron Nasty said
Definitely don’t agree on not arresting those accused of non-violent crimes (interesting how your minds jump to drug offences I think, takes another toke on joint ).

As an example, most forms of theft are considered to be non-violent with the exception of robbery. Do you really want it that having your house burgled while you’re out is something that the police can’t arrest anyone for, or the pickpocket can’t be arrested, or the shoplifter, or the guy that nicks the bike you’ve chained up, or who steals your car? These would, and are, all considered non-violent crimes unless someone is directly threatened (at which point it becomes robbery).

Is it really being suggested that most forms of theft are, effectively, decriminalised?

That’s before we start getting onto fraud and other forms of white-collar crime…

Sorry, what i meant to say was victimless crimes. While i do think that petty theft (i.e. shoplifting DVD’s) should be dealt with by paying back the amount stolen plus community service and or a little extra, i definitely support prison times for more serious forms of theft, as well as white collar crimes like fraud and embezzlement.

lovelyritametermaid said
But also to mild support you’re argument, don’t forget the slew of crimes beyond theft that are considered non-violent: embezzlement, fraud, tax evasion, obstruction of justice, damage of private property, traffic offenses (DUI, speeding, etc. that can easily lead to unnecessary violence), harassment (stalking, sexual harassment, threats), a slew of non-violent sex crimes (pedophilia, molestation, etc.), cybercrimes……

Pedophilia is definitely a violent crime, as you’re physically forcing yourself onto someone who is mentally incapable of giving sexual consent. I’d also consider things like reckless driving or willfully ignoring safety violations where you are putting others at risk to be violent crimes. As for harassment, i agree that it’s non-violent but if you get a restraining order and they violate it, then they should go to prison.

He returns! Also I don’t think I’ve ever encountered an Ellie or seen one of their posts on my three years in the forum

Link to an interesting short story I cited in one of my recent philosophy essays – worth reading for anyone interested in ethics.

https://docs.google.com/viewer…..JkZDE0MDFk