Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus
Now, see, that's a problem, because IQs are not an accurate way to test a person's intelligence. They are often biased and only apply to one time of intelligence. Instead of an IQ test to get a driver's liscense, why not have a driving test (which already exists). Instead of your IQ determining if you can safely handle a gun or not, take a gun safety course and test (already exists... at least in my country). But would correctly answering "If all zorks are zarks, and some glarks are zorks, are all zorks glarks?" make you eligible for having a baby?
That's a rather dangerous line of thinking.
But what laws? Do we subject ALL criminals to this? Or just the very dangerous ones? Where do you draw the line?
I think you are forgetting the purpose of prisons. They are to keep the public safe from criminals, but also to reform them into productive members of society. Criminals are not organ donors. What happens when a person is sent to jail on false evidence?
|
Very good points on all. I know that there are tests out there already for driving, and hand guns, and those should be enforced, and made tougher. I also believe that everyone should be made to take a physical and a reflex test, at least once every 2 years to maintain their licenses. You are right about the IQ test, and I agree with you there. I was just quickly shooting off a post about something I feel very strongly about.
As for the criminal's rights, and falsely accused people, etc... I believe that the violent offenders are the ones that need to be used for this, and those gang members that show no hope of ever being a productive member of society as well. If they are going to be part of the problem, then we will make them part of the solution.
As a victim of a crime, you have been robbed of your right to live without fear of harm, physical or mental. You, as a home owner, can't defend your personal property without fear of reprisal from the criminal. As an example: Someone breaks into your house at night to steal your TV, or whatever, cuts themselves on the window glass they just broke, and they get caught by you and you call the police, they're arrested. But then they turn around and sue you for their injuries while in the act of breaking the law. Where is the justice in that? If you shoot the bastard while he's in your house, he can sue you, if he lives. No, criminals have too many rights. In my opinion, once you break the law, you give up those rights. Now I know this will cause an arguement, but let me clarify that. Criminal laws! If you just exceed the speed limit, that wouldn't be a criminal offense. It must be a criminal offense in order for this to happen. And yes, I know there will be exceptions, and different interpretations, there always are. But something needs to be done!
And I know this sounds harsh, and that it will likely never happen, but damn it! We as a society have to begin to take back control of our lives and our country. This is just a suggestion, (a good one in my opinion), but we've got to start somewhere, or there will be no "society" in the near future.
Has anyone ever read the sci-fi/fantasy books called the Star Child Trilogy? This is where I got the idea for the productive use of criminals. And as /i see it, there are far too few organ donors out there to go around, let's use these derilects that will never be a decent, productive, IE: WORKING member of society for something good. Let's give the unfortunate people that have had their lives stolen away from them by some injury or disease another chance to live a full, unincumbered life.