Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site umn-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!chaiklin
From: chaiklin@umn-cs.UUCP (Seth Chaiklin)
Newsgroups: net.flame,net.politics
Subject: Re: State Terrorism
Message-ID: <827@umn-cs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Oct-85 18:48:36 EDT
Article-I.D.: umn-cs.827
Posted: Mon Oct 14 18:48:36 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 17-Oct-85 01:29:35 EDT
References: <903@abnji.UUCP> <1559@hammer.UUCP>
Reply-To: chaiklin@umn-cs.UUCP (Seth Chaiklin)
Organization: Computer Science Dept., U of Minn, Mpls, MN
Lines: 19
Keywords: Very unpopular view
Xref: watmath net.flame:12338 net.politics:11514
Summary: 

In article <1559@hammer.UUCP> dce@hammer.UUCP (David Elliott) writes:
 
[A diatribe about how criminials, Hitler, Capone and others should be treated
Basic conclusion:  Take off the kid gloves, and bite their heads off.]

>Criminals have got to expect to be treated like the dirt that they are.

Mr. Elliott puts forward a popular view, but in his haste for
immediate action seems to presume that there is an infallible 
judge who can determine the guilt of a person in all cases.  
There are several cases of innocent people who were executed in 
the United States after a trial by jury.  Who is going to 
determine criminality?  Who is going to determine the appropriate 
response?  I rather like the idea of due process (even with the
obvious mistakes that it commits, see above).  Are we less
barbaric for acting like criminals towards other criminals?
I don't think so.

Seth Chaiklin