Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-09-2017, 01:27 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
(10-09-2017 12:22 PM)Coveny Wrote:  ...I think everyone agrees Doctors intentions is good but the results were bad and cost someone their life. Generally, though it’s only a loss of money, and takes repeated offenses before the doctor loses their license and no they are no longer able to practice medicine...

Victorian Police Raid Anti-vax GP John Piesse's Clinic

The GP has previously been reprimanded by the medical regulator (AHPRA). In August, Piesse and his colleague, naturopath [sic ] Nerida James, attended a screening of the controversial anti-vaccination film "Vaxxed", where he told the audience there were ways in which parents could get vaccination exemptions and he knew of other doctors who were providing them.

Under "no jab, no play" legislation introduced in Victoria in 2016, childcare services and kindergartens must first obtain evidence that a child is fully immunised for their age (including MMR), or on a catch-up vaccination program, or is unable to be fully immunised due to medical reasons, before enrolling them.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2017, 02:51 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
(10-09-2017 01:13 PM)SYZ Wrote:  I strongly believe that prosecution should easily outweigh any claims of genuine helpful or life-saving intent by practitioners and/or promoters of pseudo-scientific or dangerous clinical methodologies—and particularly those currently rife in the CAM or alternative "health" care industries. Homeopathy, iridology, kinesiology, reiki, acupuncture, rolfing... I'm looking at you.

All this stuff poses two questions: Why was the disbarred Wakefield not jailed for medical malpractice and financial fraud, and why do parents (even here in Australia) still accept Wakefield's lies about autism—and deny their kids the MMR vaccine? Sad

Wakefield has cost the lives of thousands at this point, and as you've said he hasn't been jailed. Not to mention he's still getting paid for speaking events...

Developing ForDebating.com that I hope to populate with intelligent critical thinkers. You can follow updates at https://www.facebook.com/fordebating
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2017, 04:31 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
(10-09-2017 02:51 PM)Coveny Wrote:  
(10-09-2017 01:13 PM)SYZ Wrote:  I strongly believe that prosecution should easily outweigh any claims of genuine helpful or life-saving intent by practitioners and/or promoters of pseudo-scientific or dangerous clinical methodologies—and particularly those currently rife in the CAM or alternative "health" care industries. Homeopathy, iridology, kinesiology, reiki, acupuncture, rolfing... I'm looking at you.

All this stuff poses two questions: Why was the disbarred Wakefield not jailed for medical malpractice and financial fraud, and why do parents (even here in Australia) still accept Wakefield's lies about autism—and deny their kids the MMR vaccine? Sad

Wakefield has cost the lives of thousands at this point, and as you've said he hasn't been jailed. Not to mention he's still getting paid for speaking events...

And what was the Lancet's editors' excuse for publishing such a BS piece of work?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2017, 04:43 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
(10-09-2017 12:24 PM)abaris Wrote:  
(10-09-2017 11:17 AM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  ...well, as adults we make our own decisions as to whether or not we're going to agree to something.

If you ever suffered from clinical depression, you know it's not as easy. Someone talking someone already on the edge into killing themselves is not as clear cut as adults making their own decisions.

An valid point, no question. And in fact, yes, I have (suffered from chemical imbalance related depression). I've even sat in the drivers seat of a small car at an intersection and asked myself for one good reason why I shouldn't pull out in front of that fast-approaching 18 wheeler. And then, as an adult, I answered my own question. But as you pointed out, someone already on the edge, well, that's kind of part of the point that one adult isn't really responsible for another adult killing themselves. I've seen that whole emotional blackmail type stuff too, where someone says to their (usually by then "ex) wife/husband/girlfriend/boyfriend that "If you leave me I'll kill myself." Trying to make that the other person's responsibility. It really isn't. Had they not been wanting to kill themselves already, I can hardly see how one adult could talk another adult into that. Still their own decision. Is it morally wrong for someone who knows someone is on that edge to say ugly things to encourage them to "jump?" Yes. Absolutely. No question about it. Should they go to prison for saying ugly things? Welllll.. That would sure get quite a few trolls out of this forum I guess. Including some who have said some very similar things to others right here on this forum (more than likely to trolls) in the relatively short time I've been here. Paraphrasing: Why don't you just go kill yourself. Not quoting anyone specific. Paraphrasing from memory.

It was words. Not a gun. Not poison.

Where are we going and why am I in this hand basket?
"Life is not all lovely thorns and singing vultures, you know." ~ Morticia Addams
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2017, 04:48 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
(10-09-2017 04:43 PM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  ...Had they not been wanting to kill themselves already, I can hardly see how one adult could talk another adult into that. Still their own decision. ...

It was words. Not a gun. Not poison.

Have you done any reading on a fellow named Jim Jones in a city called Jonestown?

Developing ForDebating.com that I hope to populate with intelligent critical thinkers. You can follow updates at https://www.facebook.com/fordebating
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Coveny's post
10-09-2017, 05:32 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
(09-09-2017 08:55 PM)Coveny Wrote:  The law seems to finally be moving in the direction of the results rather than the intent.

No, it's not.

There are crimes where mere negligence meets the threshold for intent, and those have existed hundreds of years. But, the idea that we are moving to a point in law where intent doesn't factor in or won't matter as much is patently false.

As for the underlying question, I'd rather live in a society where pushing gibberish is legally acceptable vs. living in a society where there are "thought crimes" and pushing ideas - even "bad" ideas - is a punishable crime. The idea of it is horrific.

So, no, convincing someone of a bad idea should not lead to prosecution. Obviously, that is a general statement. Convincing someone to commit murder could very well be punishable with prosecution, and it should be. But, even then the burden of proof should be stringent.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BnW's post
10-09-2017, 06:26 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
(10-09-2017 05:32 PM)BnW Wrote:  
(09-09-2017 08:55 PM)Coveny Wrote:  The law seems to finally be moving in the direction of the results rather than the intent.

No, it's not.

There are crimes where mere negligence meets the threshold for intent, and those have existed hundreds of years. But, the idea that we are moving to a point in law where intent doesn't factor in or won't matter as much is patently false.

As for the underlying question, I'd rather live in a society where pushing gibberish is legally acceptable vs. living in a society where there are "thought crimes" and pushing ideas - even "bad" ideas - is a punishable crime. The idea of it is horrific.

So, no, convincing someone of a bad idea should not lead to prosecution. Obviously, that is a general statement. Convincing someone to commit murder could very well be punishable with prosecution, and it should be. But, even then the burden of proof should be stringent.

Mistake girl made was leaving an electronic trail showing malicious intent, if she had just told him to his face like back in the day she would've gotten away with it.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2017, 08:12 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
(10-09-2017 05:32 PM)BnW Wrote:  living in a society where there are "thought crimes" and pushing ideas - even "bad" ideas - is a punishable crime. The idea of it is horrific.

Convincing someone to commit murder could very well be punishable with prosecution, and it should be.

These two statements contradict each other. How can you feel like the "thought crime" of convincing should be punished but punishing thought crimes is horrific?

Developing ForDebating.com that I hope to populate with intelligent critical thinkers. You can follow updates at https://www.facebook.com/fordebating
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-09-2017, 10:03 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
I think it's a question of responsibility and obligation.
Example: A lawyer has a responsibility and obligation to offer accurate advice to someone seeking his legal services. If he fails to provide that, such as giving false advice, he is open to civil liability and can be held responsible for the result of his bad advice. This is the same with someone such as an accountant or like an architect.

If I was to go ask my friend his advice on some big pulsing growth growing out the top of my head I'm just asking for his opinion. He's not a trained medical person that I am seeking professional advice from in a professional manner. He has no responsibility or obligation to offer me the best advice for my situation, he only has to offer his opinion because that's all I asked for. And if that opinion is shit, well, that's my fault for listening to shit advice.

That's the difference I think. And that's the line between when someone should be responsible and when someone shouldn't.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like earmuffs's post
11-09-2017, 12:46 PM
RE: Should convincing someone of a bad idea lead to prosecution?
(10-09-2017 08:12 PM)Coveny Wrote:  
(10-09-2017 05:32 PM)BnW Wrote:  living in a society where there are "thought crimes" and pushing ideas - even "bad" ideas - is a punishable crime. The idea of it is horrific.

Convincing someone to commit murder could very well be punishable with prosecution, and it should be.

These two statements contradict each other. How can you feel like the "thought crime" of convincing should be punished but punishing thought crimes is horrific?

Not really. If I go to you and tell you something I know is likely to lead to murder, I could be culpable. If I make up a story where I tell you someone attacked your wife or kid, and my intent was to get you to kill that person, I could have some problems. But, if I tell you that I don't like someone and you decide to kill them, that's on you.

Muffs explanation us spot on - the person talking crap has to have some duty before there can be even civil culpability.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: