quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Loki45

The OP was about whether or not criminals should be held responsible for their actions or given the equivelent of a 'free pass' because of their hard upbringing. The answer, in my opinion is no.

Actually the "hard upbringing" part is something that has crept in from a misunderstanding of the OP.

The research indicates that criminal behaviour can be attributed to subnormal brain development, which then affects the ability to make the "positive choices" which have been mentioned during the discussion.

The research indicates that a "hard upbringing" results in subnormal brain development, making "positive choices" difficult or even impossible to reach due to lack of ability to reason.

In turn this means two things - one that criminals ought not to be regarded with the same standards as those with which those who are normal might regard themselves.

And two, that criminals could be regarded as subhuman and therefore akin to animals incapable of morality in that they are acting on a more instinctual basis bereft of reason.

This gets interesting in that the factors contributory to these subhuman brains and thus reasoning and thus misbehaviour through to felony can be ascertained and therefore the malformed, subhuman part of the population can be identified and anticipated.

This gets even more interesting when it is discovered which part of the population in general form a disproportionate part of the prison population.

Cue ten pages of rowing back and/or unqualified, inexperienced, clueless "man on the street" comments that should be regarded as more valid than the research protocols and results of university professors, because now the OP seems to say something unacceptable, which is widely believed and which yet must never speak its name...........

E