Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Breaking the law to catch a law-breaker?

Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 10:19:38 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?

Does the law say so?
Rob
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 10:22:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?:

I've always found it questionable to act as a prostitute in order to catch people who solicit prostitutes, or bait cars to catch car thieves. Seems like entrapment to me, but in fact it is not.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 10:26:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 10:19:38 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?

Does the law say so?

I don't know. I guess so. Otherwise how in the name of society can a cop give a speeding ticket?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 11:28:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 10:26:51 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:19:38 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?

Does the law say so?

I don't know. I guess so. Otherwise how in the name of society can a cop give a speeding ticket?

It's not against the law for a cop to speed with their signal on?

Logically, you cannot catch someone going faster than you.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 11:31:34 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?

It depends on how one views the law, by letter or by intent. Personally, I go by the intent of the law, rather than the letter. Sure, we try to get the letter to match our intent, but we are not perfect, and sometime loopholes emerge. For example, if a 17 year old girl sends a naked picture message of herself to her 18 year old boyfriend, that counts as posession of child porn. Obviously, child porn laws are not written with the intent of catching that 18 year old boy, but they were imperfectly written, and so the intent should be considered over the letter.

By viewing the intent of the law as more important than the letter, we can also view that the intent of the action holds a significant value (perhaps not overrideing the results of the action, but to be considered), and so the intent of the action of breaking a law can override the actual breaking of a law, if no other damage is done.

For example, an undercover cop is trying to sneak into a gang (insert countless hollywood movies here) and to gain their trust, he needs to break some laws. He should be allowed to up to a limit (obviously killing 15 people would not be acceptable, but spray painting a wall would).

Going to your prostitute sting example, since most people that are picking up prostitutes are looking for them before hand, they already have the intent to commit a crime, in which case, the officer is not engaging in entrapment.

Other common cases are when cops set up fake drug deals. Obviously they are in pocession of drugs at the time, and so that is technically a crime, but it is over looked for the purpose of catching criminals, and so long as the drugs are not used (since the purpose of preventing pocession is to prevent usage).

Cases where it would not be okay, would be a cop riding your arse (tailgating) in an unmarked car in order to make you speed. That would be entrapment, as you had no intention or desire to break a law until an officer provoked you into doing it.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 1:20:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 11:28:52 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:26:51 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:19:38 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?

Does the law say so?

I don't know. I guess so. Otherwise how in the name of society can a cop give a speeding ticket?

It's not against the law for a cop to speed with their signal on?

Logically, you cannot catch someone going faster than you.

Speeding is a relatively minor offence. But if taken to its logical extent, what if the only way to stop a murderer is to murder? Would that be fine?

This is similar to the quandary posed by the Joker in The Dark Knight. "If you have one rule, then that's the rule you have to break to stop me."
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 1:32:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 1:20:59 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 11:28:52 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:26:51 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:19:38 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?

Does the law say so?

I don't know. I guess so. Otherwise how in the name of society can a cop give a speeding ticket?

It's not against the law for a cop to speed with their signal on?

Logically, you cannot catch someone going faster than you.

Speeding is a relatively minor offence. But if taken to its logical extent, what if the only way to stop a murderer is to murder? Would that be fine?


self defense and defending others from physical harm are usually considered justified, for civilians and cops alike.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 4:29:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 1:20:59 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 11:28:52 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:26:51 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:19:38 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?

Does the law say so?

I don't know. I guess so. Otherwise how in the name of society can a cop give a speeding ticket?

It's not against the law for a cop to speed with their signal on?

Logically, you cannot catch someone going faster than you.

Speeding is a relatively minor offence. But if taken to its logical extent, what if the only way to stop a murderer is to murder? Would that be fine?

You mean like killing the murderer? Or like you have to murder someone else (an innocent person) in order to catch the murder? Because in the later, that does not make sense. There is no situation where you have to murder someone to catch a murder. Now if you're talking about the hypothetical train situation (the train will kill 20 people, unless you change the course and have it run over and kille 1 person), then, yes, killing (or murdering) would be morally justified (pending one's moral code).


This is similar to the quandary posed by the Joker in The Dark Knight. "If you have one rule, then that's the rule you have to break to stop me."
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 4:39:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 4:29:02 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/22/2011 1:20:59 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 11:28:52 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:26:51 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:19:38 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?

Does the law say so?

I don't know. I guess so. Otherwise how in the name of society can a cop give a speeding ticket?

It's not against the law for a cop to speed with their signal on?

Logically, you cannot catch someone going faster than you.

Speeding is a relatively minor offence. But if taken to its logical extent, what if the only way to stop a murderer is to murder? Would that be fine?

You mean like killing the murderer? Or like you have to murder someone else (an innocent person) in order to catch the murder? Because in the later, that does not make sense. There is no situation where you have to murder someone to catch a murder. Now if you're talking about the hypothetical train situation (the train will kill 20 people, unless you change the course and have it run over and kille 1 person), then, yes, killing (or murdering) would be morally justified (pending one's moral code).

I mean like killing somebody else to catch the murderer. It's just hypothetical.

What I'm trying to get at is the paradoxical situation that arises when you have to do the exact same thing to stop somebody from doing it.

Like speeding to catch a guy who was speeding.

Can protectors of the law do their duties without breaking the law? Leave aside intent and the letter of the law and such for the time being.

This is similar to the quandary posed by the Joker in The Dark Knight. "If you have one rule, then that's the rule you have to break to stop me."
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2011 4:52:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/22/2011 4:39:52 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 4:29:02 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/22/2011 1:20:59 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 11:28:52 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:26:51 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:19:38 AM, Lasagna wrote:
At 11/22/2011 10:17:03 AM, Indophile wrote:
Is it valid?

Can only designated law officials break the law?

Does the law say so?

I don't know. I guess so. Otherwise how in the name of society can a cop give a speeding ticket?

It's not against the law for a cop to speed with their signal on?

Logically, you cannot catch someone going faster than you.

Speeding is a relatively minor offence. But if taken to its logical extent, what if the only way to stop a murderer is to murder? Would that be fine?

You mean like killing the murderer? Or like you have to murder someone else (an innocent person) in order to catch the murder? Because in the later, that does not make sense. There is no situation where you have to murder someone to catch a murder. Now if you're talking about the hypothetical train situation (the train will kill 20 people, unless you change the course and have it run over and kille 1 person), then, yes, killing (or murdering) would be morally justified (pending one's moral code).

I mean like killing somebody else to catch the murderer. It's just hypothetical.

What I'm trying to get at is the paradoxical situation that arises when you have to do the exact same thing to stop somebody from doing it.

If there is evidence that the person doing the killing will kill only one person and never kill again, then there is no reason to kill someone else to catch that killer.


Like speeding to catch a guy who was speeding.

Can protectors of the law do their duties without breaking the law? Leave aside intent and the letter of the law and such for the time being.

In reality, we actually see it frequently, police hold off on car chases, because it is to dangerous, they get the license plate, back off and go arrest the guy later, or simply follow him with a chopper and go pick him up.


This is similar to the quandary posed by the Joker in The Dark Knight. "If you have one rule, then that's the rule you have to break to stop me."
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"