Eric Takabayashi wrote:
> Rykk wrote:
>
>>> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>>>> Point: people go on and on about what "cannot" be known, but don't
>>>> even "know" (or ask) the legal status of the average person for it
>>>> to make any practical difference, nor do posters conduct background
>>>> checks on random strangers around them regarding their legal status
>>>> to "know".
>>
>> Presumed innocence Eric.  What you are talking about is a violation
>> of presumed innocence.
>
> A simple background check is a violation of presumed innocence?

If done without the persons concent.

> Should they be outlawed, then?

The way your talking about using them, yes.

Should news identifying parties in
> criminal cases be banned?

Announcing the results, no.  All the sensationalist news stories, yes.

>Should all convicted criminals be given new
> identities or put under government protection after release because
> they have served their debt to society, and do not deserve any of the
> public stigma and worse, which could result if they and their crimes
> were known?

Yes, if the nature of thier crime is beyond the average person's ability to 
forgive.


>
> So how is being DELIBERATELY ignorant of what CAN be known (physical
> criminal records) any better than allegedly not being able to know the
> actual truth, as people directly involved in a criminal case
> (criminal, surviving victims, witnesses) may know?

People that have paid the price for thier mistakes deserve a chance to start 
fresh.  Airing someone's dirty laundry steals that chance from them.  People 
generally won't rehabilite if you continue to hold thier transgressions 
against them.  So no,  I think a convict that has done thier time should be 
allowed to keep thier past a secret so long as they abide by the law.  If 
they break the law again, then I think thier past should be used to enforce 
a more stringent penalty.

>Why do you and the
> two others get caught up in this "metaphysical" or beyond the senses
> argument at all?

Because what you propose is beyond horrible.

Rykk