Psychologists studied the link between the style of your walk and the presence of aggressive tendencies. This is another in the category of 'thanks for the obvious insight' but the research isn't trivial in terms of trying to identify specifically what aspects of the walk indicate aggression. (Science Daily: Link between walk, aggression discovered)
We can go on all day about body language if you're senselessly bored but the punchline is at the end of the article. There's some thinking this type of study in combination with CCTV may be useful for detecting 'aggressive individuals' (i.e. automatically assumed to be 'bad actors') as potential sources of crime.
Maybe it's also senselessly boring to you to consider the increases in prosecution for 'pre-crime' in the modern world but there are multiple examples of people being arrested for considering this terrorist act or that one but they did not actually do it. In effect, they're arrested for the pre-crime and not the actuality of it.
The shift in policing from capture and prosecution to anticipation and prevention has had unfortunate consequences and that gets philosophical, to some extent, but it's probably not necessary to thump the point when it's hardly a difficult thing to see.
We can't sit idly by while people consider, say, torching the Empire State Building or some such. Conspiracy to commit such a crime is validly prosecuted but the extents we are willing to go to identify such people are reaching extremes and that carries a concomitant risk of mistakes and false prosecution. For example, we detected 'aggressive motions' in Joe Blow so we arrested him. Maybe he was pissed off because he got jacked around in a McDonald's drive-thru, cops don't know, but he gets busted anyway.
No need to go on all day in the dangers of prosecuting thought crime but there's one hell of a lot of that taking place and we have not noticed any good effect from it since there doesn't seem to be any reduction in crime even while there are substantial increases in prosecution of anticipated crimes. That happens hundreds of times annually with police when someone is shot because 'I thought I was in danger of my life.' On subsequent analysis, there's often no reason for that thinking and yet some citizen has ended up full of bullet holes.
There's no need to get extreme and rant since the problem is obvious and the article is to register additional concern at what we see as yet another intrusion into our lives for reasons which probably do not serve us well.
How the editorial plays out is for you to write but be careful out there.
We can go on all day about body language if you're senselessly bored but the punchline is at the end of the article. There's some thinking this type of study in combination with CCTV may be useful for detecting 'aggressive individuals' (i.e. automatically assumed to be 'bad actors') as potential sources of crime.
Maybe it's also senselessly boring to you to consider the increases in prosecution for 'pre-crime' in the modern world but there are multiple examples of people being arrested for considering this terrorist act or that one but they did not actually do it. In effect, they're arrested for the pre-crime and not the actuality of it.
The shift in policing from capture and prosecution to anticipation and prevention has had unfortunate consequences and that gets philosophical, to some extent, but it's probably not necessary to thump the point when it's hardly a difficult thing to see.
We can't sit idly by while people consider, say, torching the Empire State Building or some such. Conspiracy to commit such a crime is validly prosecuted but the extents we are willing to go to identify such people are reaching extremes and that carries a concomitant risk of mistakes and false prosecution. For example, we detected 'aggressive motions' in Joe Blow so we arrested him. Maybe he was pissed off because he got jacked around in a McDonald's drive-thru, cops don't know, but he gets busted anyway.
No need to go on all day in the dangers of prosecuting thought crime but there's one hell of a lot of that taking place and we have not noticed any good effect from it since there doesn't seem to be any reduction in crime even while there are substantial increases in prosecution of anticipated crimes. That happens hundreds of times annually with police when someone is shot because 'I thought I was in danger of my life.' On subsequent analysis, there's often no reason for that thinking and yet some citizen has ended up full of bullet holes.
There's no need to get extreme and rant since the problem is obvious and the article is to register additional concern at what we see as yet another intrusion into our lives for reasons which probably do not serve us well.
How the editorial plays out is for you to write but be careful out there.
No comments:
Post a Comment