Capitol Hill Blue Forums Life and Moral Issues Crime & Punishment Illegal Immigration and Appropriate Penalties

The point being: Many Ranters take issue with generalizations and "most" statements. I've simply taken a select group, backed it up with legitimate data and extrapolated from that data using the primary data gathered.

Rick I can speak for none than I, but the problem is not whether a statistical number can be accuratley described as "most" or any other phrase. The problem is applying statistics to an individual when taking action with regard to that individual.

Most gay men are promiscuous, Rick is gay, hence ......

Absolutely, but there are exceptions to the rule. (Thank you very much ).

...and you're absolutely correct, "most" gay men are sluts - but not all.

How can a discussion take place in making points when talking about ideas. Do we not have to leave out individuals, but recognize that the generalization does not apply to all?

How does one successfully navigate that minefield?

Possibly issodhos has the answer -- individualism -- for me is a matter of recognizing that generalities, even statistically accurate ones, ought never guide how the individual is treated. Each of us is both unique and an infinitesimal speck of the human family.

My point was to illustrate that you would not want your life affected by the generalization about gay men. Likewise, each person wants to be regarded for who they are not whether they are part of a statistical group.

Awesome post Phil!!!

How do we now discuss the ideas in a broader sense to find a solution to the issue?

No, not at all. The USA is sort of democratic and even here the public has not much input into these matters. My point is that the Mexican government (democratic or otherwise) is resolutely independent and made independent decisions which are not directed by US foreign policy and in that circumstance you cannot really blame US foreign policy for the results of those Mexican decisions.

Quite true. But in that case, US foreign policy is less a culprit than a stooge. Why blame US foreign policy for these things when you apparently blame corporatism.


I am a mixture of good and bad... and as a result my opinions likely combine aspects of both alternatives. Probably my analysis is incompletely dishonest.
Ardy

I believe that the correct term for our political system is: Democratic Republic.

Well, if we return to the topic, we can avoid all issues other than those that avoid characterizing people at all.

Criminal law, for example, can be based upon general principles, but a criminal case can not be based on statistics applied to the individual.

so regarding penalties, they should fit the particular acts of the party violating the law. Whether there should be such a law could certainly be based on statistical information, and the penalty provisions of the law could well include that information as background.

It seems to me that when the statistical characteristics of a group are used as the basis of policy or law, there tends to be a heavy dose of prejudice involved. I don't think the statistics in the Pew study are particularly helpful to the topic of this thread.

As I see it, if we assume criminal penalties are warranted, they should fit whatever proper objectives are intended. If the goal is really to end unlawful immigration, realistic penalties should be applied to employers. It is hard to see that penalizing the immigrants themselves has had much impact, and it does seem like entrapment to me.

You make a very good point as seen in the crack cocaine vs powder cocaine sentencing guidelines.