one of my kids put "a crime is only a crime if it is reported"
i think that this makes sense, a bit. It would still be a crime but not a recorded crime without it ever reaching the possibility of it being a convicted crime. from a legalistic viewpoint though.
How about philosophically? What would be the philo definition of a crime?
I concur with Eugene that a crime, simply put, would be an objectionable imposition of A's will over B's will.
Objectionable to who? All in that particular community? Or only B? I guess all in that community. Since that would prevent cases whereby B is unable to judge for him or herself what is objectionable.
But then I am getting too close to common law (everyone's more-or-less agreed viewpoint) the legalistic viewpoint. Time to stop and think again.
Ultimately, a crime would still be a crime in a legalistic point. Even if a crime was unreported because the communal agreement that this particular kind of will imposition upon another still stands irregardless of the actual happening.
No comments:
Post a Comment