The folks over at Freakonomics are one of my favorite economic blogs out there. I first fell in love with them while reading the bestselling book of the same name. Honestly, even if you curl up into a fetal position every time you hear someone mention supply and demand, go read it. You'll be pleasantly surprised. Freakonomics is the MythBusters of the econ world, i.e. they make economics fun.
Today, they have one of the most interesting and thought-provoking posts I've read in recent memory. I just wish I actually had some readers so that I could hear your thoughts on the subject...
Go read it. Now. And then come back............please?
ADDENDUM: I realize that in my original post, I wussed out and didn't take a stance, but this was intentional. I wanted an unfettered discussion with a full spectrum of answers to be welcomed. Now that I have some responses, I have no problem throwing in my two cents...
I don't think we can so easily dismiss the idea that the ends do not justify the means. Certainly many of us echo the concerns expressed in Ted's comment: if those members of society, whose very responsibility it is to uphold the law, do not act in accordance with that law, then are we not witnessing the erosion of civilization itself? After all, the foundation of civilization is law...
But what if we saved billions and billions of dollars with such action? Or thousands of lives? Would it be worth it then? In other words, what price are we willing to pay?
Even the most pious of men would sell his soul to the Devil if he could feed the world. In our case, determining what that price will be, however, is a question best left for society, since it is society that must ultimately decide whether the costs of reduced crime are too high to bear.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
very interesting, my first thought was of a super hero trying to find that balance between justice and being a vigilante. at the same time i dont find this surprising.
I would have to say, it's an interesting point.
However, I would disagree.
One poster made a good comment. When police take matters into their own hands, the window for corruption and extortion is wide open. Yes, they get things done. But terrorist organizations fund schools. Drug lords can keep the peace. Berlin was safest for a woman to walk alone at night was during Hitler's reign - as long as you weren't a Jew, lesbian or gypsy (among other things).
The ends don't always justify the means. One of the reasons this country works legally is because people agree with the law and abide by it. When police circumvent or even ridicule the law, thus begins the breakdown of a regular, orderly society.
One of my most favorite memories was the huge wind storm that knocked out power for a million homes the winter of 2006. Despite the fact that none of the street lights worked, security systems were shut down and so forth, people were still driving orderly and politely, and society didn't completely break down. This is because we respect the rules. However, when you have countries like, for example, Nicaragua where the police can and often will do whatever they want, the power goes out for two minutes and people are already breaking windows and looting grocery stores. Why? Because respect for the law is not as strong and once any kind of enforcement is gone, people immediately start breaking the law.
When we see the very authorities sworn to protect and uphold the rules break them, what does it do to the psychological fabric of our society? It's a dangerous slope to travel.
Post a Comment