 Prisons and punishment, opening the books thats thrown |
  |
 May 23 2004, 12:11 PM
Post
#26
|
|||
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 360 Joined: 6-September 02 Member No.: 3,234  |
Don't forget that magic ability is a relatively rare, precious ability to society, so I'd deem that system that temporarily disable it for the duration of the sentence (drugs, simsense either by electrodes or by datajack, cortex bomb) are used much more frequently and commonly than forced burnout. Besides, think of how precious as a low-cost source of great income the forced labor of convicted magicians would be for the prison administration. Fit them with a cortex bomb to make them behave, and set them all day to churn out enchanted objects, or cast spells with money value (like healing). If I were warden, no way I'd pass out such a potential source of income. |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
May 23 2004, 01:01 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,451 Joined: 21-April 03 From: Austin, TX Member No.: 4,488 |
The prisons probably do the drugs-to-Magic-0 thing only if the prisoner is particularly violent. Otherwise, they'd get protests, boycotts, senate hearings, etc on how cruel it is. They'd probably start with the lower-end stuff (mage cuffs, simsense, etc.) unless it's a repeat offender or the person keeps making trouble with magic while incarcerated. Oh, and if you're an "odd" magical tradition that's seen as "evil" (blood mage, toxic, insect, even voodoo), expect harsher treatment.
Remember, it all comes down to cost efficiency. It's much cheaper to install a used datajack in a mage and loop some simsense then throw them in a cell with an IV and come roll them over every few hours to avoid bedsores than it is to kill a mage's magic with cyber and drugs. Sure, stimpatches are cheap, but you also have ot factor in the costs of security when the protestors show up, the cost of their lost revenues The Abstruse One |
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 06:55 PM
Post
#28
|
|||||
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
IIRC in the Lone Star soucebook the issue of making a magician mundane went in front of the supreme court and the practice was upheld. It seems that it was not deemed cruel and unusual punishment. Also the prison system does not have close to the funds to keep them magically under surveilence 24/7. All those things (protestsm boycotts, senate hearings happened and the result is you can still do it.
No, It would be FAR more expensive to have in site medical personnel to do that. Also simsense incarceration is IIRC not allowed while the removal of the magic rating it. Simsense incarceration is cruel and unusual punishment that can easily blur the lines of simsense and reality causing permanent mental problems. Thais was discussed in the "Grey man" section of the Lone Star Soucebook. The one shot surgery to remove magic would be the far cheapest, a one time expense.
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 23 2004, 07:21 PM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 360 Joined: 6-September 02 Member No.: 3,234 |
Quoting from Magic In the Shadows:
"for long-term imprisonment, most municipalities use drugs or simsense loops to interfere with a magician's concentration. Some prisons have gone so far as to install datajacks in Awakened prisoners, to make the simsense feed more direct. (...) Some jurisditions use drug treatments or radical surgery to permanenty remove a magical criminal's ability to use magic. (...) Civil rights groups strongly protest the use of such treatments, and these measures are considered to be a punishment just short of the death penalty in most jurisdictions. Rumors abund of corporations and governments cutting deals with magical criminals, giving them their freedom in exchange for promises of long-term service (usually enforced by implants such as cortex bombs". It plainly appears that either you are actually not remembering correctly, or the statements you mention have been (wisely) superseded. Destroying a magician's magical ability is the extreme option, and disabling the offender for the length of the sentence is the default. Moreover, it makes much more sense this way. The state avoids creating cripples and likely welfare cases out of convicted citizens (destroying magical ability is the equivalent of blinding and amputating legs for a mundane), and avoids enforcing an extremely controversial treatment except in really extreme cases. There is no way in Earth the Supreme Court would rule that causing a permanent and *incurable* disability would be less cruel and unusual than running the *risk* of causing a *treatable* mental disorder (by means of psychotherapy, or programmable ASIST biofeedback). |
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 07:52 PM
Post
#30
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 830 Joined: 3-April 04 From: Columbus, Ohio Member No.: 6,215 |
Except that it's not exactly a disability. It's just taking away magical powers and making the individual the same as the rest of us. I somewhat doubt that the UCAS constitution guarantees the right to be magically active.
|
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 08:22 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 360 Joined: 6-September 02 Member No.: 3,234 |
Depriving one of his or her inborn abilities is causing him/her a disability, even if such abilities are above and beyond the capabilities of average people. It would be the same as causing brain damage to a person with genius-level IQ or a physical disability to a professional athlete that still leves him able or everyday activities. Good luck if you're going to try persuade a court that such damage doesn't constitute a disability because it leaves "the individual the same as the rest of us".
|
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 08:50 PM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 830 Joined: 3-April 04 From: Columbus, Ohio Member No.: 6,215 |
It's the same as telling people that are really good at computers that they aren't allowed to use computers, which is exactly the way US courts deal with a lot of hackers that get caught. Brain damage and physical disabilities are not allowed because they interfere with your health. You can lose all your magical ability and still be a perfectly healthy (meta) human being.
|
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 09:19 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 360 Joined: 6-September 02 Member No.: 3,234 |
Preventing hackers from using computers still leaves their computer proficiency intact (ready to be used when the court's interdiction expires). Removing a magician's ability causes him a permanent damage. Causing someone a permanent loss of *any* of its inborn faculties is causing him a signifcant injury. If my knee's ligaments are damaged in a way that prevents me from doing sports, I've suffered a significant health damage, even if I am not impaired in everyday tasks. There is no way a court could subscribe to your argument. Ask yourself why surgical castration for sex offenders has never been upheld by courts.
|
|
|
|
| Guest_Crimsondude 2.0_* |
May 23 2004, 10:28 PM
Post
#34
|
|
Guests |
You presume that the UCAS would find magical ability an inborn trait, and that depriving them is a violation of the VIII Amendment. Even if it is protected now, I doubt it was before the Dumas test was created.
Due Process, OTOH, at least procedural, is not an argument, and substantive DP is... dependant on the Court. |
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 11:16 PM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 830 Joined: 3-April 04 From: Columbus, Ohio Member No.: 6,215 |
Has FASA/Fanpro ever produced a full copy of the UCAS constitution? If not, that seems like it would be a good thing to do. Wouldn't take up that many pages in a sourcebook, and would go miles in terms of flavoring the game. Plus, it would proved ENDLESS source of debate on this forum:)
But seriously, I would like to know which rights they envision us not having that we do have now, and if there's any that we have in SR that we don't have now (doubtful, but you never know; judging by some games, I wonder if the UCAS guarantees the right to bear a smartlink, bone lacing, and wired reflexes...) |
|
|
|
|
May 23 2004, 11:32 PM
Post
#36
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Kilometers. Shadowrun is metric :) ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 23 2004, 11:48 PM
Post
#37
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 830 Joined: 3-April 04 From: Columbus, Ohio Member No.: 6,215 |
That's hearsay. I want to see the actual law that says that :)
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 08:28 AM
Post
#38
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 360 Joined: 6-September 02 Member No.: 3,234 |
Shadows of North America specifically tells that the UCAS Constitution incorporates the old U.S.' Bill of Rights; I don't remember if the same is stated for the CAS Constitution, but given that they see themselves as the true inheritor of the US, it would be very unlikely that their constitution would not closely resemble the USA one. So yeah, the VIII Amendment vs. cruel and unsual punishment would be still in force. And since the inborn origin of magic potential is by 2064 is a well-known scientific fact, as any expert witness will bring to the attention of the court, the point is largely moot. Purposefully depriving convicted magicians of magic ability as a rule for better ease of internment would be cruel and unsual punishment (the same as amputating their legs to better prevent escapes). The Court *might* relax the prohibition a bit in really extreme cases, but as long as there are other reliable ways to have mages under control, there is no way it would be upheld. And making magical deprivation part of punishment: no way it would pass scrutinize. Mutilation as punishment is just the kind of thing the VIII Amndment was written to ban (and the courts have consistently struck down attempts to enforce surgical castration for sex offenders, even as voluntary for reduced sentences). |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 24 2004, 05:12 PM
Post
#39
|
|||
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
isn't that obviously disproven by MITS saying that it IS a valid option in some cases? You're drawing a conclusion that conflicts with the book. Heck, we have the death penalty. Killing someone is not crual and unusual. Unlike castration, This method is done and is practiced, therefore cannot fall under curual and unusual punishment regardless of some people's opinions.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 24 2004, 05:13 PM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
It's only cruel if the executioner giggles and it's only unusual if you do it once.
Just my sick opinion |
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 06:01 PM
Post
#41
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 830 Joined: 3-April 04 From: Columbus, Ohio Member No.: 6,215 |
I'll never understand why they prohibited cruel AND unusual punishment. If everyone can agree that something is cruel, why does it need to be unusual to be banned?
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 06:38 PM
Post
#42
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 511 Joined: 30-May 03 From: Tulsa, OK Member No.: 4,652 |
Unusual punishment is probably in there to keep judges and others in power from setting sentences and punishment at their whim. It would be unusual for a jay walker to be sentenced to 15 years hard time, while not nessecarily being 'cruel'. But, IANAL or a Constitutional Scholar.
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 07:18 PM
Post
#43
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 830 Joined: 3-April 04 From: Columbus, Ohio Member No.: 6,215 |
Does IANAL mean I Am Not A Lawyer? Because if so, it's pretty screwed up that that phrase is common enough to merit an internet abbreviation.
I hadn't thought of it like that before. I was thinking in terms of it limiting judges' ability to find new punishments. I still think I'd say that giving a jay walker 15 years would still be caught under "cruel" buy maybe that's just me. Also, I wish the provision at least said cruel OR unusual punishments. I don't like the idea that someone out there could possibly interpret it to mean cruel punishment is ok, as long as its not unusual. |
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 07:20 PM
Post
#44
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 360 Joined: 6-September 02 Member No.: 3,234 |
I'm not saying that it might not be allowed in extreme cases, and in fact MitS tells it sometimes done, but in a limited minority of cases, it is highly controversial, and it is deemed of an equivalent severity as the death penalty. What I was arguing against were the ones that stated that it was the default treatment for all or the majority of convicted mages. Yes, US have the death penalty (to the horror and regret of pretty much all the other democratic countries, I might add, and in the happy company of some among the most oppressive and murderous dictatorships), but even there it is applied only to the worst types of murder. IIRC, the Supreme Court struck down death penalty for rape as cruel and unusual. It is possible that mundanization is applied to the very worst magical criminals, but it is to be expected to be as frequent as the death penalty. It is not the standard way of dealing with all Awakened criminals. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 24 2004, 07:23 PM
Post
#45
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
But, how do you justify to the taxpayers the expense of keeing a FAB lined block of prison cells for these inmates?
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 07:53 PM
Post
#46
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 214 Joined: 8-June 03 Member No.: 4,696 |
By not doing that...? There are many cheaper methods. It would be cheaper to just execute them too, that doesn't mean it's going to be the default solution.
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 08:06 PM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
How else do you keep astrally projecting inmates from leaving their cells and going off to either not be punished, potentially commit more crimes (possession anyone), become more powerful and enable an escape, etc? Keep awakened personnel on staff? that'll cost a bundle, critters are the same way and none are infallible.
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 08:11 PM
Post
#48
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 942 Joined: 13-May 04 Member No.: 6,323 |
Wards? Perhaps maintained by inmates for the sake of cheapness? Double-layered so those who made one ward are stopped by the other?
JaronK |
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 08:14 PM
Post
#49
|
|
|
Chicago Survivor Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 5,079 Joined: 28-January 04 From: Canton, GA Member No.: 6,033 |
Prisoners doing wards aer a bad idea, too much co-ordination, not reliable. How do you know if they did a force 4 or a force 6? they could just drop them at any time. the cheapest solution is still forced datajack implantation, with a jack-stopped sinsense feed of a rehabilitory nature.
|
|
|
|
|
May 24 2004, 08:27 PM
Post
#50
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 360 Joined: 24-May 04 Member No.: 6,354 |
You don't need a datajack for simsense. Some kind of locked harness with a 'trode net would more than suffice. Add a magemask as a failsafe and maintain an alarm ward (which is both cheap and easy to maintain) around the facility, and you're good to go. If a mage projects, the alarm sounds and the idiot's body is put into a special area where they just wait for him to return at which point he will be treated just like anyone else who attempted escape.
Assorted high-grade magical security guards would doubtlessly be around as well, especially those with a hoard of powerful elementals on call guided by an equally large hoard of watcher spirits who could all track the criminal down with ease. Since he escaped, they'd have free reign to kill him where he stood, too. Assuming they don't just put a cattle prod to his body until he's disrupted. Regardless, he only has a few hours of escape time to go with. Upon return, his sentence just increased and they have a reason to attempt to get permission to strip him of his magic forever, especially if he does anything even remotely illegal (beyond the escape itself) during the escape attempt. I can easily see a one-attempt-only law being passed. If a criminal is stupid enough to do it, they deserve the reprecussions thereof. This post has been edited by A Rodent of Unusual Size: May 24 2004, 08:52 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 1st December 2025 - 12:30 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.