Imagine we're in the days of the first few Habitats. I wouldn't
foresee the need to build jails or prisons when no criminals yet
exist. Then one day a rape or murder happens, or some other crime.
Assuming the accused is tried under local law, what shall we do with
the criminal if found guilty. House arrest? Convert a broom closet?
Who do we designate to be his guard and cook food for him?

Should we ship him back to Earth? How much would that cost? Would
people go for letting him go scott free by shipping him back to
Earth?

Any thoughts?

TangoMan

Send the criminal nude to empty space. The problem
will go with the explotion. No evidence will be left.

Omar

--- victoriatangoman wrote:

Well, since you could think of it, maybe the folks building the
habitat can. Thus they can build jails into the design from the
beginning. Also, some arrangement can be made with the government of
the victim. It is, in fact, unlikely that the locals will have the
authority to hand down a death sentance (or really anything more than
holding until somebody of higher position/rank/whatever can deal with
the situation).

Xenophile (who has a good alibi)

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophile"
wrote:
> Well, since you could think of it, maybe the folks building the
> habitat can. Thus they can build jails into the design from the
> beginning. Also, some arrangement can be made with the government
of
> the victim. It is, in fact, unlikely that the locals will have
the
> authority to hand down a death sentance (or really anything more
than
> holding until somebody of higher position/rank/whatever can deal
with
> the situation).
>
> Xenophile (who has a good alibi)

I'm of the opinion that the design of the Habitat will be one of
efficiency. Why build buildings that will see so little use?

To make the question more interesting for you, why not assume that
the Habitat is an independent entity of Earth, and thus can't pass
the buck.

I'm wondering how a group of 1,000 - 50,000 people (early Habitats)
incarcerate a few people from their population? To make the
conundrum more challenging, let's say it's for a crime that usually
doesn't involve the death penalty, so we can dispense with the
pushing them out of the airlock for a barfight, property crime,
domestic disputes, etc.

What do you do with the first criminal in your group? Who looks
after him? Do you just deport him back to Earth, unpunished, and
claim the deportation is the de facto punishment?

TangoMan

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "victoriatangoman"
wrote:
> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophile"
> wrote:
> > Well, since you could think of it, maybe the folks building the
> > habitat can. Thus they can build jails into the design from the
> > beginning. Also, some arrangement can be made with the government
> of
> > the victim. It is, in fact, unlikely that the locals will have
> the
> > authority to hand down a death sentance (or really anything more
> than
> > holding until somebody of higher position/rank/whatever can deal
> with
> > the situation).
> >
> > Xenophile (who has a good alibi)
>
> I'm of the opinion that the design of the Habitat will be one of
> efficiency. Why build buildings that will see so little use?

I say not a jail per se, but a jail adjunct to a courthouse, which
itself may be adjunct to government offices. Inclued should one or two
high sucurity cells, just in case. It the for the safety of settlement
that there be somewhere to put criminals in, even if it temporary,
either of court apperances or transit to high courts somewhere else.

> To make the question more interesting for you, why not assume that
> the Habitat is an independent entity of Earth, and thus can't pass
> the buck.

That will the case only far on in the future, when settlement are
inter-stelar in nature. In the near to indermedate futures, appels to
Earth would quite common, IMHO.

> I'm wondering how a group of 1,000 - 50,000 people (early Habitats)
> incarcerate a few people from their population? To make the
> conundrum more challenging, let's say it's for a crime that usually
> doesn't involve the death penalty, so we can dispense with the
> pushing them out of the airlock for a barfight, property crime,
> domestic disputes, etc.

Well, I think that some of what you discribe would fall into civil
law, which I think (correct me if I'm wrong) does not give jail time.
On option is that a cluster of settlement create a common justice
system, with a common set of laws, courts of appels, and penal
infrastucture, etc. The cluster could create it own specialized penal
settlement, just for prisoners.

> What do you do with the first criminal in your group? Who looks
> after him? Do you just deport him back to Earth, unpunished, and
> claim the deportation is the de facto punishment?

It depends on the offender, the offence, and the laws of the
settlement and/or the "mother country," if any, of the settlement.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "victoriatangoman"
wrote:
> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophile"
> wrote:
> > Well, since you could think of it, maybe the folks building the
> > habitat can. Thus they can build jails into the design from the
> > beginning. Also, some arrangement can be made with the
government
> of
> > the victim. It is, in fact, unlikely that the locals will have
> the
> > authority to hand down a death sentance (or really anything more
> than
> > holding until somebody of higher position/rank/whatever can deal
> with
> > the situation).
> >
> > Xenophile (who has a good alibi)
>
> I'm of the opinion that the design of the Habitat will be one of
> efficiency. Why build buildings that will see so little use?
>
> To make the question more interesting for you, why not assume that
> the Habitat is an independent entity of Earth, and thus can't pass
> the buck.
>
> I'm wondering how a group of 1,000 - 50,000 people (early Habitats)
> incarcerate a few people from their population? To make the
> conundrum more challenging, let's say it's for a crime that usually
> doesn't involve the death penalty, so we can dispense with the
> pushing them out of the airlock for a barfight, property crime,
> domestic disputes, etc.
>
> What do you do with the first criminal in your group? Who looks
> after him? Do you just deport him back to Earth, unpunished, and
> claim the deportation is the de facto punishment?
>
> TangoMan

Greetings,

Just a couple of thoughts, I live in Canberra, Australia, population
300,000 and we do not have a local prison, there are six police
stations, each with limited facilities for temporary holding, after
that there is a couple of holding cells at the courts and a remand
centre, again for temporary holding while the fate of the occupants
is decided, capacity about 60 or so (I think, not sure of the exact
number but not very large). Anybody who is sentenced to real time
(more than, say 30 days) is sent to the prison in New South Wales, an
interstate transfer, the local government has an agreement with the
N.S.W state government for the holding of prisoners and pays for them
to held. You may have to transfer prisoners to a place on Earth for
holding, of course if that is too expensive then you would have to
have a local prison.

If you are looking for a model for how a small population looks after
the local crime problem you only have to go back in history a bit and
look at how small towns or isolated communities did it, what did a
town in the American west do with its prisons, how did it deal with
malcontents, what about isolated communities? A lot will depend on
what the legal status of the habitat is, are they a self governing
entity or are they just an isolated town of a larger state?

Canberra is in the Australian Capital Territory and is a self
governing area without the rights of statehood, this means that the
Federal Government has the power to override our laws and decisions
if they want (so much for self government, of course the first
habitats may have the same kind of self government). 300,000 is a
fair size for a habitat but not impossible, even when we were much
smaller we still had a crime issues and a need for prisons and we
solved it by shipping prisoners interstate, habitats could do the
same thing or they could band together to share hold facilities, in
fact it should be pretty easy for them, consider all they need is a
smaller habitat or station (two drums connected by a long wire would
work) that has to be supplied from the outside and isolated from
everybody else would make a good prison, with low enough cost to
orbit, you could even make a case for that being a for profit
industry, it gets the offender away from the society that sentenced
them and puts them where it is hard to escape from. I personally
don't like the idea of being somebody's gaoler but it is a growth
industry in some parts of the world and just a couple of centuries
ago, it helped build this country.

I think that a little bit of selection of the people
going to the space habitat, (looking into the criminal
records of the family tree, so to speak) could reduce
criminality to the minimum. If there is some cases, I
think that a small jail for 100 should be enough for
up to 100.000 people.

Omar

--- darrenb500 wrote:

The point has been made, and I agree with it -- With square footage
at a premium for supporting life, scientific experimentation, etc --
no habitat designer will want to waste space with a brig that will
seldom see use.

I think the actual solution would be dependent upon the
environment? Is the exterior environment hostile? Is water readily
available?

Presumably, early habitats will be manned by "the best and
brightest" -- will they feel obligated to conform to terrestrial
judiciary protocols?

If I were out there and in charge, and someone under my command or
jurisdiction committed a minor crime, I'd put them on half or
quarter-rations for a number of days appropriate to the crime. Take
away most of a man's food and water for a couple of weeks, and he
will think twice next time. Of course -- the argument could be made
that he'd just steal someone else's. To which I say: In space, or
other hostile environment, stealing water is a capital crime.

The loss of sustenance, or privilege, or rank. Extra duty, longer
shifts -- there are a number of ways to penalize individuals without
incarceration. A lot of the cultural problems that exist here on
good o' Terra are *because* we are an 'incaceration society',
instead of a 'rehabilitation society'.

Sean

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, omar vega wrote:

You wouldn't be suggesting profiling and an exclusionary eugenics program,
would you?

Val

Yes, some. But not more that companies usually ask for
people to apply for a job. Some psycological analysis
at least (perhaps some genetical test, who knows),
will have to be done to prevent psychos to get in. An
artificial environment will be very fragile. A psycho
could produce a disaster. You do not want wild people
to be in charge of it.

Omar

--- Valens Agnitio wrote:

Well, let's see what we have, here.

a) This is fairly early in the history of space colonization.

b) The habitat is independant of Earth or other nations, a city-state

c) This is a town or small city of about ten thousand, and includes
children, teens, young, middle-aged, and older adults.

d) Much of the population is civilian, though there may be some
millitary personnel, and some sort of governmental personnel is
inevitable.

We should decide what the crime is, but certainly it should be more
serious than cussing in a park, and less serious than mass murder. I
would suggest vandalism. Now, vandalism in a space habitat could be
a very serious crime indeed, and could well be a capital crime. But
I'm suggesting something like spray painting dirty words on the front
of an office, and maybe breaking some of that office's windows. Anti-
social, damaging to property, and disruptive to the running of the
business, but not likely to cause physical injury, much less the
deaths of everybody living in the habitat.

Is this agreeable to all?

Xenophile (wiping off the fingerprints)

In a message dated 6/16/04 5:52:54 PM, xenophile2002@... writes:

<< We should decide what the crime is, but certainly it should be more

serious than cussing in a park, and less serious than mass murder. I

would suggest vandalism. Now, vandalism in a space habitat could be

a very serious crime indeed, and could well be a capital crime. But

I'm suggesting something like spray painting dirty words on the front

of an office, and maybe breaking some of that office's windows. Anti-

social, damaging to property, and disruptive to the running of the

business, but not likely to cause physical injury, much less the

deaths of everybody living in the habitat. >>

First of all, any of list of offenses should be very limited and restricted
to things that are really threatening (from leaving a airlock open to murder)
A good rule of thumb is that such list should be no more than 20 pages in
total and that it be so clear in plan English that NOBODY can plead
misunderstanding. Ok, having say that, if the offense is nonviolent in nature such as
theivery, then the solution is to pratice reinsitution in which the offenser repay
his vitcim in value of goods or labor. This will hep restores a community
feeling and a sense of teamwork. If it's violent like robbery or murder and the
offenser show no willingness to repay his vitcim or remorse, then he should be
locked up. While on this subject I must stress very very strongly that such
offenses centering on consensual acts or religious mores should NOT be made
crime, we got too much work to do to play spy on our teammates and such thing
are distracting from real task of survival.

Carl E. Mullin
visionary artist and entrepreneur
homo asteralis
ravenart@...
www.ravenartstudio.com

The more you love, the more you can love-and the more intensely you love.
Nor is there any limit on how many you can love.
If a person had time enough, he could love all of the majority who are decent
and just.
-Robert A. Heinlein (Time Enough For Love)

"Fear is the mind killer. Fear is the little death that brings total
obliteration." -- Dune

Freedom, Immortality, and the Stars!

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "sean_page"
> The point has been made, and I agree with it -- With square footage
> at a premium for supporting life, scientific experimentation, etc --
> no habitat designer will want to waste space with a brig that will
> seldom see use.

But what would you do if the need came about?

> I think the actual solution would be dependent upon the
> environment? Is the exterior environment hostile? Is water readily
> available?
>
> Presumably, early habitats will be manned by "the best and
> brightest" -- will they feel obligated to conform to terrestrial
> judiciary protocols?

Doesn't matter wether the like or not like "terrestrial judiciary
protocols" -- they would HAVE to follow it, lest some kind of modified
verson.

> If I were out there and in charge, and someone under my command or
> jurisdiction committed a minor crime, I'd put them on half or
> quarter-rations for a number of days appropriate to the crime. Take
> away most of a man's food and water for a couple of weeks, and he
> will think twice next time. Of course -- the argument could be made
> that he'd just steal someone else's. To which I say: In space, or
> other hostile environment, stealing water is a capital crime.
>
> The loss of sustenance, or privilege, or rank. Extra duty, longer
> shifts -- there are a number of ways to penalize individuals without
> incarceration. A lot of the cultural problems that exist here on
> good o' Terra are *because* we are an 'incaceration society',
> instead of a 'rehabilitation society'.

I wouldn't like murders, rapists and other violent criminal walking in
my mysts.

But, for minor crimes, which come up more fequently, your ideas have
some valdity.

> Sean
>
> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, omar vega wrote:
> > I think that a little bit of selection of the people
> > going to the space habitat, (looking into the criminal
> > records of the family tree, so to speak) could reduce
> > criminality to the minimum. If there is some cases, I
> > think that a small jail for 100 should be enough for
> > up to 100.000 people.

That sound like part of a eungenics program to me as well.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "babbler36"
> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "sean_page"
> wrote:
> > The point has been made, and I agree with it -- With square
footage
> > at a premium for supporting life, scientific experimentation,
etc --
> > no habitat designer will want to waste space with a brig that
will
> > seldom see use.
>
> But what would you do if the need came about?

This is precisely the point of discussion. What do you do for only
one or two serious criminals?

TangoMan

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "babbler36"
> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "sean_page"
> wrote:
> > The point has been made, and I agree with it -- With square
footage
> > at a premium for supporting life, scientific experimentation,
etc --
> > no habitat designer will want to waste space with a brig that
will
> > seldom see use.
>
> But what would you do if the need came about?

See later in my post: I believe in a rehabilitation approach to
crime. Putting offenders in jail is not, statistically, a
deterrent. I think counseling and life coaching can teach a lot. And
I'm not talking about old ladies at the church thinking they know
what a person needs. I'm talking about compassionate, *caring*
analysis of a person's situation, and *helping* them to succeed.

> > I think the actual solution would be dependent upon the
> > environment? Is the exterior environment hostile? Is water
readily
> > available?
> >
> > Presumably, early habitats will be manned by "the best and
> > brightest" -- will they feel obligated to conform to terrestrial
> > judiciary protocols?
>
> Doesn't matter wether the like or not like "terrestrial judiciary
> protocols" -- they would HAVE to follow it, lest some kind of
modified verson.

I disagree wholeheartedly. If you take a group of advanced thinkers
and get them *out* of Earth's influence, I think you will find that
*many* of them reject doing things "the way they did back home",
simply because that was how it was done. Most advanced thinkers
want to know *why* a thing is done -- and let's face it... The
judiciary of the U.S. at least, is so full of loopholes and
contradictions that I think a colony with any experience with Terran
law would say "RULE #1: NO LAWYERS"

I'm not saying there would BE no penal code. Just that a colony
would be free to evaluate options that are not in use here on Earth.
>
> > If I were out there and in charge, and someone under my command
or
> > jurisdiction committed a minor crime, I'd put them on half or
> > quarter-rations for a number of days appropriate to the crime.
Take
> > away most of a man's food and water for a couple of weeks, and
he
> > will think twice next time. Of course -- the argument could be
made
> > that he'd just steal someone else's. To which I say: In space,
or
> > other hostile environment, stealing water is a capital crime.
> >
> > The loss of sustenance, or privilege, or rank. Extra duty,
longer
> > shifts -- there are a number of ways to penalize individuals
without
> > incarceration. A lot of the cultural problems that exist here on
> > good o' Terra are *because* we are an 'incaceration society',
> > instead of a 'rehabilitation society'.
>
> I wouldn't like murders, rapists and other violent criminal
walking in
> my mysts.
>
> But, for minor crimes, which come up more fequently, your ideas
have
> some valdity.
>
Thank you, but I'd also like to point out that my 'rehabilitation
over incarceration' mentality extends all the way to capital
crimes. There are psychological *reasons* why a civilized person
chooses to commit a crime. Find them. Solve them. It works.

Sean

Im not talking about "eugenics programs" nazi style here. What I am
saying is different. The colonist that are going to be send to the
habitat will have to pass for a selection test, just in the same way
people do when applying to an university, the army, a job or just to
get a driver license. In all those cases there is a "selection". Some
people pass the exams and some others do not.

Well, that "selection" will produce the following effect: the
colonial people will not be representative of the general Earth
population. They will be better because they will be chosen for the
job. They will be "the chosen people" (a joke, don't get serious in
this point, please).

Well, if one of the tests is design to select healthy and peaceful
people instead of violent types, well, the population of the habital
will be more peaceful. Therefore, there will be less crime than the
regular population of Earth.

That's all.

Omar

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "babbler36"
> --- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "sean_page"
> wrote:
> > The point has been made, and I agree with it -- With square
footage
> > at a premium for supporting life, scientific experimentation,
etc --
> > no habitat designer will want to waste space with a brig that
will
> > seldom see use.
>
> But what would you do if the need came about?
>
> > I think the actual solution would be dependent upon the
> > environment? Is the exterior environment hostile? Is water
readily
> > available?
> >
> > Presumably, early habitats will be manned by "the best and
> > brightest" -- will they feel obligated to conform to terrestrial
> > judiciary protocols?
>
> Doesn't matter wether the like or not like "terrestrial judiciary
> protocols" -- they would HAVE to follow it, lest some kind of
modified
> verson.
>
> > If I were out there and in charge, and someone under my command
or
> > jurisdiction committed a minor crime, I'd put them on half or
> > quarter-rations for a number of days appropriate to the crime.
Take
> > away most of a man's food and water for a couple of weeks, and he
> > will think twice next time. Of course -- the argument could be
made
> > that he'd just steal someone else's. To which I say: In space,
or
> > other hostile environment, stealing water is a capital crime.
> >
> > The loss of sustenance, or privilege, or rank. Extra duty,
longer
> > shifts -- there are a number of ways to penalize individuals
without
> > incarceration. A lot of the cultural problems that exist here on
> > good o' Terra are *because* we are an 'incaceration society',
> > instead of a 'rehabilitation society'.
>
> I wouldn't like murders, rapists and other violent criminal walking
in
> my mysts.
>
> But, for minor crimes, which come up more fequently, your ideas
have

> From: oevega [mailto:oevega@...]

> Im not talking about "eugenics programs" nazi style
> here. What I am saying is different. They will be
> better because they will be chosen for the job. They
> will be "the chosen people" (a joke, don't get
> serious in this point, please).

> Well, if one of the tests is design to select healthy and peaceful
> people instead of violent types, well, the population of the habital
> will be more peaceful. Therefore, there will be less crime than the
> regular population of Earth.

Ah, but that does bring up an old eugenics question: What happens if two
desired traits are counter productive? Can you select peaceful, law abiding
people who can be innovative enough to keep up with the rest of humanity,
decisive enough to handle a crisis, and adventuresome enough to want to work
in space? I'm guessing not. ;)

You'd want to keep the psychotics out, but anything more than that could end
up being counter productive.

Also, How do you define physically healthy? In zero G someone without legs
would require less oxygen for any given task, and hence be 'healthier', than
someone with legs. Ditto for mental health. PhD holders don't always make
good grease-monkies, yet that's the kind of people you'll need to maintain
equipment up there.

In all likelyhood working up in space will eventually be like working on an
oil-rig, a car factory, or an aircraft carrier. You'll need qualifacations,
and the ability to work with others, and to pass a basic job interview, but
the people working there probably won't be any better or more honest than
the rest of us.

ANTIcarrot.

I agree with you in most of your arguments. But look
at the space programs. As far as I know, about 500
people, both from Rusia, and the United States has
gone to the space so far. They are people chosen with
extreme care and the results are obvious. Most of them
have a lot of working skills, they know how to flight
planes, they work in groups, they are courageous, and
they are very responsable, besides holding a PhD in
science or engineering. They are not common people by
any standard. Now, in those missions only one case of
mild mental illness has been reported. If you take
regular people at random and send them to space I am
quite sure the rate would be much higher.

And the comparison with oil-rigs and car factories
workers does not seem fair because the resultant
population will reflect what are you selecting for. If
you preffer intelligent working people with peaceful
attitudes, that is what you are going to get. There
are 6.000 million people on Earth to chose from.

I am not talking about eugenics here. I am just
talking of selecting people to do a job.

Omar

--- ANTIcarrot wrote:

> From: omar vega [mailto:oevega@...]
> I agree with you in most of your arguments. But look
> at the space programs. As far as I know, about 500
> people, both from Rusia, and the United States has
> gone to the space so far. They are people chosen with
> extreme care and the results are obvious.

Serious space engineering usually measures work forces in the ten thousand
range. ;) For one thing that's a lot more than 500, and for another, sending
that many people up just to build the colonies/SSPSs is going to mean that
they will recieve less training than current astranauts. NASA also gets
hundreds of applications each year for 35 places at most. Again for a large
workforce they will have to be a lot less picky, and standards will fall.

Can you find thousands of highly qualified workers willing to accept low
wages, tedius work, poor living conditions, spartan recreational facilities
and virtual imprisonment at the work site? They'll be able to earn three or
four times the wages back on earth and live in far better conditions.

Unless it's all done by robots the comparison between a future space worker
and a current astranaut may well lend up the same as a car driving test vs
an F1 car driver. ;)

Yes there will always be highly trained people in space, but if people start
to live there, soon or later the population up there will match the
population down here. If nothing else, their children will be their undoing,
just as they are down here. ^.^

ANTIcarrot.

Oh!, My God. So much money invested to convert space
in just another Earth! Plenty of thieves, murderers
and rapists. And also with some punk artists and
artistic hoockers (I mean porn stars).

With those convincing arguments, you blow my dreams
up. You just convinced me that humankind does not have
any future at all. If space will be just the way it is
around the corner, well, it does not pay the sacrifice
to go there.

But maybe you are wrong. I think millions will try to
go to live in space and they will not care for the
sacrifice and the effort. Going to space will be
considered a privilege. And that is enough to select
just 10.000 of the best people. 1 in 100 is not too
bad, after all.

Omar

--- ANTIcarrot wrote:

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "sean_page"

...

> > I wouldn't like murders, rapists and other violent criminal
> walking in
> > my mysts.
> >
> > But, for minor crimes, which come up more fequently, your ideas
> have
> > some valdity.
> >
> Thank you, but I'd also like to point out that my 'rehabilitation
> over incarceration' mentality extends all the way to capital
> crimes. There are psychological *reasons* why a civilized person
> chooses to commit a crime. Find them. Solve them. It works.

But, what if you know the victim personally? Could you allow for the
agressor to be "rehabilitation," while enjoying (limited) liberity?

It not a moot point. With populations of 10 000 to 250 000, space
settlement will operate like small towns/cities (Even small countries
may be up in arms over a very gurrsome murder, like Paul Detroux in
Beligum). There is a greater sense of community as a whole than in
large cities/metropolises. Viglantees and angry mobs may act on their
own rage to punish the offender. Putting police to protect the
offender would not work because (1) the police may just act just like
te viglanetees and (2) the police would risk harming their public
image as not protectors of the settlement and it vunerable, but a
protectors of it preditors and criminal. The people may, at best, look
at the police as ineffectal and therefore, bypassable in the name of
justice, or at worst, be hostile to the police force, and try to
replace.

Eathier way, the saner aspects of your rehabitation program will be
lost, and the settlement would enter a horrific world of mob rule,
lest untill some get a hold of things.

> From: babbler36 [mailto:babbler36@...]
> It not a moot point. With populations of 10 000 to 250 000, space
> settlement will operate like small towns/cities (Even small countries
> may be up in arms over a very gurrsome murder, like Paul Detroux in
> Beligum). There is a greater sense of community as a whole than in
> large cities/metropolises. Viglantees and angry mobs may act on their
> own rage to punish the offender. Putting police to protect the
> offender would not work because (1) the police may just act just like
> te viglanetees and (2) the police would risk harming their public
> image as not protectors of the settlement and it vunerable, but a
> protectors of it preditors and criminal. The people may, at
> best, look
> at the police as ineffectal and therefore, bypassable in the name of
> justice, or at worst, be hostile to the police force, and try to
> replace.

The authority of the early colonies will, ultimately, be backed up by
governments or corporations back on earth. And THEY would probably take a
very dim view of such behaviour. And after paying $500B to build the colony,
they won't stint at paying $100M to evict EVERYONE if that's what it took to
restore order. In fact if done as a contract violation this could involve
the confiscation of company shares - which might work out cheeper for the
company. ;)

Either way, the colony would not be allowed to run it's own affairs any more
than any small/medium town in any country. Plus the colony would get a
*little* bit more media attention then the theoretical small town if it did
anything stupid.

ANTIcarrot.

In a message dated 6/18/04 7:08:20 PM, babbler36@... writes:

<< But, what if you know the victim personally? Could you allow for the

agressor to be "rehabilitation," while enjoying (limited) liberity? >>

In reading this line I recalled a few months ago in New York Times about a
family in Saudi Arabia who lost a relative to a couple of murderers in course of
robbery. As the vamily of the murdered they have the right of demanding
capital punishment or showing them mercy of life imprisonment. As the murderers
were about to be beheaded, the family made up their minds and let them live.
The community thought highly of the family after this and honors them as men of
piety. This was interesting because this show that this kingdom of tribes
(which is more accurate than "nation") of one of the most anti-modernist sects
can have surprising spots of real humanism. Also, it seem to show that young
Saudis are becoming more western and moderate at much faster rate than at first
blush from US mass media's representations. A closer look at pop music
videos in Middle East show new willingness to talk sex and feeling and a embracing
of individualism that is far different than our pop images. Even in fundie
evanglical Christian circles, there is a Prison Fellowship which is working to
moderate harsh justice system for the last 30 years, led by none other than
Nixion hack man Chuck Colson.

Carl E. Mullin
visionary artist and entrepreneur
homo asteralis
ravenart@...
www.ravenartstudio.com

The more you love, the more you can love-and the more intensely you love.
Nor is there any limit on how many you can love.
If a person had time enough, he could love all of the majority who are decent
and just.
-Robert A. Heinlein (Time Enough For Love)

"Fear is the mind killer. Fear is the little death that brings total
obliteration." -- Dune

Freedom, Immortality, and the Stars!