We’ve got criminals demanding to be treated like decent people. Well there are different rules for criminals. They certainly play by a different rule-book. We too should have different etiquettes for interactions with criminals and interactions with decent people. Do we pray to the devil the same way we pray to God? I don’t think so!
So to start, let’s define criminal behavior. Secondly, we should recognize criminal behavior when we see it, or are informed about it. Then we need to consider the difference between how we respectfully relate to decent people and how we apply the law to criminals.
Criminals tell lies. These are not miscalculations, figures of speech or lapses in memory. These are bold, calculated misrepresentations of facts.
Criminals are not humble nor contrite. They blatantly disrespect others. They are openly murderous and oppressive to those they perceive as powerless.
Criminals are motivated solely by self-interest. Concern for others is never a consideration.
Can we agree on these descriptors of criminals? Are we under any obligation, then, to allow criminals the same rights as decent people?Once we have heard a person’s lies enough times, and heard about people hurt, stolen from, oppressed, raped and killed by that person, enough times, doesn’t there come a point where we can make the judgment that that person is a criminal? And once enough of us have made that judgment, doesn’t a different behavior, on our part toward him or her, apply? Do we have to extend a podium to that person so he or she can continue to lie to us and propagandize us from the same place of power we give to those who have earned our respect? What kind of sense does that make?
The things that are wrong in this world can be corrected by curtailing criminal behavior. The three steps of defining criminal behavior, recognising criminals, and then putting criminals in their place, will be done, once enough of us stop making excuses for blatant criminality.