Action versus Thought

Paper Summary:

This paper discusses the option of penalizing criminal thought. The paper explains the fundamental concept in modern American law of the distinction between mere criminal thought and actual criminal conduct. The paper contends that, whereas criminal thoughts alone are usually not punishable as crimes, modern American law does generally authorize public safety authorities, law enforcement, and mental health agencies to confine citizens against their will anytime mere thoughts meet certain statutory criteria and are considered to represent a legitimate threat of harm to themselves or to the general public.

From the Paper:

"Even after criminal convictions for actual criminal conduct, elements of criminal punishment still require a "guilty mind," and sentencing guidelines recognizing varying degrees of malice, even for the same specific act. Typically, criminal statutes distinguish between criminal conduct in several different degrees, such as first or second degree murder, based largely on the specific state of mind, or specific intent of the criminal. In many instances, criminal conduct is punishable by life in prison, or even by the death penalty, such as in the case of first degree murder, which requires a guilty mind, or malice (Taylor, 1982). Conversely, even deadly conduct, is, in certain circumstance, prosecuted and punished much more leniently, such as in the case of second degree murder, involuntary manslaughter, and negligent homicide."

More papers on Action versus Thought:

• Essay # 138219 : "Bentham and Mill: Good"
• Essay # 17126 : "Philosophical Issues: Freedom and Determinism"
• Creative Essay # 100289 : "Theories on Instinct and Free Will"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: