Jim Nicholas,

I agree. If we punish mistakes, it is harder to learn from them, because people will misrepresent what happened to avoid getting punish. It’s only human.

The situation you describe – avoiding learning to lessen the possibility of punishment – is all too common in American commerce. But it is natural, given the incentive structures.

I understand – and even share, to a certain extent – cedarford’s frustration and desire to use violence in the pursuit of justice. But the problem with that approach, as I see it, is that the end-game is “might makes right.”

You line up all of the “bad guys” and shoot them. FIne. Feels good for a while. But the bad guys are not dumb. They realize now that the implications of being caught are, well, ugly. So they deploy their own resources to protect themselves, and that ultimately means they put themselves beyond reach of the legitimate authorities. Private armies proliferate, and the thugocracy is born. If you need an example of that outcome, look at Russia.

Yes, it is frustrating that the bad guys get away with things. Yes, it is disheartening that good people are taken advantage of. Yes, it discouraging that real businesses are hurt by the proliferation of scams and schemes.

But we should be careful about the unintended consequences of abandoning our traditional commitment to the settling of grievances through the law. For, as Thomas More said (I quote from memory), once the law is destroyed, and there is nothing between us and the forces of evil, what then? Who shall we turn to for protection?

As I said in other posts, I am voting for McCain, but if Obama is elected he will be my President. But that doesn’t mean I can’t support fundamental reform. The problem is not Obama. The problem is a system that gives rise to Obama.

I can’t change Obama. But together we can change the system.

FWIW.

L3