New economic research indicates that children exposed to lead in either paint or gasoline have violent tendencies. The article can be found at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19655897/
In Freakonomics, Steven Levitt asserts that crime fell in the 90'2 because of Roe v. Wade. Legalized abortion, explains Levitt, allowed mothers to abort unwanted childrend. These children are the ones most likely to commit a crime according to the book. The econ 101 explaination is that a mother knows more about her ability to raise a child than the state so she should have the choice to make decisions about whether to bear a child. In econ this is the classic asymmetrical information problem that leads to unintended consequences when a law is unilaterally enforced.
John R. Lott offered a rebuttal in his book, Freedomnomics, on why crime fell in the 90'2. Lott's explainations include the death penalty, better law enforcement, the right to bear arms. This book is a fast read and exceptionally well written.
The MSNBC link above offers a biological reason for abberant behavior. My law blog, http://www.fladdoglaw.blogspot.com/ has a link to a Newsweek article explaining how biology, life's experiences, and culture might link to aggression like Virginia Tech shooter Cho Seung-Hui. I wonder if this link isn't the association and causation problem.
I wasn't going to give my opinion on abortion, but you strayed from being completely Econ-minded.
ReplyDelete"The econ 101 explaination is that a mother knows more about her ability to raise a child than the state so she should have the choice to make decisions about whether to bear a child."
This may be true, but i believe abortion would violate John Stuart Mill's Harm Principle, as it causes harm to another human being, therefore not subject to choice. BUT we could argue all day about where life starts :)
Griffin,
ReplyDeleteJohn Stuart Mill's harm principle and utilitarian thought can only get you so far. It leaves you with too many unanswerable situations, for instance problems of retaliation from unchecked aggression, as seen in war. (Notice that if there exists a correlation between legalizing abortion and a decrease in crime, then the law itself created a utilitarian outcome.) I think a better criterion is that of Kant and his categorical imperative. However, we can debate metaphysical theory that apply to humans all day. Without getting into a biological debate(which I think is equally compelling and destructive against pro-life arguments), I think that we must look at what rules govern us under the constitution and we come to the conclusion of upholding the right to privacy and upholding Roe v. Wade and the 14th amendment.
vab банк
ReplyDeletevab банк
[url=http://www.ricardo.com.ua/news/releases/110220]vab банк[/url]
http://www.ricardo.com.ua/news/releases/110220 - vab банк