Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Renovating the wheel

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                   

Mr. X

 No Noteriety for the Notorious
  (-3)
(-3) 		  [vote for,
against]

Psychologist and police profilers often tell us that fame is a driving rationalle for people to commit heinous crimes. Murderers and rapists can publish first-hand-account books from prison. I would recommend that all people convicted of serious crimes simply be referred to as Mr. or Mrs. X by the media. Real names would be secured within court documents and available for legal means. But to the rest of the world, the fame would dissipate. What punishment or deterent could be better than erasure of one's name?
—ASLAN, Jan 14 2003

thcgenius is right http://thesimpsons.com/mrx/index.htm
[my face your, Oct 04 2004]

Less Cool Names for Criminals Less_20cool_20names_20for_20criminals
A bit better, in my opinion. [Shadow Phoenix, Sep 10 2007]

[link]






       We could apply the same principle to halfbakers.
—kropotkin, Jan 14 2003
   

       To my mind it's in my interests to know if someone has been convicted of a criminal offence. Where I agree with you though is that there should be no publicity, well certainly no naming or publishing pictures of the accused, before a verdict has been reached. Overall: fishcake!
—DrBob, Jan 14 2003
   

       // What punishment or deterent could be better than erasure of one's name? //   

       Calling you "Geoffrey Archer" ?
—8th of 7, Jan 14 2003
   

       This wouldn't even begin to work. Everyone would still hear about Mr. X (*that* Mr. X, not the other one) and the incredible crimes committed and want to hear all about it and would buy the book and the fame would be just as great. Taking away the name would change nothing.   

       Aside from that, the justice system operates in public for a variety of good reasons. As I understand it, identities are only concealed in juvenile cases. I wouldn't go changing that just to eliminate a few book deals (which are really a lot less common than you think).
—egnor, Jan 14 2003
   

       FYI, many states have laws that require criminals who do book deals to give the proceeds over to their victims.
—krelnik, Jan 14 2003
   

       Didn't the ancient Egyptians erase heiroglyphic records of people if they committed some horrible crime?
—Bert6322, Jan 14 2003
   

       That would just make crime sound cooler. Steal some cash, and you join the ranks of X. Instead of singular criminals shown for what they truly are, you would have the unstoppable X ! Whenever 1 X is defeated, 18 more come out of the woodwork to avenge him/her. It would make crime stronger. The [link] to "Less cool names for criminals" has something I belive to be on the same track, but better.
—Shadow Phoenix, Sep 10 2007
   
      
[annotate]
   


 

back: main index
business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle