Abstract
I hold that we could justifiably criminalize some threats, on account of the fact that issuing them renders one more likely to commit a crime. But I also point out that if we criminalize some threat-issuing, we will de facto criminalize some warning-issuing, which is unjust. So we ought not to criminalize any threat-issuing. Instead, we should criminalize (roughly) rendering oneself more likely to commit a crime. This would allow us to punish all the threat-issuers we should want to punish. It would also force us to punish some warning-issuers, but we would not be punishing them for their warning-issuing.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 180-203 |
| Journal | Ratio Juris |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 22 May 2015 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jun 2015 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The crime of self-solicitation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Profiles
-
Benjamin Sachs-Cobbe
- School of Philosophical, Anthropological and Film Studies - Director of Impact
- Philosophy - Senior Lecturer
- Institute of Legal and Constitutional Research
Person: Academic
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver