The immediacy of these considerations to the teaching and practice of
esotericism is unfortunate. Today I heard an ad on the radio, advertising
for applicants to the CIA's National Clandestine Service.
Kathryn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Edge" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Esoterism in the Classroom
> Khem says:
>
> "And might the claim to have killed someone by
> magical means then carry the same weight in the
> eyes of the law as a smoking gun?
>
> And is anyone else shuddering at the thought of
> what could result?"
>
> As I've argued elsewhere, it depends on whether you like the law of
attempt,
> and in particular punishing people for attempting the impossible. In
English
> criminal law (I've too much respect for the working of States Rights to
say
> *anything* about 'US criminal law') a defendant can be punished not for
> succeeding in committing the crime, but for the attempt. In the late
> twentieth century, it became clear that this punishment could follow even
if
> the attempt was impossible. So, for instance, you shoot a gun into a room
> where you think someone is sleeping in an attempt to murder them. They had
> died of natural causes overnight, so it was impossible for you to succeed
in
> killing them. You are still guilty of attempted murder. Or another
example,
> you try to break into a safe with tools which are completely incapable of
> succeeding at the task - you face conviction for attempting to steal the
> contents, even if it was impossible for you to do so using your chosen
> technique. The implications for methodologies whose potential to achieve
the
> desired ends is not recognised by the courts are pretty clear - and don't
> need any legal or state acceptance of the methodology to kick in.
>
> Peter.
|