Interesting Links for 07-02-2012

[andrewducker]

• The 25 Most Awkward Cat Sleeping Positions (The Cuteness - it burns!)
  (tags: sleep cute photos cats )
• U.S. drones targeting rescuers and mourners
  (tags: usa politics military pakistan afghanistan )
• Government rejects pardon request for Alan Turing
  (tags: uk law lgbt AlanTuring )
• Narrative is not a game mechanic - on computer games, feedback and

Comments

[undeadbydawn]

Government somewhat fails to appreciate that the point of pardoning Alan Turing is that his actions should never have been considered a crime.

the man is one of the greatest heroes in the history of mankind. the authors of that law among the greatest villains.

/sigh/

[andrewducker]

The government must appreciate that, as they said as much in their response.

[simont]

But McNally's quote - "A posthumous pardon was not considered appropriate as Alan Turing was properly convicted of what at the time was a criminal offence" - does seem to me to have missed the point somewhat.

A pardon is distinct from a retrospective quashing of a conviction. The latter would mean that you'd decided he had not in fact committed the crime after all, and that would indeed be inaccurate in Turing's case. But a pardon says (or can say) that you think he did commit the crime but nonetheless should not be, or should not have been, punished for it. So it's missing the point to argue that a pardon would not be appropriate because he did it.

If someone was punished cruelly and tragically for breaching a law that should never have been on the books in the first place, that would seem to me to be excellent cause for a pardon in moral terms. And if they were also a media-friendly war hero, it would seem excellent cause in PR terms too!

[andrewducker]

It seems the government disagrees about what a pardon means. As they agree that the law was bad and have apologised I'm not sure why else they would take this stance (unless it would have them open to criminal claims from survivors who were also convicted at the time).

[undeadbydawn]

this is rather clearly a case where legal ..thingumy has nothing at all to do with recognising what is right. Turings case is entirely about the latter.

this is precisely why I disagreed with - while understanding the reasoning for - every decision Jack Straw ever made.

Legally justified, morally contemptible.

[andrewducker]

A pardon _is_ a legal thingumy. It has a specific legal meaning. Saying that that should be ignored makes no sense.

[undeadbydawn]

It is clearly evident that I have no logical argument to make.

so I'll stfu :)

[andrewducker]

I do agree that the British government should make a big gesture about the fact that what happened to him was wrong. To some people the public apology was enough. The suggestion of a posthumous knighthood has potential, but I don't know if there are ramfications.

[simont]

Actually, thinking about it, it does kind of make more sense to do a big gesture of apology for the terrible law as a whole than for its effect on Turing in particular. He may have been the most famous and most heroic victim of it, but it would be a bit dodgy to issue an individual posthumous pardon to him and thereby send the message 'we don't care about all the other victims of the same law, because they weren't cool'.