Ethics and Information Technology 1 (2):95-104 (1999)
|Abstract||Internet stings to catch child molesters raise problems for popular tests of entrapment that focus on causation, initiative, counterfactuals, and subjective predisposition. An objective test of entrapment works better in the context of the Internet. The best form of objective test is determined by consequences of drawing a line at various places. This approach allows some Internet stings but counts other stings as entrapment when they go too far.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Alan Gauld (1989). Cognitive Psychology, Entrapment, and the Philosophy of Mind. In The Case for Dualism. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
Carter Snead (2007). Neuroimaging, Entrapment, and the Predisposition to Crime. American Journal of Bioethics 7 (9):60 – 61.
Paul M. Hughes (2004). What is Wrong with Entrapment? Southern Journal of Philosophy 42 (1):45-60.
Neil Levy (2002). In Defence of Entrapment in Journalism (and Beyond). Journal of Applied Philosophy 19 (2):121–130.
Douglas Walton (1999). The Fallacy of Many Questions: On the Notions of Complexity, Loadedness and Unfair Entrapment in Interrogative Theory. [REVIEW] Argumentation 13 (4):379-383.
Andrew Altman & Steven Lee (1983). Legal Entrapment. Philosophy and Public Affairs 12 (1):51-69.
Paget Henry (2004). Between Hume and Cugoano: Race, Ethnicity and Philosophical Entrapment. Journal of Speculative Philosophy 18 (2):129-148.
B. Grant Stitt & Gene G. James (1984). Entrapment and the Entrapment Defense: Dilemmas for a Democratic Society. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 3 (1):111 - 131.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads8 ( #131,679 of 722,838 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?