Introduction:
Doesn't everyone think it's wonderful that the American justice system is now on the cusp of recognizing the concept of hatecrime? Anyone who has done even the most cursory examination of criminal psychology as well as issues of constitutionality agrees. There is nothing more thrilling than meting out extra punishment on a criminal because his crime was motivated by hate. This is especially apt because hate and other emotions are so very readily measurable and easy to define and quantify.

Given this fact, it only seems obvious that we must consider other emotions such as love in this context. In contrast to punishing someone more because they were motivated by hate, when someone commits a crime motivated by love it only seems fair to lessen the punishment. This is evidenced by the American public's great love of Victor Hugo's "Les Miserables." People are repulsed by Javier's relentless pursuit of the heroic Valjean, are they not? After all, Valjean only stole a crust of bread to feed his family - surely an act of love. This fact provides incontrovertible proof of the existence of the "lovecrime."

My System:
Having established these facts, it is my hope to introduce the following emotion matrix for use in our criminal justice system. I have developed the Intention Designating Index Of Thought (hereafter referred to as I.D.I.O.T. or the I.D.I.O.T.ic system.) I.D.I.O.T. is a system which will provide the legal system with a mathematical tool for tailoring sentences in accord with the relative emotions which motivated the crime.

As you can see from the diagram below, I have established "indifference" as the baseline for all sentencing decisions. On the horizontal from this point is the x axis of love (-1) and hate (+1). On the vertical is the y axis of good (-1) and bad (+1). Thus, any personal emotion can be expressed as some point placed within the I.D.I.O.T.ic matrix. For example, I have suggested the following four examples:

A. Ultimate love and goodness would be represented by (-1,-1). An example of this type of crime would be a person who accidentally sideswipes a parked car in order not to hit a baby animal in the road (goodness) while speeding to the hospital because their wife is about to give birth (love).
B. Ultimate hate and badness would be represented by (+1,+1). An example of this type of crime would be a person who smashes the jukebox at an old folks home because it only offers Tommy Dorsey records (hate) and who is wearing a t-shirt covered with expletives (badness).
C. Ultimate love and badness (-1,+1) would occur if the person in Example A had the accident because he was putting on a t-shirt covered with expletives (badness) while racing his wife to the hospital (love).
D. Ultimate hate and goodness (+1,-1) would occur if the person in Example B smashed the jukebox because he hated Tommy Dorsey (hate) but also could prove that repeated playing of Tommy Dorsey records caused mental anguish to the small birds kept in a nearby cage (goodness).

Of course, these are extreme examples. It will be up to the wisdom of the US Government to come up with a more complete set of guidelines to better assess the thoughts that might be swirling through a criminal's head at the moment he or she commits a crime. It is this researcher's hope that at some time in the not too distant future this complex analysis can be computerized. Only a computer has the complex mathematical ability to correctly assess the myriad factors involved in any crime, whether it is the content of the criminal's webpage, comments he may have made to friends and associates, his hairstyle, the "way he thinks" and other extremely relevant and quantifiable details.

Using The I.D.I.O.T.ic System
Once a sentencing judge has established the I.D.I.O.T.ic factor within the matrix, sentencing will proceed from the following simple equation. The two factors (x and y) are added together. This resulting number is multiplied by 100. This result is the number of months and or years that will be either added to or subtracted from the baseline (indifferent) sentence. The result is the I.D.I.O.T.ic sentence produced by this system.

Let me provide a couple examples. In the cases outlined above, I will posit that the crimes have occured in a state where the sentence for reckless driving resulting in an accident (sideswiping a car) is 6 months and the sentence for wanton destruction of property (trashing a jukebox) is 1 year.

In Example B where we see ultimate hate and badness, the equation produces a result of 200 years. Added to the baseline sentence we get 201 years, or essentially, life in prison. In Examples C and D where the hate and badness are tempered respectively by goodness and love, the equation produces a result of 0, leaving us with the baseline indifferent sentences of six months and one year respectively.

But where the I.D.I.O.T.ic system really shines is in Example A. The equation produces a result of negative 200 months. When this is added to the baseline it establishes a sentence of negative 194 months. This sentence is served by paying the "lovecriminal" a sum equal to the monetary value of these months. This is calculated by multiplying the average monthly salary of the "lovecriminal" by the sentence and awarding it as a tax-free bonus at the end of the trial.

As anyone with even the most elementary knowledge of psychology knows, positive reinforcement is the single best way to affect people's behavior. While the I.D.I.O.T.ic system does tend to ignore this fact on the hatecrime side, this researcher feels that it is a small price to pay for the incredible opportunities for the betterment of society that are offered in the positive reinforcements outlined in the introduction of the "lovecrime." Only the I.D.I.O.T.ic system provides an easily quantifiable method to reward people for being loving and good.

Conclusions:
Given the ease and fairness inherent in the method by which we measure hatecrime, it only seems logical that we establish a category of lovecrime as well. But if we are to be truly fair, we must realize that all human behavior occurs on a continuum. Only the I.D.I.O.T.ic system that I have outlined above can effectively assess where on this continuum any particular human behavior exists, especially crime.

This researcher hopes that at some point in time many other aspects of people's lives can be subsumed into the I.D.I.O.T.ic system. These might include standardized pricing systems (hateful and bad people would pay more for goods and services), government relationship and dating programs (hateful and bad people would have governmentally imposed barriers to making friends and meeting potential dating partners), and universal pet selection procedures (hateful and bad people would not be allowed to own potentially mean pets like rottweilers, snakes, and piranhas). Only then will we experience the genuinely free, open, and tolerant society to which we all aspire.

How You Can Help:
I am asking everyone who reads this to write to their Member of Congress and their two Senators and urge them to consider sponsoring as much I.D.I.O.T.ic legislation as possible. Also, make sure that President Clinton is aware of your support of I.D.I.O.T.ic causes as well. I have included links to their websites below. If we can get enough people to rally around this I.D.I.O.T.ic cause, it is a safe bet that the politicians will follow. Isn't that the kind of true leadership we expect and deserve?

United States Congress
United States Senate
President of the United States

If you would like more information about the I.D.I.O.T.ic sentencing system, please feel free to send me e-mail at the following address:
mason_j@gse.utah.edu,

persons are now aware of the I.D.I.O.T.ic thought analysis system