I never claimed that, only that I know more about will and how it is constrained than the common folk on whose vote politicians enact laws.
Actually I can because things like pschizophrenia medications which alter brain chemistry are proven in clinical trials to modify patient behaviour.
Likewise it is well known that brain tumours in certain regions of the brain and other brain deformities have modified human behavior such as in the case of Phineas Cage;
'
Phineas P. Gage (1823–1860) was an American railroad
construction foreman remembered for his improbable
[B1]: 19 survival of an accident in which a large iron rod was driven completely through his head,
destroying much of his brain's left frontal lobe, and for that injury's reported effects on his personality and behavior over the remaining 12 years of his life'
Source:
Phineas Gage - Wikipedia
People are a product of their brain wiring/chemistry and environmental inputs, in my opinion you are refusing to look at what the underlying cause of peoples choices are because it doesn't support your assertion.
To the contrary as explained above
It would be ridiculous to pass laws based on things we can't prove don't exist. Demonstrate their existence first and then we can legislate based on them.
They chose to commit crimes, however those choices were constrained by their brain wiring/chemistry and environmental inputs. As such finger pointing them as blameworthy for acting according to their nature does not make sense in my view.
There you go finger pointing rather than looking at the underlying reasons they are the way they are.
I dont know if "most" criminals can be rehabilitated based on current technology, but I do know that the ones that can be should be, whilst the ones that can't be should be isolated for the safety of society until such time as the tech can be developed that will enable their rehabilitation in my view.
Neither of those two groups should have vengeance based actions undertaken against them in my opinion.