What is the objective of justice under law. Is it to punish those who are evil, to promote law abiding actions by threat of consequence, or to stop crime by separating criminals from potential victims.
In the first case, we would have to assume there is something called good and something called evil that is objectively based. In the second case, we have to determine by some objective measure the level of threat we will make to potential criminals we think will create a sufficient level of deterrence to satisfy the population they will be protected. In the third case we would assume that we can accurately measure the amount of suffering we will demand for specific crimes by some objectively determinable level calculated properly enough to satisfy us as payment for them. Is there something that you would add?
What we can see in some of the crimes by police and crimes against them in our threads is that what people really seem to want is revenge. They want to see violence done to perpetrators. They want an eye for an eye until everybody is blinded by this. That got me thinking as to what justice is.
Some time back in our history folk used to put more faith in rehabilitation but then the thirst for revenge began to take over. Since then we have gone down the path we call 'no more mollycoddling of criminals. Three strikes and you're out and the rest of it......
But what if we could go back to that in some way? How would you feel? Suppose we could find a drug or a genetic treatment that would stop criminal behavior in people. What if we could give some guy who just shot and killed forty people a pill and he wouldn't every kill anybody again? He would just wake up as if he had a bad dream with a previous part of his personal identity missing. Would that be enough or should he still have to pay for his crime?
In the first case, we would have to assume there is something called good and something called evil that is objectively based. In the second case, we have to determine by some objective measure the level of threat we will make to potential criminals we think will create a sufficient level of deterrence to satisfy the population they will be protected. In the third case we would assume that we can accurately measure the amount of suffering we will demand for specific crimes by some objectively determinable level calculated properly enough to satisfy us as payment for them. Is there something that you would add?
What we can see in some of the crimes by police and crimes against them in our threads is that what people really seem to want is revenge. They want to see violence done to perpetrators. They want an eye for an eye until everybody is blinded by this. That got me thinking as to what justice is.
Some time back in our history folk used to put more faith in rehabilitation but then the thirst for revenge began to take over. Since then we have gone down the path we call 'no more mollycoddling of criminals. Three strikes and you're out and the rest of it......
But what if we could go back to that in some way? How would you feel? Suppose we could find a drug or a genetic treatment that would stop criminal behavior in people. What if we could give some guy who just shot and killed forty people a pill and he wouldn't every kill anybody again? He would just wake up as if he had a bad dream with a previous part of his personal identity missing. Would that be enough or should he still have to pay for his crime?
Facebook
Twitter