A long time ago, I temporarily believed in an eye for an eye (mainly because John Locke and Thomas Jefferson [see Notes on Virginia] did), but then I realized that retribution doesn't bring things back to the way they were before the crime was committed. It may also not be possible to always take an eye in retribution for the first eye taken. Finally, the doctrine of "an eye for an eye" sucks (as well as caging people) because an arbitrary party (the state) gets stronger when it never suffered.
Just like the state isn't necessary, prisons aren't necessary and they're rather harmful. Instead, murderers should become slaves to the person/people directly affected by the violent actions.
If we were to enter a free society tomorrow, then Obama would likely become a slave for aw-Awlaki's family and friends for several days of the week, then on other days he'd likely spend time in Afghanistan and Iraq doing non-aggressive service for the people who lost loved ones there, and he'd probably give all of everything he got (his salary, his travel costs, his lavish vacations on our dime, part of the cost of running the White House, the cost of his utilities, food, etc.,) from the tax payer all back to the tax payer.
That's more just and more productive than executing him. He's been an awful person, but he can be made into a better person if he provides restitution to the people he harmed.
Similar things would happen for Bush (he would likely pay for all of the costs of freeing the Guantanamo Bay detainees and also probably pay them a lot of money for what they went through). He would probably spend many days helping out pretty much every Iraqi citizen. Non violent criminals would be uncaged, and criminals who committed violence would probably be slaves to the people they stole from. So basically, a murderer is owned by the people he directly caused a loss. If if he is to be killed, then it would probably have to be in self defense or only under conditions agreed upon by his owners. If someone tricked someone into buying a car that died when it went 90mph, then the person who committed trickery would have to pay the person back for the car.
We need to advance past having wasteful prisons and try to make things as close as possible to the way they were before the crime was committed. No one has a right to security at other peoples' expense. Individuals are responsible for their own security. If someone murders someone, then they shouldn't become property of the state. Rather, they should become property of the people directly affected. Public law and Common Law is bullshit.
Just like the state isn't necessary, prisons aren't necessary and they're rather harmful. Instead, murderers should become slaves to the person/people directly affected by the violent actions.
If we were to enter a free society tomorrow, then Obama would likely become a slave for aw-Awlaki's family and friends for several days of the week, then on other days he'd likely spend time in Afghanistan and Iraq doing non-aggressive service for the people who lost loved ones there, and he'd probably give all of everything he got (his salary, his travel costs, his lavish vacations on our dime, part of the cost of running the White House, the cost of his utilities, food, etc.,) from the tax payer all back to the tax payer.
That's more just and more productive than executing him. He's been an awful person, but he can be made into a better person if he provides restitution to the people he harmed.
Similar things would happen for Bush (he would likely pay for all of the costs of freeing the Guantanamo Bay detainees and also probably pay them a lot of money for what they went through). He would probably spend many days helping out pretty much every Iraqi citizen. Non violent criminals would be uncaged, and criminals who committed violence would probably be slaves to the people they stole from. So basically, a murderer is owned by the people he directly caused a loss. If if he is to be killed, then it would probably have to be in self defense or only under conditions agreed upon by his owners. If someone tricked someone into buying a car that died when it went 90mph, then the person who committed trickery would have to pay the person back for the car.
We need to advance past having wasteful prisons and try to make things as close as possible to the way they were before the crime was committed. No one has a right to security at other peoples' expense. Individuals are responsible for their own security. If someone murders someone, then they shouldn't become property of the state. Rather, they should become property of the people directly affected. Public law and Common Law is bullshit.
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter