|
I agree people need closure but disagree that the only way to achieve closure is through the suffering/execution of the perpetrator(s). I have a question for Somfin, mostly in regards to your first post in the thread: do you believe there are individuals beyond rehabilitation, in any meaningful sense? I'm asking this is good faith and not trying to pull any socratic bullshit here so I'll just lay out my point and position: I am pretty much on board with everything you've posted here w/r/t restorative justice and the damage a lust for revenge causes. I also especially agree with you that life imprisonment is at best about on par with execution, and probably worse overall. I sometimes see captial punishment opponents try to "sell" their positions along the lines of: "no, see, imprisonment is even better than execution! They have to sit there and think about it forever! No escape!", especially to conservatives. I've seen it almost everywhere, including here from self-styled progressives, and it always loving blows my mind because I tend to agree with the sentiment in most cases. Let me be clear, though: I am not a active proponent of long-term imprisonment or capital punishment. But, the reason I ask, what should happen to people for whom rehabilitation is impossible? There's no good answer, I know, but I tend to think that in (these specific!) cases that execution would be more humane. If we've decided that they can't be helped and also can't be allowed into society, the only two options I see are "kill them" and "lock them away forever" and execution at least seems to limit the extent of suffering. As policy, though, I believe imprisonment is always the better response (in cases where we have to choose) because if the legal system has made a mistake at least the wrongfully-incarcerated at least get a shot at a decent life with the time they've got left.
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 09:40 |
|