Eleanor
Diamond Member
@Solara, I'm not saying you should agree with me, ok? And I totally get the "some people just need killing" impulse, and ... at different times I agree with it. When I am calm and in my best self, here is what I think:
1) Everyone should make every effort to keep everyone safe.
2) Some people, for a variety of reasons, are not safe to have free in society and are not getting better, and don't want to, so, in the interests of 1) the best thing to do is to lock them up.
3) I don't think making me or anyone else feel much much much better, justifies intentionally harming someone else. Because I don't think it is ever legitimate to use hurting other people to make myself feel better. If they consent to take the risk, that I might unintentionally hurt them that makes it a little different. But it is still a tricky judgment.
4) We can use sufficient force to stop someone who is doing violence (intentionally or not.) Intentionally harming someone else without a legitimate (moral) purpose and in the absence of any evidence that that harm will effect some positive change for that person or others that is greater than the harm imposed is my definition of cruelty.
5) Cruelty hurts the perpetrator (less) and the victim (more.)
6) "Ought implies can." If a person is sufficiently mentally ill that they are not in control of their actions - then no, they don't "deserve" to be punished. They are ... a problem to be dealt with humanely. No one deserves to be punished if punishment means infliction of harm beyond what is necessary to stop or alter the behavior.
7) No one deserves the cruelty of others. Ever. For any reason.
If punishment is intentional infliction of pain without any greater and certain benefit - that sounds like cruelty to me.
For the record, I struggle (and often fail) to live up to this standard.
But I can't disagree with any of the premises. And they logically (deductively) imply the conclusion that punishment (not correction) is unacceptable.
So, yeah. I don't think anyone deserves to be punished.
1) Everyone should make every effort to keep everyone safe.
2) Some people, for a variety of reasons, are not safe to have free in society and are not getting better, and don't want to, so, in the interests of 1) the best thing to do is to lock them up.
3) I don't think making me or anyone else feel much much much better, justifies intentionally harming someone else. Because I don't think it is ever legitimate to use hurting other people to make myself feel better. If they consent to take the risk, that I might unintentionally hurt them that makes it a little different. But it is still a tricky judgment.
4) We can use sufficient force to stop someone who is doing violence (intentionally or not.) Intentionally harming someone else without a legitimate (moral) purpose and in the absence of any evidence that that harm will effect some positive change for that person or others that is greater than the harm imposed is my definition of cruelty.
5) Cruelty hurts the perpetrator (less) and the victim (more.)
6) "Ought implies can." If a person is sufficiently mentally ill that they are not in control of their actions - then no, they don't "deserve" to be punished. They are ... a problem to be dealt with humanely. No one deserves to be punished if punishment means infliction of harm beyond what is necessary to stop or alter the behavior.
7) No one deserves the cruelty of others. Ever. For any reason.
If punishment is intentional infliction of pain without any greater and certain benefit - that sounds like cruelty to me.
For the record, I struggle (and often fail) to live up to this standard.
But I can't disagree with any of the premises. And they logically (deductively) imply the conclusion that punishment (not correction) is unacceptable.
So, yeah. I don't think anyone deserves to be punished.