• Snailpope
    link
    56 months ago

    My personal opinion used to be “those who are beyond change, those who are so cruel, vindictive, undeniably atrocious, evil, maniacal ect. should be put to death, removed from the world they clearly shouldn’t be in”. After many long discussions with my closest friend I have come to believe that death is too light a punishment. Those who truly deserve the harshest judgment should live a long life, in complete isolation, devoid of all pleasure, entertainment, contact, ect. Take away all that humans crave besides basic human needs, let them truly suffer for their crimes.

    Obviously, every individual instance of any crime should be dealt with by a fair and balanced jury, judge, defense, and prosecution, with as much fact and evidence as can be attained without prejudice or predetermined judgment based on personal biases.

    I’m obviously long winded but am super happy with the engagement on my comment. I don’t like arguing but I love hearing others opinions! Thank you all!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      05 months ago

      That’s a rather fresh opinion with lack of better words. I cant say i agree but i am glad i asked, thanks.

      Personally i feel conflicted about the morality of taking away freedoms. This is for both criminal and state.

      Obviously some people have done crimes that destroyed any notion of mental freedom in their victims and it doesn’t feel just to allow those people to operate, but i acknowledge we are tapping into the same wrong “take away another freedoms” Its no avadada-Kedavra or imperio + rape, but its still an imperials curse nonetheless.

      What i eventually settled on is that we have no choice then remove the freedom of clearly dangerous individuals. With those that have a path to redemption, basic human flaws are often fixable so we should go all in on those.

      But for those that crossed the impossible to draw proverbial red line that redemption is no longer possible.

      Our only single concern with them is their removal to keep everyone else safe. Technically that means putting them on their own self sufficient luxury island would be adequate as an ethical solution, we adress the single concern with no further harm but its not a very sensible idea in our economic context and i wouldn’t support it (give me the island instead). A walled facility providing basic needs will do as the best we can honestly offer… we should do more for homeless, partly unrelated sorry.

      The easiest, most efficient way to remove them permanently is of course death. But then we do lower ourselves to take away all freedoms, knowing we could succeed the main tasks more ethically, shouldn’t we?

      I absolutely understand your perspective of punishment but personally i feel nothing for a person who cannot reach or interact with anyone getting punished. Punishment to me requires reason like eventually growth.

      What i eventually settled on is permanent jail, naturally being provided with just the basics we can economically spare and then provide the freedom for the detained to chose for death. And i feel many in this situation, with no hope of shortening of sentence or pardon would chose to die.

      Providing the most clean/efficient way to remove monster from society. In personal theory.

      Factual Practice is this is an ugly gritty topic with no easy answers.