What is Justice?

[beecee]

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Seems to me what you mean is, "Justice according to my emotional judgement of the "evil" he "possess".  

No justice specifically as called for in any reasonable westernised country and society.

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Rose West Evil monster or innocent victim of child abuse? 

Probably both...Yet many many other people through the annals of the human race, have had similar unfortunate and terrible upbringings, and have risen above it, and in many cases, exceeded and become someone who demands respect from society as a whole. And you see, this is the point, that I have said many times, and you seem to wishy washy over it...There is all kinds of people that make up society, from the Mandella's to the Hitler's, and the evil bloke in my prime example. The prisons are for the latter. 

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

I think you find it in most religion's, Buddhism is a more recognised philosophy, in it forgiveness leads to inner-peace; seems to be a pretty good place to start... 😉

Inner peace can be achieved in many ways I suggest. For example, if I take the extreme opposite tack that you and Buddhism take, I would find it an interesting philosophy in elliminating all the known evil doers in society, petty criminals included, and then be able to relax, with total inner peace, comforted by the knowledge that no inncoridgible bully, will attempt to harm or take advantage of me. But like your extreme scenario, it is but a dream.

7 hours ago, Intoscience said:

I'm not a fan of the death penalty, even though a person that commits such a crime, in my personal opinion doesn't deserve to live. 

Yes, agree totally, and a point I have made throughout this thread for the obvious reasons.

8 hours ago, Intoscience said:

Possible scenario 1 of many: A person rapes and brutally murders a child. The person is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment into a mental facility aiming at rehabilitation. 20 years later the perpetrator is deemed rehabilitated and fit to re-join society. All is forgiven and the person is set free, new identity... 1 possible outcome:  After a few months in society another child is raped and brutally murdered by the same person.

In the case I presented the perpetrator was on parole, and after submitting the little girl to satisfy his evil gratifications, then attacked and knifed a couple of hero rescuers that stumbled upon the still active crime scene.

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

How does this argue my post?

Indeed, it's clear that you don't understand my philosophy; my apologies for not explaining it, to you, properly...   

It argues your post quite admirably imo, particularly since you suggested that Hitlerism/Nazism could possibly lead to a better life. If that is part and parcel of Buddhism, then that religion/philosphy has certainly lost my respect.

 

9 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed, it's clear that you don't understand my philosophy; my apologies for not explaining it, to you, properly...   

Not a terribly great fan of pure philosophy, and align with the Lawrence Krauss'of this world. Also reminds me of a remark 

"Philosophy consists very largely of one philosopher arguing that all others are jackasses. He usually proves it, and I should add that he also usually proves that he is one himself".

Henry Louis Mencken.

 

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

I'm proposing: Pay a lot less attention to, spend less money on, give less public infrastructure, equipment and manpower to, wars of choice or convenience or profit. Pay less attention, devote less administration, bestow less reverence on the accumulation of great wealth by a few.

That's nice. Still, the facts remain, that it takes all kinds to form any society, and not all society are involved in, or part of any of the above.

 

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

Put a lot more effort, thought and care into the welfare of the young and troubled, ill and old, vulnerable and volatile.

Even more simply:  social justice is the better part of criminal justice.  

That may all well be true, but the facts remain again, that 100% success rate will never be achieved, and despite any and all efforts of social justice, some will spit it back in your face. 

Edited August 24, 2021 by beecee

[beecee]

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

I think this is a large part of what Dimreepr has been advocating for.?

Quite admirable and like religion, probably could give one a nice warm inner glow of contentment. And if you or dimreeper can ever show me that such a philosophical stance will ever have 100% success rate, or even close to it, you may even get me to support such a philosophy.  And effectively, both of you have agreed that it will not and cannot ever be achieved.

That's why we have a justice system...that's why we have the necessary evil orginizations such as Police forces Armies, etc...that's why we have prisons. There will always be incorridgible criminals and violent people within society, just as there will always be victims of crime and violence. My sympathy first and foremost,  goes with the vicitm and society of crime and violence.  

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, beecee said:

but the facts remain again, that 100% success rate will never be achieved,

I'm looking for an improvement of a 10% reduction in avoidable incarcerations and a 10% increase in the rehabilitation rate of not-capital offenders ion the first five years of UBI, universal healthcare, well-equipped and staffed public schools and comprehensive family services. 

If, after ten years, the saving on crime and punishment doesn't balance the cost of resources added to social welfare, you will have some evidence that my proposal doesn't work.  

I'm looking at the whole system. You seem concerned only with the fraction of a % you have designated incorridgible. 

Different perspectives.

Edited August 24, 2021 by Peterkin

[beecee]

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

I'm looking for an improvement of a 10% reduction in avoidable incarcerations and a 10% increase in the rehabilitation rate of not-capital offenders ion the first five years of UBI, universal healthcare, well-equipped and staffed public schools and comprehensive family services. 

If, after ten years, the saving on crime and punishment doesn't balance the cost of resources added to social welfare, you will have some evidence that my proposal doesn't work.  

I'm looking at the whole system. You seem concerned only with the fraction of a % you have designated incorridgible. 

Different perspectives.

We already [at least where I am] have comprehensive family services for all requiring them, and we also have a universal health care system and have since 1972.

Your final paragraph has it all arse up. I am certainly concerned about all you have mentioned, but just as certainly, give less emphasis to the incorridgible criminal and perpetrator of violence.

Same perspectives, different emphasis.

3 hours ago, iNow said:

Since you replied to my question with new questions of your own, I don’t feel any more clear on what you’re actually proposing. 

Join the club. It is a beautiful heart warming philosophy in many ways, but totally and completely unrealisitc and unworkable.

11 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed, it's clear that you don't understand my philosophy; my apologies for not explaining it, to you, properly...   

Perhaps if you get the Dalai Lama to attempt a better explanation? 😜

Edited August 24, 2021 by beecee

[iNow]

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

No, there are no magic bullets - and that includes throwing away keys.

Agreed, but you said we must prevent kids from turning bad. I asked how, and found the following bits too far removed to enable us to achieve that:

3 hours ago, Peterkin said:

Pay a lot less attention to, spend less money on, give less public infrastructure, equipment and manpower to, wars of choice or convenience or profit.

Uhmmm… sure. Okay, but how does this prevent individual kids from turning bad?

These too:

3 hours ago, Peterkin said:

Pay less attention, devote less administration, bestow less reverence on the accumulation of great wealth by a few

How does that prevent kids from turning bad? I’m not following. Sounds like a bumper sticker.

This last bit was the closest you came to giving a direct answer:

3 hours ago, Peterkin said:

Put a lot more effort, thought and care into the welfare of the young and troubled, ill and old, vulnerable and volatile.

Totally agree, but I can’t do anything with that, can we?

Assume we have a magic wand / a blank check to prevent kids from turning bad. Gonna need much more detail than “put more effort and thought into their welfare” when asking the genie for those wishes or writing those checks. 

“Be more awesome” is a rallying cry, not a metric against which we can measure ourselves nor a plan to get there.

Prevent kids from turning bad is a laudable goal, but is a complex and extremely nuanced objective.  

Edited August 25, 2021 by iNow

[Peterkin]

7 minutes ago, iNow said:

Totally agree, but I can’t do anything with that, can we?

Maybe you can't, but industrial societies certainly can.

 

7 minutes ago, iNow said:

Assume we have a magic wand / a blank check to prevent kids from turning bad. Gonna need much more detail than “put more effort and thought into their welfare” when asking the genie for those wishes or writing those checks. 

I elaborated further down, but it doesn't matter. Nothing can be done, because one prisoner in 100,000 will never be rehabilitated, so we have to keep the prisons in their present state for that one, and as long we have to have prisons, we might as well fill them with all the other people who have broken various laws but won't become habitual criminals until they've been to prison.

14 minutes ago, iNow said:

How does that prevent kids from turning bad? I’m not following. Sounds like a bumper sticker.

In many possible and several certain ways. Bumper stickers win election.

Edited August 25, 2021 by Peterkin

[beecee]

31 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

. Nothing can be done, because one prisoner in 100,000 will never be rehabilitated, so we have to keep the prisons in their present state for that one, 

Not sure where you dragged those figures from, but irrespective, that 1/100,000 makes it about 3,500/350,000,000 going on the last estimate I saw of the USA population, so we'll stick that lot in your suburban region, OK? [and realistically probably a lot more]

31 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

and as long we have to have prisons, we might as well fill them with all the other people who have broken various laws but won't become habitual criminals until they've been to prison.

Except that isn't quite exactly the situation. In my country and I presume in the US to a similar extent, we have parole, suspended sentences, house arrests, ankle bracelets etc, coupled with smaller sentences for petty crimes and repeat offenders of petty crimes. 

Remember justice serves three, obligatory purposes...[1]Punsishment": [2] Protecting victims and society: [3] Rehabilitation. They should all necessarily and ideally  work in unison.

Edited August 25, 2021 by beecee

[Peterkin]

Well, I know they let their governments make some bad decisions, but surely the entire US population can't be criminals!

[iNow]

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

In many possible and several certain ways. Bumper stickers win election.

Right. Okay. I thought maybe you wanted to have an intelligent conversation about this, but you’re contenting yourself with platitudes and flowery language. 

“Be better” and “be more awesome” isn’t a plan. It can’t be actioned. 

We share many of the same desires. I’m asking you how you wish to make them a reality, not convince me that we should. 

[beecee]

Not much has changed in this thread from page 1, so I thought I would check it out again...generally a lot of political/philosophical banter as has continued.

My position, based on facts, has not changed from my first post near the bottom of page 1...

 

Justice for all! particularly including justice for victims and criminal justice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice

Justice, in its broadest sense, is the principle that people receive that which they deserve, with the interpretation of what then constitutes "deserving" being impacted upon by numerous fields, with many differing viewpoints and perspectives, including the concepts of moral correctness based on ethics, rationality, law, religion, equity and fairness.

Edited August 25, 2021 by beecee

[Peterkin]

31 minutes ago, iNow said:

I thought maybe you wanted to have an intelligent conversation about this, but you’re contenting yourself with platitudes and flowery language. 

I have attempted 6 pages of intelligent conversation about this. I'm pretty much conversed out.

 

31 minutes ago, iNow said:

“Be better” and “be more awesome” isn’t a plan

Ending poverty and disparity, promoting physical and mental health, providing children with education, guidance and opportunity... In a wealthy advanced nation, that's an achievable plan. It has been proposed, repeatedly, by more knowledgeable people than i am. And shot down repeatedly, by more powerful factions who have their own plan for those resources.

So it can't be done.

31 minutes ago, iNow said:

I’m asking you how you wish to make them a reality, not convince me that we should. 

And I have outlined it broadly. Not in minute detail, since this thread isn't about the fine points of social reform, but about "what people deserve". I think everyone deserves a chance at a reasonable life, and no-one deserves to grow up in fear.  I think that if those basic requirements were met, "crime" would decrease to the point where resources became available to treat seriously disturbed and disruptive persons far more effectively. 

Edited August 25, 2021 by Peterkin
more, even more

[beecee]

6 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Ending poverty and disparity, promoting physical and mental health, providing children with education, guidance and opportunity... In a wealthy advanced nation, that's an achievable plan. It has been proposed, repeatedly, by more knowledgeable people than i am. And shot down repeatedly, by more powerful factions who have their own plan for those resources.

So it can't be done.

It can't be done because we have all types and sorts of people in any society, that are more interested in taking advantage of such attempts...those in the powerful factions you seem obsessed with, and those others that just simply will not, or will ever fit into a normal society.

9 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

And I have outlined it broadly. Not in minute detail, since this thread isn't about the fine points of social reform, but about "what people deserve". I think everyone deserves a chance at a reasonable life, and no-one deserves to grow up in fear.  

Justice for all! particularly including justice for victims and criminal justice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice

Justice, in its broadest sense, is the principle that people receive that which they deserve, with the interpretation of what then constitutes "deserving" being impacted upon by numerous fields, with many differing viewpoints and perspectives, including the concepts of moral correctness based on ethics, rationality, law, religion, equity and fairness.

[iNow]

22 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

I'm pretty much conversed out.

And yet you continue posting / failing to engage meaningfully 

22 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

  I think that if those basic requirements were met, "crime" would decrease

Don’t disagree. How do we meet those basic requirements is my question. 

22 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

to the point where resources became available to treat seriously disturbed and disruptive persons far more effectively. 

Availability of resources isn’t the issue. Allocation of them (and accurately identifying those most in need of them) is. 

Edited August 25, 2021 by iNow

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

And yet you continue posting / failing to engage meaningfully 

I've continued to respond after i realized the futility, yes; you're right about that. You may have expected a new engagement when you joined in, but I simply haven't the energy to start over. If you're interested in anything I've said on the subject, or any of the statistics I've cited, you can find them. If not, I'm sorry to disappoint. 

1 hour ago, iNow said:

How do we meet those basic requirements is my question. 

Depend on who "we" are. I've listed the essentials, enormous bodies of work in social sciences have been published on the particulars. This is not a new issue.

 

1 hour ago, iNow said:

Availability of resources isn’t the issue. Allocation of them (and accurately identifying those most in need of them) is. 

Yes. The insurmontable issue.

[beecee]

4 hours ago, Peterkin said:

I have attempted 6 pages of intelligent conversation about this. I'm pretty much conversed out.

The issue is that mainly all we have got is philosophically and/or politically [and possibly religious] motivated  banter and grand plans and ideas, as opposed to a minute sample of actual cases of extreme crimes of violence, both here and in the torture thread. 

I reiterate a position I put previously, that was incrediously dismissed...a position imo of reality, sympathy, and logic...A perpetrator of any serious crime of violence, to expect sympathy, should at least show some remorse and/or regret for what he has done. That in no way though dismisses the necessity of appropriate punishment. How can any perpetrator of any serious crime of violence, expect for example, any consideration of parole, a suspended sentence, or house arrest? It is in a word, inconceivable to accept that.

 

Edited August 25, 2021 by beecee

[Intoscience]

6 hours ago, Peterkin said:

I elaborated further down, but it doesn't matter. Nothing can be done, because one prisoner in 100,000 will never be rehabilitated, so we have to keep the prisons in their present state for that one, and as long we have to have prisons, we might as well fill them with all the other people who have broken various laws but won't become habitual criminals until they've been to prison.

Is this a statistical fact? Cause if so, I'd say that's a pretty good success rate @ 0.001% failure. 

I know of 2 people within my community that were repeat offenders. I actually grew up with one and was good friends with him for a short while. He had no interest in rehabilitation, the thrill of doing the crime was his motive and the "soft" approach from the justice system just encouraged him more so. He would often say to me that when he gets caught he just plays the system. He had an excellent upbringing, education, came from a nice family, his siblings went on to have good careers and families of their own. 

There was no excuse, it was just the way he was, he had no issues other than he enjoyed breaking the law. Fortunately he never committed any real serious stuff (though I can't be sure if this is the case now cause I haven't seen him for 30 odd years). He had countless counselling, psychology sessions, the complete shebang...

He is/was a lost cause, there are countless like him, many that commit atrocities.  

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, beecee said:

The issue is that mainly all we have got is philosophically and/or politically [and possibly religious] motivated  banter and grand plans and ideas, as opposed to a minute sample of actual cases of extreme crimes of violence, both here and in the torture thread. 

I reiterate a position I put previously, that was incrediously dismissed...a position imo of reality, sympathy, and logic...A perpetrator of any serious crime of violence, to expect sympathy, should at least show some remorse and/or regret for what he has done. That in no way though dismisses the necessity of appropriate punishment. How can any perpetrator of any serious crime of violence, expect for example, any consideration of parole, a suspended sentence, or house arrest? It is in a word, inconceivable to accept that.

 

 

[beecee]

 Progress in NSW Australia re prison reform and violence.......

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/throw-away-the-key-worst-of-worst-to-stay-locked-up-20100410-rzs3.html

Throw away the key: worst of worst to stay locked up:

 

THE state's worst murderers and violent criminals will be kept behind bars after their sentences have finished under a radical plan by the NSW government that will target prisoners who resist rehabilitation.

Premier Kristina Keneally will today order Corrective Services to begin an audit of the 750 ''worst of the worst'' prisoners in NSW.

more at link........

Edited August 25, 2021 by beecee

[dimreepr]

14 hours ago, beecee said:

Inner peace can be achieved in many ways I suggest. For example, if I take the extreme opposite tack that you and Buddhism take, I would find it an interesting philosophy in elliminating all the known evil doers in society, petty criminals included, and then be able to relax, with total inner peace, comforted by the knowledge that no inncoridgible bully, will attempt to harm or take advantage of me.

Good luck with that, fearing something you have no control over, isn't a path to peace; just like seeking revenge.

I do wonder though, if you'd take pleasure in dishing out their comeuppance; and sleep better?

14 hours ago, beecee said:

It argues your post quite admirably imo, particularly since you suggested that Hitlerism/Nazism could possibly lead to a better life. If that is part and parcel of Buddhism, then that religion/philosphy has certainly lost my respect.

Since WW2 has lead to what you believe is a society with the best, possible handle on justice; I'd say Hitler had a part to play in causing that.

13 hours ago, beecee said:

Quite admirable and like religion, probably could give one a nice warm inner glow of contentment. And if you or dimreeper can ever show me that such a philosophical stance will ever have 100% success rate, or even close to it, you may even get me to support such a philosophy.

Why do you need 100%, for it to be better than what we've got?

Isn't 10% over what we have now, worth a go?

Do you really think the world would be a better place, if we lock up every potential threat; ergo there is no more threat?

Tell that to Afghanistan...

12 hours ago, beecee said:

Perhaps if you get the Dalai Lama to attempt a better explanation? 😜

That's my boy, if you don't understand it, it can't be understood. 🙄 

[beecee]

45 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Good luck with that, fearing something you have no control over, isn't a path to peace; just like seeking revenge.

The essence of what I said  of course has by-passed you, and actually has as much chance of implimentation as your wishy washy compassion for evil and evil doers.

45 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I do wonder though, if you'd take pleasure in dishing out their comeuppance; and sleep better?

I certainly took pleasure in dishing out my version of comeuppance as a 10 year old and a few other moments in my life, when needed.

45 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Since WW2 has lead to what you believe is a society with the best, possible handle on justice; I'd say Hitler had a part to play in causing that.

Yes, you have said many unsupported and a couple of rather silly things relating to that monster.

45 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Why do you need 100%, for it to be better than what we've got?

Isn't 10% over what we have now, worth a go?

That's easy. Because what's left is why we have  a reasonable justice system  and prison, that gives the perpetrator his comeuppance, protects society and the victim, and makes  rehabilitation possible. That will not change to any great extent.

45 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Do you really think the world would be a better place, if we lock up every potential threat; ergo there is no more threat?

A far, far better place then letting evil incorrigibles run free and forgetting about the vicitm and society in general.

45 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Tell that to Afghanistan...

That has nothing to do with criminal and society justice. There is a thread in which I have made comments and my feelings known on that, so if you like, question them there.

45 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

That's my boy, if you don't understand it, it can't be understood. 🙄 

You were and are understood, as you well know....and criticism  [which you have ignored to a great extent] has been forthcoming  with regards to your unworkable system, and may I say, a system that would not be accepted by any reasonable society. With all the wishy washy papers on political correctness with relation to justice and the criminal that have been put out for publication and the "feel good"  talk fests that it gives birth to, not much has really been achieved, [other then what I have mentioned]  simply because society in general, reject that, and see it for what it is, and what I have mentioned a few times now....that is politically, philosophical  and unsupported, unrealistic rhetoric.

Edited August 25, 2021 by beecee

[dimreepr]

11 hours ago, beecee said:

Remember justice serves three, obligatory purposes...[1]Punsishment": [2] Protecting victims and society: [3] Rehabilitation.

And I'm asking why do we need [1] (why is it obligatory), when [2] and [3] adequately protects while attempting to cure?

Answer that and this merry-go-round comes to an end... 😉

9 minutes ago, beecee said:

The essence of what I said  of course has by-passed you, and actually has as much chance of implimentation as your wishy washy compassion for evil and evil doers.

I only have compassion for me, as I've previously stated, just in case my training isn't quite as good as I thought it was and I find myself in the dock; with the likes of you pointing and calling me a witch...

[Intoscience]

6 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

And I'm asking why do we need [1] (why is it obligatory), when [2] and [3] adequately protects while attempting to cure?

Answer that and this merry-go-round comes to an end... 😉

Because 1 & 2 are one and the same when a criminal is locked away number 3 comes later if applicable. How do you suggest we deal with the immediate threat? 

[dimreepr]

15 minutes ago, beecee said:

You were and are understood, as you well know....and criticism

Is that why you resorted to ridicule; as some sort of wishy-washy attempt at an argument?

[beecee]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

And I'm asking why do we need [1] (why is it obligatory), when [2] and [3] adequately protects while attempting to cure?

Answer that and this merry-go-round comes to an end... 😉

Sure I'll answer it, but the merry-go-round will not stop....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice

Justice, in its broadest sense, is the principle that people receive that which they deserve, with the interpretation of what then constitutes "deserving" being impacted upon by numerous fields, with many differing viewpoints and perspectives, including the concepts of moral correctness based on ethics, rationality, law, religion, equity and fairness. The state will sometimes endeavour to increase justice by operating courts and enforcing their rulings.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

In my own words justice  does or should do as I said...[1]Punish [2] protect, [3] rehabilitate.

All three apply because not all violent criminals of which I am speaking of, can be rehabilitated...you know that, I know that, and society knows that. There are good and evil people, from the top echelons of government and business, to the average man in the street.  When you eventually admit that, then the merry-go-round will stop.

 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, Intoscience said:

Because 1 & 2 are one and the same when a criminal is locked away number 3 comes later if applicable. How do you suggest we deal with the immediate threat? 

That's no answer, why is there [1] and [2] if they're the same?