What is Justice?

[beecee]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

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

I believe your position is wishy washy...I'm no philosopher, I'm no politician and I am not speaking from any political position, either left or right of the spectrum. I say what I feel, and what I believe the evidence supports.

[Intoscience]

This thread reminds me of the old adage about a kind man who freed the trapped wolf. 

A kind man comes across a wolf that has been, systematically killing the man's sheep. He see's the wolf trapped and in pain and feels pity for the beast. He forgives the wolf for all the sheep it killed and in doing so helps to free the wolf. Once freed the wolf, hungry and desperate, turns to the man killing and eating him. 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, beecee said:

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.

Again no answer, if the public are protected from your 'so called evil' and [3] isn't effective, there's no reason to stop protecting the public; that doesn't = they need to be punished.

[beecee]

2 minutes ago, beecee said:

I believe your position is wishy washy...I'm no philosopher, I'm no politician and I am not speaking from any political position, either left or right of the spectrum. I say what I feel, and what I believe the evidence supports.

You on the other hand respectfully of course, do seem to have an agenda.

I answered your question, now you answer mine....

In the case I have mentioned many times, of the little girl being raped and tortured, do you believe the perpetrator should be given another chance? or have his life sentence reduced? 

ps: remember, he was alreay out on parole.

2 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Again no answer, if the public are protected from your 'so called evil' and [3] isn't effective, there's no reason to stop protecting the public; that doesn't = they need to be punished.

Of course there is an answer. It just appears you don't want to accept that answer. and are making philosophical excuses, as you have with Hitler in trying to make him less of a monster then we all know he was.

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, beecee said:

You on the other hand respectfully of course, do seem to have an agenda.

I answered your question, now you answer mine....

In the case I have mentioned many times, of the little girl being raped and tortured, do you believe the perpetrator should be given another chance? or have his life sentence reduced? 

ps: remember, he was alreay out on parole.

I've answered that question many time's, if he's a proven dangerous dog and can't be changed; put him down, with the lament "it's kinder".

[beecee]

http://justiceandprisons.org/

 

Prisons and Rule of Law

Prisons have a crucial role to play in upholding the rule of law, but in many parts of the world they are lawless sites of appalling suffering, incubators of disease or mere warehouses from which prisoners return to society poorly equipped to lead a law abiding life…….

Prison Alternatives

International law requires all countries  to develop non custodial measures to reduce the use of imprisonment  but people charged with or convicted of minor crimes still find themselves locked up in large numbers. How can alternatives help…….

Prison Best Practices

Sufficient staff, decent conditions, adequate health care and regular contact with the outside world are key to prisons meeting international and regional standards. How can this be achieved affordably……

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

All three apply in my society and I would suggest your's if you are honest.

 

3 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I've answered that question many time's, if he's a proven dangerous dog and can't be changed; put him down, with the lament "it's kinder".

🤣 That's one way to get off the merry-go-round, and no real oppostion from me, although, I am generally against the death penalty.

The thing you need to remember, is that he is not Robinson Crusoe. Check out the three or four incidents mentioned by me in the torture thread...I don't believe they would really be off topic here.

Edited August 25, 2021 by beecee

[dimreepr]

7 minutes ago, beecee said:

You on the other hand respectfully of course, do seem to have an agenda.

Indeed, my agenda is, let's try to be a little bit kinder to our fellow animals/humans. 

5 minutes ago, beecee said:

http://justiceandprisons.org/

 

Prisons and Rule of Law

Prisons have a crucial role to play in upholding the rule of law, but in many parts of the world they are lawless sites of appalling suffering, incubators of disease or mere warehouses from which prisoners return to society poorly equipped to lead a law abiding life…….

Prison Alternatives

International law requires all countries  to develop non custodial measures to reduce the use of imprisonment  but people charged with or convicted of minor crimes still find themselves locked up in large numbers. How can alternatives help…….

Prison Best Practices

Sufficient staff, decent conditions, adequate health care and regular contact with the outside world are key to prisons meeting international and regional standards. How can this be achieved affordably……

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

All three apply in my society and I would suggest your's if you are honest.

It's a simple question, if we're protected why do we need to punish?

[beecee]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed, my agenda is, let's try to be a little bit kinder to our fellow animals/humans. 

I'm kind to all animals and have had many dogs. Humans I treat with respect, until they give me reason to not respect them.

I also have an agenda...that is a love of the scientific method, and which I see in many ways applying here. 

BTW, I see the Dalai Lama as a generally friendly chap, and in many ways wise, but that doesn't make him infallible. 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, beecee said:

I'm kind to all animals and have had many dogs. Humans I treat with respect, until they give me reason to not respect them.

I also have an agenda...that is a love of the scientific method, and which I see in many ways applying here. 

BTW, I see the Dalai Lama as a generally friendly chap, and in many ways wise, but that doesn't make him infallible. 

Just answer the question... 

[beecee]

17 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Just answer the question... 

I've answered it, its simply an answer you don't want to hear. the protection is prison and being kept away from those he or she may cause harm to.....If you are suggesting that we change all prisons into holiday camps, with all the amenities of a holiday camp, then that is not justice as defined, and is not what a society would accept. 

Another question: 35 years ago in Sydney we had an horrific crime of a nurse being kidnapped by five young hoodlums, raped repeatedly, tortured and her throat cut while still alive. the details are here  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Anita_Cobby

There ages ranged from 19 to around 28 from memory with three brothers. All were senetnced "never to be released" two have since died in jail.

The article lists their background and early life, and while not pretty, neither was what they did which the article covers.

Question: do you think they were given unduly harsh sentences? Do you think any of them may have been rehabilitated.

These are the animals that society expects to be punished and locked away. 

Edited August 25, 2021 by beecee

[Intoscience]

53 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

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

If a person is jailed the public are protected and the perpetrator is punished by being locked up. In the case of jailing someone, both aspects -  1 & 2 are covered off at the same time. 

47 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I've answered that question many time's, if he's a proven dangerous dog and can't be changed; put him down, with the lament "it's kinder".

"But what if you have the wrong person?" You threw this one at me, but now you are condoning the death penalty. 

Just to be clear, although emphatically my feelings are that the dog should be put down, morally I don't.  

[TheVat]

I see how these discussions start circling endlessly.   Once we have humans reduced to terms like "monster" or "evil " or "animal," then many feel the work is done and there is no need to examine their nature further or try to understand what degree of choice they have or ask if they have any prospect of redemption.   

In the study of psychopaths, in behavioral science,  it's usually discovered that the psychopathic actor is also a victim,  someone subjected in early life to profound neglect,  abuse, and the general withdrawal of love.   

When evil seems to overtake an entire group of people,  as in Nazi Germany, there is what Hannah Arendt called "the banality of evil," where we see that no one sets out intending to do evil but rather curtails the process of thinking and awareness to uncritically and obediently follow the group ethos.  

I think endlessly citing awful deeds, provoking and stoking our emotions of repulsion, as if that's an argument in itself for retribution, is missing the process of understanding what sort of person we are dealing with, and if punishment,  for its own sake, has value.   

[Peterkin]

7 hours ago, Intoscience said:

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

No, it's a guesstimate of the "incorrigibles" - those who can never be rehabilitated, no matter what we try. (the only ones who, in my opinion, need to be sequestered from society) The remainder is not a success rate; it's a guesstimate at how many we could rehabilitate with the appropriate approach in each unique situation. Neither is a reflection of the present system, which has a very high failure rate: 43% recidivism, plus whatever happens to ex-cons who can't get a job and are not recaptured. 

 

1 hour 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? 

[11]Punsishment": [2] Protecting victims and society:]

I don't see how they're the same. Punishments protects nobody; it does escalate the violence in a culture; it does feed the baser drives of society's members; it does further brutalize people who were already damaged in some way. Protecting [potential] victims requires nothing more than containment of the [potential] danger. 

The actual victim has already suffered whatever harm they suffered, so you're not protecting them.  That's where prevention would have been more beneficial. The actual danger from a particular lawbreaker can usually be assessed and their level of containment decided accordingly. 

But, of course, in all the hoopla over the most egregious cases, the vast majority of lawbreaking, for which prison is invariably the wrong answer, is overlooked. Once you've brutalized a cheque-kiter or graffiti artist or joy-rider,

[3] Rehabilitation.

is too late

 

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, beecee said:

I've answered it, its simply an answer you don't want to hear.

No, you've dodged and danced round it, with strawmen and ridicule.

It's really quite simple, if the perp is unable to threaten you; why do you need to punish them?

This might be quite a long hour for you...

 

1 hour ago, beecee said:

its simply an answer you don't want to hear.

Then why do I ask the question?

 when it's much easier to hate what I don't understand...

 

45 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

No, you've dodged and danced round it, with strawmen and ridicule.

It's really quite simple, if the perp is unable to threaten you; why do you need to punish them?

This might be quite a long hour for you...

 

Then why do I ask the question?

 when it's much easier to hate what I don't understand...

 

What else don't you know?

[beecee]

6 hours ago, dimreepr said:

No, you've dodged and danced round it, with strawmen and ridicule.

Pot kettle black.

 

7 hours ago, beecee said:

I've answered it, its simply an answer you don't want to hear. the protection is prison and being kept away from those he or she may cause harm to.....If you are suggesting that we change all prisons into holiday camps, with all the amenities of a holiday camp, then that is not justice as defined, and is not what a society would accept. 

To spell it out for you, justice as defined by our law makers, in a reasonable westernised society, is specifically a reflection of that society. If society was to be reflected even more accurately, many criminals that are given parole, would have that parole revoked, and many sentences would be much longer.

It's society old friend that dictates that your softly softly, wishy washy approach will never work, despite your pages of philosophical banter, and dancing and dodging around the issue, and the mountains and mountains of studies and questionable statistics that support your stance. Reality my friend, stands in the way.

7 hours ago, TheVat said:

I think endlessly citing awful deeds, provoking and stoking our emotions of repulsion, as if that's an argument in itself for retribution, is missing the process of understanding what sort of person we are dealing with, and if punishment,  for its own sake, has value.   

The citing of awful deeds [specifically the one's I am familiar with], is nothing more then illustrating that for such deeds, the perpetrator needs to be punished,  incarcerated and separated from society, and the fact that such people sadly do exist. That is what the average Joe Blow in the street, sees as justice. As has been shown, Joe Blow rejects the many studies and philosophical stance that takes and supports the softly, softly approach...specifically when rehabilitiation methods, compassion and sympathy for the perpertator, is already within the system, some of which I have listed, and yet strangely no comment at all on those methods. 

Punishment that fits the crime, is part and parcel of our justice system, as is genuine attempts at rehabilitation and acts of compassion, like house arrests, suspended sentences, parole, ankle bracelets. When we think further, there is even more examples of attempts to rehabilitae a criminal with kindness and compassion...things like restitutional fines, community service, work release, probabtion and psychiatric treatment for drug dependency etc.

Let me again make it clear [not particularly for yourself] Our justice system reflects the wants of society. Society rejects the softly softly, wishy washy approach, for serious violent criminal acts, similar to the one's I have detailed. The same society that accepts the lists of examples of criminal consideration that I listed above, specifically for the perpetrators of minor crime, and showing that rehabilitation, and compassion for those is already in the system.  

Edited August 25, 2021 by beecee

[iNow]

Ten years ago, I touched on this topic suggesting punishment teaches people to avoid getting caught, not to avoid the crime. I advocated for a focus on rehabilitation and argued that prison is largely a waste of money. 

https://thescienceforum.org/criminality-why-do-we-never-seem-to-learn-or-chang-t187.html

[MigL]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

Ten years ago, I touched on this topic suggesting punishment teaches people to avoid getting caught, not to avoid the crime.

Why would you think that ?
Pain, as an indicator that you are doing something wrong ( touching a hot stove, overexerting yourself, etc ), is a physiological evolutionary process, and seems to keep most people and animals from doing foolish things.

[iNow]

9 minutes ago, MigL said:

Why would you think that ?

Decades of research in the field of psychology. I also went into more detail all those years ago, but that’s the gist. If behavioral change and societal improvement are the objective, then punishment is the wrong project plan / wrong strategy to use in achieving it. 

9 minutes ago, MigL said:

Pain, as an indicator that you are doing something wrong ( touching a hot stove, overexerting yourself, etc ), is a physiological evolutionary process, and seems to keep most people and animals from doing foolish things.

And that feedback is immediate. It’s a reflex. In crime, however, the punishment comes weeks or even months later so the association in our minds is lost. 

If you stole a bike and got collared right there at the bike rack, that’s one thing. But if you stole a bike then got arrested at your front door 3 weeks later, that’s something else entirely when viewed in terms of learning. 

You don’t give the rat in your experiment cocaine 3 days after solving the maze for the same reasons. The feedback must be immediate for the association to form strongly enough to alter behavior. 

Punishment teaches us not to get caught. It doesn’t so much teach us to avoid the criminal act entirely. 

Edited August 26, 2021 by iNow

[MigL]

The solution seems simple then ...

Immediate punishment; no trial.
Judge Dredd style.

[beecee]

1 minute ago, iNow said:

 If behavioral change and societal improvement are the objective, then punishment is the wrong project plan / wrong strategy to use in achieving it. 

Perhaps both are relevent and desirable. As someone mentioned in the torture thread, is a slap on the hand of a child that is misbehaving, torture? 

I bet my short n curlies, that some still complain about the leniancy, comfort, and facilities of that previous Scandinavian prison system that was discussed earlier. Reminds me of another old addage, "you can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you will never please all of the people all of the time".

[iNow]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

The solution seems simple then ...

Immediate punishment; no trial.
Judge Dredd style.

I am the law!

Kidding aside, not practical or possible absent chips in brains and constant monitoring in a Minority Report / 3 pre-cogs in a vat kinda way. 

1 hour ago, beecee said:

Perhaps both are relevent and desirable.

Of course prison and punishment are desirable to some, but it’s bc they tend to want retribution and state sanctioned retaliation… security theater in a kabuki style to assuage their fears and insecurities.

Punishment and prison are not pursued in a deep seated desire for societal improvement or improved wellbeing for the population at large. 

[beecee]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

Of course prison and punishment are desirable to some, but it’s bc they tend to want retribution and state sanctioned retaliation… security theater in a kabuki style to assuage their fears and insecurities.

Punishment and prison are not pursued in a deep seated desire for societal improvement or improved wellbeing for the population at large. 

Retribution, deterrence, punishment, protection, justice, or improvement, are all reasons. I don't know anyone in the cases I have mentioned, they are simply horrific cases that occured, and received extensive news coverage. They are all cases, both here and in the torture thread, that prompted revulsion from observers such as myself. They are a small sample of society that through their actions, destroyed any and all feelings of rehabilitation from the society at large.

This is why society at large, despite all the attempted psychological and philosophical recommendations of "extensive" reform, has been rejected. I say extensive, because again, reform has already been made and is part and parcel of the justice system.

3 hours ago, iNow said:

Punishment teaches us not to get caught. It doesn’t so much teach us to avoid the criminal act entirely. 

 That's probably also correct for some of us...at least concerning minor crime. But murder?...extreme cruelty and extreme violence? aggravated rape? I can say with near certainty, that I am beyond that and I would think most people would be. 

Personally, I am horrified by the sight of blood, to the point of near fainting and am even turned off by some modern day  movies, and there attempts at realism.

Possibly my position on this, and I believe societies position, is driven by feelings that it is simply inhumane to commit such atrocities and that reflects on their rejection of any easing of the current prisons and justice systems for these non humans that commit such atrocities. I remember when the Allied powers marched into the death camps of Hitler, how they shamed the population of towns around the concentration camps, by forcing them to view scenes of such atrocities. Who in their right mind feels sorry for Hitler and the heads of that regime? 

The main essential point I make, is that the status quo exists for a small group.

Edited August 26, 2021 by beecee

[Intoscience]

19 hours ago, Peterkin said:

 

[11]Punsishment": [2] Protecting victims and society:]

I don't see how they're the same. Punishments protects nobody; it does escalate the violence in a culture; it does feed the baser drives of society's members; it does further brutalize people who were already damaged in some way. Protecting [potential] victims requires nothing more than containment of the [potential] danger. 

The actual victim has already suffered whatever harm they suffered, so you're not protecting them.  That's where prevention would have been more beneficial. The actual danger from a particular lawbreaker can usually be assessed and their level of containment decided accordingly. 

But, of course, in all the hoopla over the most egregious cases, the vast majority of lawbreaking, for which prison is invariably the wrong answer, is overlooked. Once you've brutalized a cheque-kiter or graffiti artist or joy-rider,

[3] Rehabilitation.

is too late

 

You are missing my point, if someone is jailed for a crime they are punished by imprisonment and the public is protected from them, 2 birds with one stone. Obviously each and every case requires assessment on what levels of protection and punishment is/or if required. I'm not saying its the answer to all crimes and all levels of crime, I'm just saying it is a quick and immediate solution that then allows sometime for the authorities to decide on the next procedure and sometime for the perpetrator to think about and reflect on the crime they have committed.   

This is why there is a bail system or other means... a petty thief who has done a bit of shop lifting say for example is not likely to be a threat to society, more rather a nuisance. But a serial killer is a whole different ball game, as myself Beecee and others keep stating.

What do you propose in place of punishment?

I agree prevention is a much better approach, but not much use if it hasn't worked. Rehabilitation is and should be aimed at for the vast majority of criminals, I fully advocate this. But there are many that are simply lost causes, some that pose a real danger to society and have been, and will continue to be dangerous to society. 

  

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, Intoscience said:

What do you propose in place of punishment?

I'm questioning the need for the word punishment in the context of beecee's insistence on retaining the word in his 1,2,3 approach.

What I'm proposing is we exchange the word with, [1] an attempt to understand the underlying 'reasons' for the perp to commit the crime.

As it stands 'punishment' is used as an 'excuse' to protect the status quo, for some reason; I want to understand the reason.

When I look at a homeless person, I think "there but for the grace of god go I" as I'm sure do countless other's.

Quote

Carlos and carmen vidal just had a child
A lovely girl with a crooked smile
Now they gotta split 'cause the bronx ain't fit
For a kid to grow up in
Let's find a place they say, somewhere far away
With no blacks, no jews and no gays

 

2 hours ago, Intoscience said:

I agree prevention is a much better approach, but not much use if it hasn't worked.

We can't prevent crime (whatever the movie's say), but we can mitigate against the damage done by society, as it stands now, prison's are nothing more than a university of criminality; only this time the "drop outs" are the lucky one's. 

[Intoscience]

14 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I'm questioning the need for the word punishment in the context of beecee's insistence on retaining the word in his 1,2,3 approach.

What I'm proposing is we exchange the word with, [1] an attempt to understand the underlying 'reasons' for the perp to commit the crime.

As it stands 'punishment' is used as an 'excuse' to protect the status quo, for some reason; I want to understand the reason.

When I look at a homeless person, I think "there but for the grace of god go I" as I'm sure do countless other's.

 

We can't prevent crime (whatever the movie's say), but we can mitigate against the damage done by society, as it stands now, prison's are nothing more than a university of criminality; only this time the "drop outs" are the lucky one's. 

I agree to some degree with what you are saying, I don't think any justice system is perfect, nor should we expect it to be. 

I'm not sure we can just omit punishment, at least in some form or another. There is nothing preventing looking at the reasons any crime was committed. But this takes time, each and every case is different, simply because each and every person is different, even though many patterns and similarities will emerge. Unfortunately in many cases if its not acted on quickly then it can go unchecked and create further, possibly worst problems. 

Prisons, many of which I'm sure are far from ideal, but are a necessity, at the very least as a stop gap to prevent the possibility of re-offending. If you caught a killer and there was a possibility they would commit again given the chance, what do you propose we do?