> "If you don't believe in punitive punishment" Please define "punitive". According to http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punitive http://www.merriam-we

> "If you don't believe in punitive punishment" Please define "punitive". According to http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punitive http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punitive there are two meanings: Definition #1: "intended to punish someone or something". I'm for that. But c'mon, a fine for $1 is a punishment. An order to stay away from someone else is a punishment. Is that what you mean by punitive punishment? Definition #2: "extremely or unfairly severe or high". I'm against that. I don't believe in cruel and unusual punishment. Like caning. I don't believe in inhumane punishment. Like most prisons in the US. Just because I am against "extremely or unfairly severe or high" punishment doesn't mean I am for no punishment. I can still be for moderate or measured punishment. Which I am. > "The only question remaining what form that punitive punishment should take" I do not agree with "extremely or unfairly severe or high punishment", no. As the essay points out, some people are much more affected by certain forms of punishment than others. The "extremely or unfairly" may be hard to determine. This is why Breivik is allowed to plea for a change of his conditions. This is indeed a question. It's a well studied question, with a long history and associated court cases from multiple jurisdictions. But as I complained, the essay ignores the existing concept of "cruel an unusual punishment", and makes things up out of whole cloth - literally, by positing a new culture which just happens to reproduce the US prison system and also happens to consider caning as something other than "cruel and unusual."