4 ms·

> One bad person less. Reform is better than revenge. Not only would society lose a bad person, we'd gain a good one. > How about asking questions, then tort

> One bad person less. Reform is better than revenge. Not only would society lose a bad person, we'd gain a good one. > How about asking questions, then torturing, then killing. You'd get the cake and eat it, too. This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn.

imwillofficial 6y ago
“Reform is better than revenge” Cite your sources where a rapist and murderer is a benefit to society after reform. “This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn” How is the murder and rape of an innocent comparable to the punishment of a murderer and rapist? How do you measure reform? Are their limits to what should be reformed? Do the risks of relapse ever outweigh the benefit of reform? An example to consider are the France Shooters or the Boston Marathon Bomber.
- xenophonf 6y ago
  I explained my logic in the previous comment and don't feel the need to go into further detail. Demanding sources isn't really a logical argument, anyway.
- nicoburns 6y ago
  IMO the limits lie where someone isn't interested or can't be reformed. If I could turn the Boston Marathon Bombers into adovcates against extremism I would. And if successful they'd likely be very good at it because they'd understand the motives of other extremists better. It doesn't work with everyone (that's why we have prisons), but AFAIK it's not that uncommon for people to tunr their lives aeound in this way. Most criminals are not inherently sadistic: they do care about other people. Their upbringing and circumstances just lead them to a bad place and they ended up taking that out on someone else. That doesn't mean they aren't repsonsible for their actions or that they shouldn't be punished, but it doesn mean that they can often be rehabilitated with the right support. And that's generally a win-win scenario where it is possible.
Aeronwen 6y ago
>This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn. But they can reform.

imwillofficial 6y ago

“Reform is better than revenge” Cite your sources where a rapist and murderer is a benefit to society after reform. “This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn” How is the murder and rape of an innocent comparable to the punishment of a murderer and rapist? How do you measure reform? Are their limits to what should be reformed? Do the risks of relapse ever outweigh the benefit of reform? An example to consider are the France Shooters or the Boston Marathon Bomber.

xenophonf 6y ago
I explained my logic in the previous comment and don't feel the need to go into further detail. Demanding sources isn't really a logical argument, anyway.
nicoburns 6y ago
IMO the limits lie where someone isn't interested or can't be reformed. If I could turn the Boston Marathon Bombers into adovcates against extremism I would. And if successful they'd likely be very good at it because they'd understand the motives of other extremists better. It doesn't work with everyone (that's why we have prisons), but AFAIK it's not that uncommon for people to tunr their lives aeound in this way. Most criminals are not inherently sadistic: they do care about other people. Their upbringing and circumstances just lead them to a bad place and they ended up taking that out on someone else. That doesn't mean they aren't repsonsible for their actions or that they shouldn't be punished, but it doesn mean that they can often be rehabilitated with the right support. And that's generally a win-win scenario where it is possible.

Aeronwen 6y ago

>This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn. But they can reform.