3 ms·
I too feel that rehabilitation, not vengeance, should be the goal of the justice system but in this case, I think it's a moot point. This is an individual with
by akiselev 6y ago
I too feel that rehabilitation, not vengeance, should be the goal of the justice system but in this case, I think it's a moot point. This is an individual with the means and clear history of organizing and wielding violent armed groups which (I hypothesize) requires a level of emotional intelligence that justice systems are not equipped to rehabilitate by design. The ones that try to rehabilitate offenders naturally err towards giving people the benefit of the doubt in order to make the process fairer for the falsely accused which is very easily exploitable, especially for the well resourced.
I think this individual presents a clear cut case where public safety is more important than the individual's right to rehabilitation post-conviction, in a way that even the worst civilian criminals like serial killers do not. There is just no way to reintegrate him to like a POW of an opposing nation in war or a rebel soldier who joined a movement - he was a primary instigator in the conflict and his enemy was the system he'd be rehabilitated into.
- s1artibartfast 6y agoI don't think that your last statement is supported. Why isn't rehabilitation possible and why is it impossible that public safety can be ensured? You seem to assume that intelligent individuals are more difficult to rehabilitate but I see it is just as likely that the opposite the opposite. The burden of demonstrating public safety and rehabilitation should always be on the individual, but I don't see why that is impossible.