4 ms·
> Punishment and re-education should be prioritized depending on the crime, but in any case both are just nice, optional perks. Again there is this framing abo
by threatofrain 5y ago
> Punishment and re-education should be prioritized depending on the crime, but in any case both are just nice, optional perks.
Again there is this framing about what is deserved and what is owed.
This is in contrast to the framing of what is best for society — if your prevailing theory is that some people are safe and some people are dangerous (as opposed to some people are criminals and some people are owed), then those individuals who still have a good future story ought be candidates for rehabilitation. From this perspective, it is not a matter of what is a "perk" and what is owed, but rather what the state has to gain.
- sershe 5y agoWell, is re-education better for society than removal? It's expensive and unreliable, whereas if you only consider the society of people whom we owe the respect of their negative rights (based on reciprocity), incarceration is cheaper and more reliable, and death penalty is cheaper and more reliable yet.