3 ms·
No, Socialism. Let the local people decide. If the offenders thought that the locals might punish them, they would behave better.
by Johnythree 4y ago
No, Socialism. Let the local people decide.
If the offenders thought that the locals might punish them, they would behave better.
- eurasiantiger 4y agoNo. They would just go elsewhere to commit offenses. Retributive justice is not really effective when the offender’s world view internally justifies their actions. It’s a common theme that criminals are victims of circumstance to such a degree that the enforcing entity is seen as another arm of the system that caused their criminal behavior in the first place. Imagine being in a car crash, having difficult pains, getting prescribed oxy- or hydrocodone, and after the script runs out, asking for a refill gets you a stamped as a drug seeker, never to receive another prescription ever again. But the pain and the withdrawals are still there. This has created an incredible numbed of convicted criminals and homeless people. A Venn diagram of these two populations overlaps with people who spend nights in public toilets.
- xyzzyz 4y ago> No. They would just go elsewhere to commit offenses. This is just denying the offenders all agency. If they literally cannot help but commit crime, the response from the society should then be to lock them up, as unfit to live in the society. I do not in fact believe that to be the case. Criminals have agency, and, as can be readily observed, respond to incentives too.
- eurasiantiger 4y agoI get your point, but this isn’t about me denying agency, this is about the system denying agency.