4 ms·

You skipped the “take responsibility”. In case of a more serious crime a simple apology is indeed not enough. But it should still be possible to proceed with so

• philipallstar 1y ago
  Take responsibility is just a euphemism, though. For some people that is someone going behind bars. What do you actually mean?
  • lostlogin 1y ago
    Apply the same thought process to ‘punishment’. Those who spend a lot of time in prison seem to come out worse and reoffend. How is that helpful?
    • rat9988 1y ago
      I don't know, if somebody kills my child, I don't know why you'd expect me to be helpful to him.
      • n4r9 1y ago
        Even to prevent them continuing to kill someone else's child later?
        • lukan 1y ago
          A death sentence would certainly prevent this person from killing another child. (Whether a death sentence is good for society in general is a different question)
          • esafak 1y ago
            It would not be good for a deceased either, especially if they are wrongly convicted.
            • lukan 1y ago
              Indeed, but it would also be not good to be wrongly sentenced to life in prison. Once inside, chances to get out with a retrial are pretty slim. Fatal misstakes are bad in any situation.
    • philipallstar 1y ago
      This sort of thinking always misses that part of the reason for punishment is deterrent of others.
      • n4r9 1y ago
        I think most people who commit a crime either do it in the heat of the moment, or believe that they're very unlikely to get caught. The distant prospect of punishment doesn't apply in either case. I guess there are some edge cases. Drug smugglers for example are probably aware of the rough probability of detection and weigh it up against the length of jail time. But I reckon Sarkozy thought he'd just get away with it and didn't even consider what the potential punishment would be.
        • philipallstar 1y ago
          > But I reckon Sarkozy thought he'd just get away with it and didn't even consider what the potential punishment would be. It's worth considering then that the next person who has the option to do this might behave differently, given Sarkozy has not got away with it.
          • n4r9 1y ago
            There's definitely some truth to that. There are situations where someone might restrain themselves because of the consequences of getting caught. I suppose the question is whether the consequence needs to be punishment as opposed to correction or isolation. In the case of a narcissist like Sarkozy, the reputaional tarnish of being publicly labeled as guilty would be an emotional blow.
        • esafak 1y ago
          It has to be a deterrent rather than punishment, because crimes can't be undone; it's better to prevent them.
    • lenkite 1y ago
      Prison is nonsense and a waste of human life. Best punishment is caning like Singapore. Do fast and quick. Pain is an excellent memory aid. Most stable lowest recidivism rate.
    • nmeofthestate 1y ago
      > those who spend a lot of time in prison seem to come out worse and reoffend. How is that helpful? You're implying that imprisonment makes people offend more - perhaps the simpler explanation is that most criminals will commit crimes when they get the chance, especially prolific criminals. Prison takes them off the streets and stops them victimising more people - this is helpful.
  • n4r9 1y ago
    It's not a hard and fast definition, but generally involves: * An honest acknowledgement of ones behaviour and its impact on others. * Accepting the consequences of your behaviour, whether legal (such as going to jail), financial, or personal. * Taking the initiative to make amends where possible. * Taking steps to improve oneself and/or prevent the same behaviour in future.