Go Back   Steam Users' Forums > Steam Discussions > Off Topic

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-02-2011, 03:11 AM   #1
thoreau
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Reputation: 349
Posts: 170
philosophy lol

From my own thoughts,

Let's say that a man has just been convicted for a horrific murder of which has earned him a pretty good amount of years in prison. The year is 2100 and we still have roughly the same kind of classic justice system in place that we have now since the ancient times (trial of prosecution and defense + prison). In that period however, coupled with the most advanced knowledge of psychology we have, we also have accurate computers that can tell when a person has had a shift in conscience and morality. The total science of that time has found that the murderer, while going through his trial, has completely changed simply through the intense guilt and is no more likely to murder than you or I would be inclined to.

Would it not then be pretty pointless to send him to jail for years and years?

What about if this person was a mass murderer like Hitler? Wouldn't the same logic apply?

Topic on my mind recently of how I think our current "justice" system might be much, much farther from perfection than we've thought.
thoreau is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:16 AM   #2
Boone
 
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Reputation: 166
Posts: 79
So basically what you're saying is: it's ok to do something wrong, as long as you're sorry after?
Boone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:17 AM   #3
sad_ism
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Reputation: 1463
Posts: 77
The question is, what's the point of putting him in jail in the first place?

Used to be, the penal system was a method of punishment. Meaning, they didn't care what you did or what your morals were, you broke the law therefore you're going to jail.

Now, jails are more than often called corrective (correctional?) facilities. There are programs to help jailed dudes get re-integrated into society, etc -- basically, you're there not because you need to be punished, but because you don't get along with the rest of society.

Bringing Hitler in just confuses the issue.
sad_ism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:19 AM   #4
thoreau
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Reputation: 349
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by sad_ism View Post
The question is, what's the point of putting him in jail in the first place?

Used to be, the penal system was a method of punishment. Meaning, they didn't care what you did or what your morals were, you broke the law therefore you're going to jail.

Now, jails are more than often called corrective (correctional?) facilities. There are programs to help jailed dudes get re-integrated into society, etc -- basically, you're there not because you need to be punished, but because you don't get along with the rest of society.

Bringing Hitler in just confuses the issue.
The philosophy of jail is no longer based on the ancient eye for an eye concept (mostly, and comparatively speaking). It's to try and rehabilitate you so you can be like a person ought to be as dictated by what is viewed to be ethical.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone View Post
So basically what you're saying is: it's ok to do something wrong, as long as you're sorry after?
Not exactly. You can be sorry for something and either consciously lie about it or unconsciously know that you haven't quite changed and would still have be inclined to murder. In my case, it is known with accurate science that the person has changed.

Last edited by thoreau: 06-02-2011 at 03:22 AM.
thoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:25 AM   #5
Boone
 
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Reputation: 166
Posts: 79
Yes, but I'm pretty sure most people who do something they know is wrong, will genuinely be sorry after the act. Does not change the fact they did it.
Boone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:33 AM   #6
chaplain_wu
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Reputation: 773
Posts: 3,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by thoreau View Post
It's to try and rehabilitate you so you can be like a person ought to be as dictated by what is viewed to be ethical.
Problem with THAT though is that ethical views of rehabilitation itself is rather subjective: one day your government will raise funding for such systems, the next day another administration will come in and cut it all, advocating death penalty.
chaplain_wu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:35 AM   #7
KraitVenom
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Reputation: 60
Posts: 126
in my opinion this man should still go to jail, if it was premeditated it doesnt matter how he feels afterwards, he still planned and carried out the act.

if it was accidental but still came under murder/manslaughter depending on the law of the country then yes i think a reduced jail sentence would be justifiable
KraitVenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:38 AM   #8
tibetanpunk
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Reputation: 6748
Posts: 4,690
I don't think 'being sorry' or 'feeling guilty' = justice...

It certainly isn't to the family and friends of the murdered person that have suffered the loss.

You purposefully take someone else's life, you lose the privilege of living your life freely.
tibetanpunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:45 AM   #9
thoreau
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Reputation: 349
Posts: 170
So far a few people are misunderstanding my write: "being sorry" does not = being changed. Being sorry is just an emotion, whether genuine or fake. It does not prove to anyone that you are less inclined to do something unethical. Drug addicts feel sorry all the time for what they do. We have a computer in this case that can detect if you've changed.
thoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:46 AM   #10
Eldar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Reputation: 164
Posts: 294
Some jails nowadays are far more luxurious than lives outside the jail for those incarcerated.
Eldar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:52 AM   #11
sad_ism
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Reputation: 1463
Posts: 77
So now, besides the question of rehabilitation, there's also the issue of justice (eye-for-eye, or something deeper?), for the family or friends of the victim. Gotta wonder what the motive was, as well -- pure spite, money, power? Has the motive been achieved?
sad_ism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:52 AM   #12
Modiga-Disabled
 
Modiga-Disabled's Avatar
 
Volunteer Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2004
Reputation: 10254
Posts: 10,007
It depends entirely on what you think the point of the prison and justice system should be.

If you think they should exist to punish people, then clearly no.
If you think they should exist as correctional facilities, then potentially yes.

My personal view is that if justice is intended merely to punish those found guilty of wrongdoing, then it's going about it wrong. The goal should be to have the most benefit on society, not to cause suffering to those who for whatever reason committed a crime.

__________________
Need something? PM me or contact support
Modiga-Disabled is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 03:56 AM   #13
thoreau
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Reputation: 349
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Modiga-Disabled View Post
It depends entirely on what you think the point of the prison and justice system should be.

If you think they should exist to punish people, then clearly no.
If you think they should exist as correctional facilities, then potentially yes.

My personal view is that if justice is intended merely to punish those found guilty of wrongdoing, then it's going about it wrong. The goal should be to have the most benefit on society, not to cause suffering to those who for whatever reason committed a crime.
The latter is a staple of the current idea of justice in the West, but unfortunately that's far from also being the case in some countries like in the Middle East. If we wanted our answer to this case on the global level, we'd still have to be fighting that stupid debate.
thoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 04:04 AM   #14
Firestorm998
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Reputation: 7302
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by thoreau View Post
We have a computer in this case that can detect if you've changed.
In that case, assuming the tech is 100% correct, sentencing could revolve around a period of genuine community service.
Unlike the community service that exists now that is arbitrary as in the 'reform' and 'service' ideals are lost in: a) simply wanting to keep prison numbers down for the system, and b) an easy get out of jail free card, pardon the pun, for the convict.

But even if such tech existed the public wouldn't go for it imo and if someone close to me was murdered, I'm not sure I would either.
Firestorm998 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2011, 04:05 AM   #15
velvetmeds
 
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2008
Reputation: 3270
Posts: 2,297
In my country the penal system's objective is prevention, not retribution. Same goes for a lot of civilized countries. If there ever was a way to know that he wouldn't ever do it again (unlikely, that's too sci fi :P) then yeah, he wouldn't need to go to jail cause it would be pointless. If anything, he'd just have to pay (civil law) compensation for whatever damage he did.
velvetmeds is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Steam Users' Forums > Steam Discussions > Off Topic


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site Content Copyright Valve Corporation 1998-2014, All Rights Reserved.