gontijoloyola wrote: ↑June 11th, 2022, 11:01 pm
Is there really any alternative? What to do with superviolent criminals? The prison system can be minimized, but never supressed.
Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑June 12th, 2022, 8:58 am
Criminals, super-violent or otherwise, can be imprisoned, executed, or released. There are other options too; prison remains one of them, but only one.
LuckyR wrote: ↑June 12th, 2022, 4:29 pm
It's definitely the best of the three that you mentioned.
I take a broad view. I think that, when a court is considering criminal behaviour, all options should be available. Previous verdicts ("precedents") should be available for reference, but not binding on future decisions. Each case is different, and requires (in an ideal world) different treatment. The guiding principle is, IMO, that a court should produce a verdict that is
fair and
just for
all concerned. And "all" there means the accused, the victim(s), their friends and families, the general public and the whole of society: all.
In addition, I would favour reparation over punishment.
If possible, I want to see a criminal putting something back, to try to make up for the wrong that was done. I would rather see a criminal rebuild a wall than in prison, at our expense, in punishment for knocking the wall down.
So I think prison should remain an option, even though there is much wrong with existing prisons. There are some crimes, in some circumstances, that require the guilty party to be excluded from society, and prisons fulfil that role.