Sip Posted December 11, 2003 Report Share Posted December 11, 2003 Dan I think now you are asking the tough question. I think I made certain of not saying who I think is more valuable than another! Social status (i.e. homeless versus rich) doesn't by itself indicate human value. I think no matter how we look at it, "punishment for past actions" is a fairly rediculous notion by itself since past actions have been done. The way I look at it, "punishment" (given by the "state") is meant to deter future bad actions. Some go looking for "revenge" ... that is part of human nature. But I don't think the "state" should ever be looking for revenge. For determining revenge and compensation for damages done, we have civil suits. And I don't think civil suits should result in death penalties although anything can have an exception! Now at some point, it becomes rather clear that any sort of punishment will probably not deter an individual from committing more bad actions. An example would be a serial killer that has already killed 14 people. The 15th one is undoubtedly coming (I agree that no one knows the future) but this is a "high probability situation". This is where the serial killer in my opinion is not only worthless, but also has negative worth and we are better off putting him to rest and save everyone the hastle of his existance. Am I adovcating punishing people only based on possible future actions? Absolutely not. Am I making a point that punishment is designed to deter and prevent future bad actions? Yes! The past is always done and there is nothing anyone can do to change it. Now to answer your question ... the guy who kills a homeless ... we have to look at the motives and analyze to determine the killer's worth to society. His victims worth will play a role but it is not the only determining factor. In other words, for the killer's punishment, focus on the KILLER's worth as a human Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted December 11, 2003 Report Share Posted December 11, 2003 Dan - my paper was supposed to strictly be an advocacy thing...oh well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted December 11, 2003 Report Share Posted December 11, 2003 (edited) I think no matter how we look at it, "punishment for past actions" is a fairly rediculous notion by itself since past actions have been done.Yes, but if punishment is used to deter others from doing the same thing, wouldn't that imply that ALL those who committed or at least participated in killing someone should be put to death, in order to have fewer people committing or participating in such crimes? Moreover, do you think that death is the most terrifying thing for those killers? I don't know.. I think people would rather be executed than spend the rest of their lives in a cell. That's why so many criminals (not all) are runaways here in Canada, and when it comes to arresting them, they put up a huge fight.. they certainly aren't doing that cos they're gonna be executed. But they certainly don't want to be put in a cell. Of course, they would love it if they could get away from both being imprisoned or executed. I'm sure they don't go actively looking for their own death. Dan - my paper was supposed to strictly be an advocacy thing...oh well...lol THOTH, even then, one can't really advocate something without knowing the other side's views, unless we're talking about the "kill the f***" type of advocacy.. Edited December 11, 2003 by Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOTH Posted December 11, 2003 Report Share Posted December 11, 2003 lol THOTH, even then, one can't really advocate something without knowing the other side's views, unless we're talking about the "kill the f***" type of advocacy.. Yeah - that was my approach (but apparently not what the proff was after - at all)...and in the end my paper didn't so much advicate as present various sides and say you can judge for yourself - ro an argument can be made either way etc (anbd at the time I was dead set [sic] against the death penalty..where I have somewhat more mixed views now - thoguh still generally against)...the proff also didn't like that I used quotes/references from Monty Python in the paper either..such as one I recall having to do with the fact that the US would likely retain the death penalty for some time to come so i said: "so you better get used to the idea" (and referenced it to Monty Python) LOL I also did a paper in the class where we had to write our own obituaries - and part of this was to teach us to write in the past tense or some such - and/or to keep the tenses coinsistent - don't remember. So i took it as a challange and wrote in in multiple tenses (which was Ok since I presented myslef as a time traveller reading my obituary in the future after my death)...got an "A" on that one....anyway - always pushing the limits...just my way... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.