Against Prisons: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

Against Prisons (Quelltext anzeigen)

Version vom 11. August 2016, 13:44 Uhr

1.487 Bytes hinzugefügt , 13:44, 11. Aug. 2016

→‎Punishment without Prisons

Tiao

Bürokraten, Administratoren

31.738

Bearbeitungen

@@ Zeile 262: / Zeile 262: @@
 == Punishment without Prisons ==
-Even with the safety of the population guaranteed (at least as well as with prisons) by way of a responsible system of preventive detention - much smaller and better than the present system of prison-as-punishment - there might remain a need for some punishment for some offenders. To keep a cold-blooded mass murderer who had just been doing his job as a killer for the mafia or a drug cartel in preventive detention in order to keep him from career continuity is an immediate necessity. But if that was all that was done in response to his crimes, such an instrumental reaction will almost certainly not satisfy victims' families nor the justice system, the media, or the general public. It is one thing to exempt insane killers from criminal responsibility (and to simply lock them up in a forensic ward of a psychiatric hospital), but it is another to forego punishment of
+Even with the safety of the population guaranteed through a responsible system of preventive detention - both drastically smaller and better than present-day prisons-as-punishment - there might remain a need to see a criminal suffer. An example might help. Imagine a young man of 29 years, diagnosed as physically and mentally healthy, an educator in a kindergarten, who is found to have abused and brutally killed three children over the time of five years. Or a cold-blooded professional killer hired by the mafia or a drug cartel for the necessary eliminations of traitors, enemies, and unfair competitors, who, after a number of years on the job, is finally being arrested. In both cases, public security can be regained by ordering the dangerous individuals to be locked up in preventive detention. For questions of safety, that could be it. Even if we know that such a purely instrumental reaction will be seen as unsatisfactory by victims' families and beyond. In the case of a successful insanity defense such an exemption from criminal responsibilization is a long-standing tradition and the victims' discontent is seen as a sad, but unavoidable fact which  the criminal justice system, in those cases, cannot do anything about.
+In the case of mentally sane offenders, though, not only victims' families feel a strong need for something more than just instrumental reactions to happen. It is one thing to forego punishment in the case of mentally ill offenders. It is another to do so with the sane and cold-blooded authors of heinous crimes. This becomes clearer when we imagine the case that either the child killer or the mafia killer has has successfully completed treatment or counseling, and that - after a few years - he is set free because a sufficient number of high-quality expert assessments have come to the sound conclusion that the person in question does not pose a risk of continued offending anymore.
+Most people would probably not consider it just if the offenders were to walk out of their preventive confinement without having had to "pay" for what they had done. There is a strong and very widespread emotion that those who committed heinous acts should be responded to by the intentional infliction of harm to them. One might even say that there is a kind of natural law logic that crimes must be responded to with punishment. Where there is crime, there must be punishment, not only damage repair or a sanitary reaction of preventing future occurrences.
-off killer or a We are not talking of  like, e.g., mass murderers, which, of course, then would have to be non-custodial.
 Von #### hier an müsste der weitere argumentationsgang noch einmal gründlich revidiert und vielleicht gestrafft werden ...das ist der stand von Do, 11.8., 10:30  ####