Wednesday, November 30, 2016

The limits of retribution

 There can be limits on retribution based on what we can humanely do. We might think a murderer who tortures his victims to death should himself be tortured. But who could take that job and come out of it a decent human being?

4 comments:

Gyan said...

But today many deny that it is humane to execute a sadist murderer. Tomorrow, to sentence him to life imprisonment could be deemed inhumane.

So, "humanely do" is insufficient guide because it is subjective.

Ilíon said...

^ Actually, that "tomorrow" is already here, especialy in Europe, but also here in the US.

oozzielionel said...

"The punishment should fit the crime" is different from "The punishment should be a crime." The concept of "an eye for an eye" was not to dial up criminal sentences but to limit them in a retaliatory social climate. Retribution can be distinguished from retaliation. Torturing the torturer seems to cross the line from justice to retaliation.

Dave Duffy said...

"History will judge," and somehow punish I guess, seems to be the current form of justice favored. Whatever that means.