True, technical fairness is not necessarily fair. But look at some of the nonsense already promoted because of differential sentencing: crack was treated more harshly than ordinary powdered cocaine because it is more dangerous to health, and it was associated with a wave of urban gang wars. In spite of the clear rationale, eventually it was alleged that it was racist, because blacks disproportionately favored crack. Standards for female firefighters have had to be made so low that, for example, it is not necessary to be able to perform the "fireman's carry" to qualify as a female, one only has to be able to drag someone across a floor. This is obviously a safety problem. However, it is supposed to be unfair if women do not have an equal chance to gain admission. Now, what happens if rough equality of sentencing flies out the window, and people wonder about favoritism or political affiliation of judges, or whatever?
Again, if malice is not punished, then one is treating the matter as an accident, or mere negligence, rather than making the person assume responsibility for his actions. I do not wish to see the sense of responsibility diminished in this society....... |
