Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (15394)	6/24/2002 5:56:37 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 21057

See you later, all......

To: Neocon who wrote (15394)	6/25/2002 12:05:28 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

"I see no point in abandoning the standard of justice because it is imperfectly applied....... If the thing is imperfect in its application due to corruption, ignorance or human falabilities (sp),I would agree with you. The situation here is that the "standard" is not standard. The dishing out of measured amounts of "punishment" to perpetrators of crime does not end up with measured amounts of suffering. What you are calling a standard is inherently flawed as a standard. In any event I do not see how causing someone to suffer at the hands of legal authority is a just outcome for anyone. This, in and of itself does not resolve the loss for whom ever the crime was committed against nor does it cause a constructive change in the criminal person. I have shown in several examples that demonstrate how the intent to cause suffering as a standard is insufficient, not just imperfect in its application. So it can not be relied upon as a standard tool even if it were effective, which it is not. If we were to have perfect justice it would be a condition in which everyone's needs are being met absolutely and simultaineously. Of course you know that I do not believe we have the resources to design such a system. However, it was you who mentioned that you would consider other paradygms...so loosen up. So far the only meaning I can get from this standard is, we don't hit the bad guy any harder than he deserves... equals justice.