DescentBB

flip wrote:So? Lawlessness is already contempt for society and its laws. It's revenue neutral

So you wish to ignore the disease and treat the symptom?

Again, it depends on who we are talking about exactly. Murderers,rapists...... or drug offenders. I would even go so far as to lump drug offenders in 2 groups. Those that are responsible or those that are reckless. Those that are reckless and unruly can and should be rehabilitated. Being confined the very first step. The truly heinous of offenders should be removed indefinitely and left to themselves to consider their ways.

“As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.”

null0010 wrote:

woodchip wrote:

null0010 wrote:

Why must laws be enforced through punishment?

Why shouldn't they be punished?

Punishment breeds contempt for society and its laws.

Congrats Null, you are now officially the biggest troll on this board.

Sadly what I think is needed is what history did with convicts in the past. They sent them to Australia. But I'd go a step further and send them to another planet and let them live among themselves. We spend on average $100,000 per person who its in prison. That is a shame.

null0010 wrote:Punishment breeds contempt for society and its laws.

TOO DAMN BAD. contempt for Law breeds lawlessness and Anarchy. (see Terrorism) so which one is worse for society as a whole

woodchip wrote:Congrats Null, you are now officially the biggest troll on this board.

Funny, coming from the man with a socialist Joker Obama avatar.

Keep it professional, boys.

null0010 wrote:

woodchip wrote:

null0010 wrote:

Why must laws be enforced through punishment?

Why shouldn't they be punished?

Punishment breeds contempt for society and its laws.

As I see it the consequences we deliver for law breakers are punishment with hopes it serves as a deterrence and removal of the offender from society as a protection for the citizens.
Without consequences for breaking them laws are useless and not all illegal activity is best addressed by treatment. So how would you give a law any chance to be a deterrent if you don't allow a punishment consequence for those who break the law and don't need treatment (a scenario which covers most offenders)?

Treatment is an additional consequence or alternative consequence that can be used but ultimately even treatment is pursued primarily to benefit society not necessarily the criminal.
You don't find prison systems or jails or probation departments seeking out patients from the population at large for treatment simply because the person needs treatment, they only send convicted criminals down that path because the criminals activity has become a risk to others and it is that risk that triggers the justice system to seek treatment as another form of stopping the illegal activity.

So dismissing punishment because it makes the criminal contemptuous toward society seems really counterproductive to a system designed to curb criminal activity. If someone is so greedy and lazy they want to break into houses and rob people they already have contempt for the law and society! Do you want to treat them for excessive greed? Give them couch time so you can possibly make them see the error of their ways?!?