In truth, such damaged human beings don't feel guilt or shame. Those emotions are there to keep good people in check of their less flattering emotions. If those emotions are absent, they can effortlessly commit brutal crimes against other human beings. If only there was treatment for such broken people.
I don’t believe the real goal is prevention. It’s justice. Is it JUST to allow the truly heinous (& without a reasonable doubt - guilty) to continue to live in relative comfort (i.e. not in a medieval dungeon, chained to a wall) while their victims lives have been unjustly cut short?
I really don’t care about rehabilitation as much as 1) protecting the innocent and 2) punishing the offender.
If a woman is violently raped by a stranger, what is the proper punishment? The courts exist to try to “make whole” victims, but how do you do that when something like your senses of safety and dignity are taken? The LEAST the courts can do in cases like rape, murder, violent assault, etc., is to expeditiously remove the offender from this planet. Dead people are guaranteed not to reoffend, and are rarely let out of prison by accident (except to vote in blue cities), so capital punishment does do the most important job it is there to do - give some peace to the victim and their family.
Now you might say what about the accused’s rights? Fine, we have due process, but we also have rogue judges, so I’ll help fix the due process when you start making rogue judges culpable for the crimes of the criminal they were lenient towards. Yes, that old “if a bartender can over serve”, a judge can under incarcerate.
When you commit a violent crime, you aren’t worthy of society’s kid gloves. You need a punishment HARSHER than what you gave your victim, but I would settle for your quick death if it saved a few bucks.
I have always wavered over the efficacy of the death penalty, so for a while I thought Nathaniel Hawthorn got it right in "The Scarlet Letter," but then I read Shirley Jackson's short story (the one that all college freshmen were assigned as their first assignment in American literature), "The Lottery," and was convinced that public shaming was also dangerous. I have finally settled on this punishment: find a deserted island far from the mainland and put all our worst criminals there. Give them each a packet of cucumber seeds and wish them luck. Buh bye.
Inmates often live longer (and more expensively) on death row than in general population. It seems 10 - 20 years is not an unusual time frame for a death row prisoner in some states. Efficiency in death sentences should be improved, or death sentences reconsidered. 15 -20 year waits are problematic for survivors, relatives, etc.
Shaming some of these criminals would just make them want to take revenge on the citizens who shamed them. They don't feel shame for what they did - they're proud of it. Have you SEEN the faces of some of these people who've been arrested for heinous crimes? They look smug and proud. Having them in the town square stockage wont change that. They'll just seek revenge.
How many jurors must be protected simply because they were selected to hear the testimony? Revenge is real. We have a mobile, urban society where shamed people can simply remove from that community.
“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.”
― Voltaire
As I read the article, I couldn't help but keep thinking not about axe murderers, but politicians. Structural violence (death by public policy) kills people just like dropping bombs on them. More people are killed by our political system either directly or indirectly than any criminals currently in jail or on death row. Why shouldn't they be tried and put on display of public humiliation instead of worshiped by their party? We have a form of this now and it is being ejected from office by a sex scandal, but that is when the politicians don't follow the deep state. Leaving office due to corruption just doesn't happen any more (there is plenty of corruption, but they are protected).
'ostracism'—each Athenian citizen was required to write on a shard of pottery (ostrakon) the name of a politician that they wished to see exiled for a period of ten years.[24] This may have been triggered by Miltiades' prosecution, and used by the Athenians to try to stop such power-games among the noble families.[24] Certainly, in the years (487 BC) following, the heads of the prominent families, including the Alcmaeonids, were exiled.[24] The career of a politician in Athens thus became fraught with more difficulty, since displeasing the population was likely to result in exile.
With current day forensics and DNA available it shouldn't be costing $millions to get to the execution stage of someone convicted and sentenced to death. What is required is a change in the law to allow only one appeal based solely on new evidence, if there is even a slight doubt then it should be automatic that the whole evidence is investigated by an independent department. Anyone found ignoring or manipulating evidence at the trial should themselves be prosecuted. When/if it fails then it should be 'set a date time'. End of. Furthermore the only option should be whichever is cheapest - probably hanging.
Im probably going to be wrong about this but my spontaneous reaction is to disagree that public shame is all it takes. For 1 thing, dangerous criminals (mentally ill, drug-induced or whatever) are already NOT spending a week, much less a lifetime, in prison, courtesy of “no bail” laws & the types of judges, AGs, criminal defense lawyers & prosecutors who have the criminals out within a day if not hours to murder, rape, &/or pillage again. In addition, many of not most criminals are psychopaths or sociopaths who have zero sympathy or empathy for their victims so why would they feel shame? And if any did, they can simply move away from the former community. One has to have a conscience to feel shame / humiliation / regret.
And for anyone who has lost a loved one to a horrific crime, they can be justified in wanting vengence because they will suffer the rest of their lives without the loved one while some monster lives & breathes the rest of THEIR lives.
I do agree though that adding more options is stupid.
Jenna, all I could visualize while reading your article was the scenes from Game Of Thrones where the horrific female character who had sex with her brother was paraded down the street naked as the people screamed “Shame,Shame” while ringing bells. Somehow I do not think this would work at all for criminals who have committed horrific death penalty worthy crimes. Personally I believe they should die in the same manner their victim(s) did. And not 50 years later.
Umm maybe I'm a little slow... but how is it NOT shameful to go to prison??! That stays on your record forever and follows you everywhere you go. If someone fresh out of prison moved in beside me, I'd definitely hesitate before I pursue a new friendship.
Also I think it's fine for people sentenced to death to pick the method used for their exit. That is quite generous considering murderers don't give their victims that option. Except if lethal injection is that expensive, I'd be in favor of removing that option completely. It should never cost as much to achieve justice as it does to house someone for decades.
It's not the injection that costs so much--ANY method would cost the same; it's the legal process that can stretch out for decades with multiple trials and appeals (https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/what-to-know-costs-and-the-death-penalty). And for sure, going to prison is somewhere on the shame-scale, but that's not the same as being shackled in the town square under a sign detailing exactly what you've done... (it's okay fi you disagree!) :)
My youngest daughter told me not long ago that we needed to bring shame back (she was, in fairness, talking about access to porn). I couldn’t agree more. And I told Lily that when her article came out lol. I’m not sure about petty crimes and misdemeanors. But for the big ones? Yes. I think public shaming would be a really good idea.
I get the feeling that a person capable of violent crime, who might be operating out of a sense of rage, the need to exercise power, and/or clearly mental instability, might respond to public shaming by upping the ante. Because after you've shamed him and released him, then what?
In truth, such damaged human beings don't feel guilt or shame. Those emotions are there to keep good people in check of their less flattering emotions. If those emotions are absent, they can effortlessly commit brutal crimes against other human beings. If only there was treatment for such broken people.
they are demonic, not broken.
Studies have confirmed that the recidivism rate for dead pedophiles is (checks notes) zero percent.
BOOM! Touch my child and I will kill you myself and not kindly or politely.
I don’t believe the real goal is prevention. It’s justice. Is it JUST to allow the truly heinous (& without a reasonable doubt - guilty) to continue to live in relative comfort (i.e. not in a medieval dungeon, chained to a wall) while their victims lives have been unjustly cut short?
I really don’t care about rehabilitation as much as 1) protecting the innocent and 2) punishing the offender.
If a woman is violently raped by a stranger, what is the proper punishment? The courts exist to try to “make whole” victims, but how do you do that when something like your senses of safety and dignity are taken? The LEAST the courts can do in cases like rape, murder, violent assault, etc., is to expeditiously remove the offender from this planet. Dead people are guaranteed not to reoffend, and are rarely let out of prison by accident (except to vote in blue cities), so capital punishment does do the most important job it is there to do - give some peace to the victim and their family.
Now you might say what about the accused’s rights? Fine, we have due process, but we also have rogue judges, so I’ll help fix the due process when you start making rogue judges culpable for the crimes of the criminal they were lenient towards. Yes, that old “if a bartender can over serve”, a judge can under incarcerate.
When you commit a violent crime, you aren’t worthy of society’s kid gloves. You need a punishment HARSHER than what you gave your victim, but I would settle for your quick death if it saved a few bucks.
Boom!
I have always wavered over the efficacy of the death penalty, so for a while I thought Nathaniel Hawthorn got it right in "The Scarlet Letter," but then I read Shirley Jackson's short story (the one that all college freshmen were assigned as their first assignment in American literature), "The Lottery," and was convinced that public shaming was also dangerous. I have finally settled on this punishment: find a deserted island far from the mainland and put all our worst criminals there. Give them each a packet of cucumber seeds and wish them luck. Buh bye.
Love it! Yes, exile is perhaps the ideal punishment.
How's the Australian tourism industry doing these days?
Dems have no shame so that won't work. In fact, dems would would hold a parade for a depraved rapist/murderer. Perfect example, Mangione.
What?! No drawing and quartering? Horses need jobs too.
Inmates often live longer (and more expensively) on death row than in general population. It seems 10 - 20 years is not an unusual time frame for a death row prisoner in some states. Efficiency in death sentences should be improved, or death sentences reconsidered. 15 -20 year waits are problematic for survivors, relatives, etc.
Accountability should be #1. When there is no accountability, criminals are enabled to commit more crimes. And They Do!
Shaming some of these criminals would just make them want to take revenge on the citizens who shamed them. They don't feel shame for what they did - they're proud of it. Have you SEEN the faces of some of these people who've been arrested for heinous crimes? They look smug and proud. Having them in the town square stockage wont change that. They'll just seek revenge.
How many jurors must be protected simply because they were selected to hear the testimony? Revenge is real. We have a mobile, urban society where shamed people can simply remove from that community.
“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.”
― Voltaire
As I read the article, I couldn't help but keep thinking not about axe murderers, but politicians. Structural violence (death by public policy) kills people just like dropping bombs on them. More people are killed by our political system either directly or indirectly than any criminals currently in jail or on death row. Why shouldn't they be tried and put on display of public humiliation instead of worshiped by their party? We have a form of this now and it is being ejected from office by a sex scandal, but that is when the politicians don't follow the deep state. Leaving office due to corruption just doesn't happen any more (there is plenty of corruption, but they are protected).
'ostracism'—each Athenian citizen was required to write on a shard of pottery (ostrakon) the name of a politician that they wished to see exiled for a period of ten years.[24] This may have been triggered by Miltiades' prosecution, and used by the Athenians to try to stop such power-games among the noble families.[24] Certainly, in the years (487 BC) following, the heads of the prominent families, including the Alcmaeonids, were exiled.[24] The career of a politician in Athens thus became fraught with more difficulty, since displeasing the population was likely to result in exile.
Excellent point! Politicians are perhaps our most heinous group of criminals. Their victims are not counted in single digits!
With current day forensics and DNA available it shouldn't be costing $millions to get to the execution stage of someone convicted and sentenced to death. What is required is a change in the law to allow only one appeal based solely on new evidence, if there is even a slight doubt then it should be automatic that the whole evidence is investigated by an independent department. Anyone found ignoring or manipulating evidence at the trial should themselves be prosecuted. When/if it fails then it should be 'set a date time'. End of. Furthermore the only option should be whichever is cheapest - probably hanging.
Im probably going to be wrong about this but my spontaneous reaction is to disagree that public shame is all it takes. For 1 thing, dangerous criminals (mentally ill, drug-induced or whatever) are already NOT spending a week, much less a lifetime, in prison, courtesy of “no bail” laws & the types of judges, AGs, criminal defense lawyers & prosecutors who have the criminals out within a day if not hours to murder, rape, &/or pillage again. In addition, many of not most criminals are psychopaths or sociopaths who have zero sympathy or empathy for their victims so why would they feel shame? And if any did, they can simply move away from the former community. One has to have a conscience to feel shame / humiliation / regret.
And for anyone who has lost a loved one to a horrific crime, they can be justified in wanting vengence because they will suffer the rest of their lives without the loved one while some monster lives & breathes the rest of THEIR lives.
I do agree though that adding more options is stupid.
And we know Dems have no shame.
Jenna, all I could visualize while reading your article was the scenes from Game Of Thrones where the horrific female character who had sex with her brother was paraded down the street naked as the people screamed “Shame,Shame” while ringing bells. Somehow I do not think this would work at all for criminals who have committed horrific death penalty worthy crimes. Personally I believe they should die in the same manner their victim(s) did. And not 50 years later.
Totally agree!!!
Umm maybe I'm a little slow... but how is it NOT shameful to go to prison??! That stays on your record forever and follows you everywhere you go. If someone fresh out of prison moved in beside me, I'd definitely hesitate before I pursue a new friendship.
Also I think it's fine for people sentenced to death to pick the method used for their exit. That is quite generous considering murderers don't give their victims that option. Except if lethal injection is that expensive, I'd be in favor of removing that option completely. It should never cost as much to achieve justice as it does to house someone for decades.
It's not the injection that costs so much--ANY method would cost the same; it's the legal process that can stretch out for decades with multiple trials and appeals (https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/what-to-know-costs-and-the-death-penalty). And for sure, going to prison is somewhere on the shame-scale, but that's not the same as being shackled in the town square under a sign detailing exactly what you've done... (it's okay fi you disagree!) :)
Most depraved criminals have no conscience or they would not be where they are hence they are not shamed bc they are devoid of that emotion.
My youngest daughter told me not long ago that we needed to bring shame back (she was, in fairness, talking about access to porn). I couldn’t agree more. And I told Lily that when her article came out lol. I’m not sure about petty crimes and misdemeanors. But for the big ones? Yes. I think public shaming would be a really good idea.
I get the feeling that a person capable of violent crime, who might be operating out of a sense of rage, the need to exercise power, and/or clearly mental instability, might respond to public shaming by upping the ante. Because after you've shamed him and released him, then what?
For minor crimes, I'd make them run for political office. OH WAIT!!! They're already doing that!