Whats wrong with violent punishment? - Debate in good faith or don't debate it all

[Rapier Ape]

I remember this story I once heard about in Texas, this one town had this guy who would rape all the women, and kill anyone who was gonna testify...

That was in Skidmore Missouri. Guy's name was Ken MacElroy. There are probably 100+ documentaries on the guy and also a few films. It's one hell of an example of small town bullshit that escalated to what happened in the end. The guy pretty much terrorized the entire town and to be honest should have been shot well before he got put down when he did. On top of that his house was burned to the ground following his murder. My guess is they even wanted to scatter his family out of there as well.

 

[Naproxen Sodium]

It didn't work to deter crime and allowing people to legally torture others brings some seriously bad people into law enforcement as well as allows that abuse to happen for lesser crimes. It's about justice more than anything, the punishment has to fit the crime.

And there's also the possibility of wrongful conviction - what do you say to someone whose hand you lopped off or you tortured? "Sorry, our bad?" Being in prison for decades because of something you didn't do is bad enough but if you suffered physical torture or loss of a body part from it what then?

It's getting more and more difficult to prove a wrongful conviction in the age of DNA evidence and the fact that a surveillance state exists in many countries. Either by the government itself or by the fact that there are many people who have been proven on this site simply to record themselves or admit doing crimes on camera and everyone has cell phones to record basically everything. Bodycams on cops are more useful to cops in proving crimes occurred than are cops seen using unreasonable force or being corrupt without public oversight.

That said, I'm not sure it is necessary to go full and blind 'eye for an eye' on these people in some mob rule way like you can see on a thread here about it still happening in many third world countries. It might be in some cases for sure, but still think the person should be tried, has one appeal, and then if that fails, justice is whatever it is.

 

[Agamemnon Busmalis]

It's getting more and more difficult to prove a wrongful conviction in the age of DNA evidence and the fact that a surveillance state exists in many countries. Either by the government itself or by the fact that there are many people who have been proven on this site simply to record themselves or admit doing crimes on camera and everyone has cell phones to record basically everything. Bodycams on cops are more useful to cops in proving crimes occurred than are cops seen using unreasonable force or being corrupt without public oversight.

Unless the prosecution just makes it up. If anything the necessity of protecting people from violent punishments is even more critical now.

That said, I'm not sure it is necessary to go full and blind 'eye for an eye' on these people in some mob rule way like you can see on a thread here about it still happening in many third world countries. It might be in some cases for sure, but still think the person should be tried, has one appeal, and then if that fails, justice is whatever it is.

It just doesn't work and invites people with very sick tendencies into law enforcement.

I do support Singapore-style caning though for minor offenses.

 

[Core Theorist]

I'm just saying we can get most of the benefits if we brand people who've been convicted of heinous crimes.

Y'know, instead of the pussy-ass 'sex offender registry', we just put 'RAPIST' on their forehead? Maybe a 'BURGLAR' for people who break into homes?

Doesn't really matter if it's a branding iron or just a tattoo, as long as it's permanent.

 

[BestUserName]

Regardless of morality, all forms of state punishment rely on at least the threat of violence.