Quote:
Originally Posted by JMvS
My bolding was probably misleading, what I meant is that the case justice is for everybody: you commit a crime => you get sentenced to something.
How you get judged, depending on circumstances, etc... is up to the judge.
Allowing somebody to escape trial is not the same as giving him a comprehensive sentence.
|
I think I misconstrued what you said, because of the bolding. We seem to be in direct agreement on this issue. Everyone deserves to be judged for their crimes, but punishment lies with the penal system, and those who interpret it, on a case by case basis.
Quote:
|
Yeah I misspoke the saying, sorry about that. I am fully aware of the multiple flaws of democracy (and not-so-democracies), but I value it still.
|
No apologies necessary. As I said, I assumed you misspoke, I just like to nitpick for the sake a nitpicking. Call it a character flaw =P
Quote:
|
I fully realize the advantages of such a system. What I was pointing at is precisely that values such as democracy and human rights are highly vulnerable to the utilitarian approach.
|
This I find to be an unfortunate truth. We start to delve into question like "If someone takes a life, do they deserve to live?" when we get to here. As I said before, I'd prefer to see eye for an eye justice, but we live in a country where human rights must come first, for all people, regardless of their actions toward others.
Quote:
|
No argument here. My main point being that he has to be sentenced, to what is up to the judge.
|
Again, we are in complete agreement here. And, obviously, we could argue ad nauseam about what a fair punishment would be, but it is up to the judge to interpret the law and derive punishment from his interpretation. I simply hope that he will recognize where some benefit for others can come out of this situation, aside from just punishing the accused.