What is the purpose of law and punishment?

[Lord Kenneth]

Apparently, people have different ideas on why we punish people.

[LuxFerum]

where is the "for fun" option
and the planet X too.

[CWL]

A little bit of all options, except for the "filtering out" option, which I quite honestly did not understand.

[Lord Kenneth]

Originally posted by CWL
A little bit of all options, except for the "filtering out" option, which I quite honestly did not understand.

To rephrase:

"To keep the bad people away from the good"

[CWL]

Originally posted by Lord Kenneth


To rephrase:

"To keep the bad people away from the good"

Oh! As in "to keep the streets safe".

Darn. In such case I would say it's a little bit of that as well. Feel free to ask Hal to add a vote to that option and refer to this post of mine.

[richardm]

Originally posted by Lord Kenneth


To rephrase:

"To keep the bad people away from the good"

Certainly not that one, otherwise we'd never let 'em out!

[CWL]

Originally posted by richardm


Certainly not that one, otherwise we'd never let 'em out!

There are instances when we don't (and when we shouldn't).

[Lord Kenneth]

Originally posted by CWL


Oh! As in "to keep the streets safe".

Darn. In such case I would say it's a little bit of that as well. Feel free to ask Hal to add a vote to that option and refer to this post of mine.

Not necessarily safety... not all people who are punished are because they are a direct threat to other people...

[BobK]

Where's the option "to allow the sadistic and masochistic to play together"?

[richardm]

Originally posted by CWL


There are instances when we don't (and when we shouldn't).

Mm, true enough. I was thinking more that the purpose is (or should be!) to rehabilitate people, but I suppose that slamming them in prison does segregate them until that's happened. And for the people who are irredeemably lost, then segregation is all that it's for.

[Suddenly]

Any one "reason" will fit some situations and be absurd in others.

I'd like to say it is mainly for rehabilitative purposes, but there are situations where other reasons are appropriate. Punishment changes the "cost vs. benefit" analysis of an action, and that can effectively deter certain conduct, but only among reasonable people. Also, there is some value to the retribution aspect of punishment with really awful crimes, such as murder and sex offenses. While revenge is not the most noble desire, human nature can't be ignored.

The whole thing would make more sense if the concept of punishment were done away with, and the treatment of "offenders" were viewed in a more pragmatic fashion taking into account the best interests of society and not some invisible ledger where "crime" must be somehow canceled out by "punishment." The "suffering" of criminals simply for the sake of "making them suffer" is worthless at best and counterproductive at worst.

This is not to say that the "suffering" of criminals is worthless per se. Unpleasentness is likely an unavoidable byproduct of rehablilitation and deterrence.

[Nyarlathotep]

I think a lot of the problems we have in our criminal justice system stem from the fact that, as a society, we haven't come up with a satisfactory answer to that very question. We haven't come up with a consensus as to whether we want to rehabilitate criminals or punish them, as a result we try to do a little of both, and consequently end up doing neither one very well.

In an ideal society I think we would do everything we could torehabilitate those who are capable of rehabilitation and (depending on the nature and seriousness of the crime) either lock the rest up forever or punish them so harshly that they would think twice before doing whatever they did again. Of course we don't live in an ideal society and I have no idea who would determine who is capable of rehabilitation or not.

[Samus]

Law is to allow people to co-exist in a society of many types of individuals. It is to enforce a degree of social order, so that people can live with as many liberties as possible, without undue encroachment on others in society.

Punishment exists (obviously) to, well, punish those that choose not to follow the rules. Closure for the victims is but a side effect of this. Depending on which definition of justice you use, punishment can also be just (i.e. doing the right thing, and giving someone what they deserve given their actions).

Rehabilitation (in prisons, for example) exists to convince an offender that once they hit the streets again, it would behoove them to follow the rules. It only works if the individual wants it to, and it's separate from the actual punishment.

You only punish when someone who knows what is expected of them chooses to violate the rules. I know I'm not supposed to murder; if I do, I'm going to be punished.

Was this thread started in the context of some greater issue? I get the feeling it was (perhaps dealing with your recent punishment?)

[Jon_in_london]

The purpose of punishment is to punish.
Make the cnuts suffer and make their suffering very public.
That will discourage more people from doing the same thing.
Bollocks to rehabilitation!
Yes to public floggings!

[CWL]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london
The purpose of punishment is to punish.
Circular arguments are go.
Make the cnuts suffer and make their suffering very public.
Why do we want to punish crime? Amongst other reasons, because it causes suffering. Doesn't make much sense causing more of the same of that which you are trying to prevent. Sets a bad example.

BTW, please enlighten a non native speaker of English - what the heck is a "cnut".?
That will discourage more people from doing the same thing.
No it won't. Perhaps you are being ironic? Or do you really believe that draconian punishments prevent the very grave criminals (I assume we are discussing) from committing crimes? Just compare the crime rates of a lenient country (like Sweden) with that of a country which is tough on crime (like the US).
Bollocks to rehabilitation!
Yes to public floggings!
Ah. Just like during the Middle Ages. That was a very humane society indeed.

Then there is of course also the problem of innocent people being convicted. It happens all the time. How do you compensate someone who has been physically punished (or even executed) if it turns out that the person was in fact innocent?

[bjornart]

Two and four, and a bit of five, but it seems the originator of the poll has defined this too wide for me to vote for it.

One and three, "punishment" and revenge, are very human, but they are something we should try to avoid most of the time, and certainly should not incorporate into our system of society.

[RandFan,Jr.]

At least most of if not all of the above. I didn't vote.

[gnome]

I would say that "To separate the bad from the good" should be a separate option from "To prevent by detainment likely repeat offenders from victimizing someone again."

The first sounds too much like you can sort people by bad and good and put a wall between them. People cross over way too much for that.

[Bearguin]

No one answer works.

Primarily, we want to reduce or eliminate crime. This is to aid peacful co-existence in a mutually beneficial society (whatever that is).

So, we prescirbe laws that are (in general) in the best interest of society as a whole. Laws found to be overwhelmingly not in the best interest of society are removed and new ones are added. The process is political, un-objective and subject to bias but is the system we have (i.e. Canada's gun laws).

When an individual breaks those laws, we need some method to hold them accountable to revent them from breaking the laws again, to prevent others from breaking the laws and to try to protect members of society. Depending on the particular law and the severity of the crime, we punish in different ways. Traffic tickets are a reasonable punishment for speeding while providing a reasonable deterent to the majority of the population. Life imprisonment is a reasonable punishment for murder (but I'm not sure how effective it is as a deterrent).

Revenge does (IMHO) have it's place in this discussion until we get to capital punishment.

[Dancing David]

Didn't vote. Couldn't find a category.

Punishment is partly to deter furture crime or at least remove the criminal from the ability to commit crime for a time period.

It would be nice to rehabilitate people, so should we send them to college.

We need for society to 'do something' with criminal, so we have punishment.