Should compassion be a part of the justice system?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Asguard, Aug 23, 2009.

?

Should anyone be releaced on compassionate grounds

  1. US Yes

    45.5%
  2. US No

    9.1%
  3. UK Yes

    9.1%
  4. UK No

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Eroupe Yes

    9.1%
  6. Eroupe No

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. Other (please state in thread which country) Yes

    18.2%
  8. Other (please state in thread which country) No

    9.1%
  1. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    This comes out of the freeing of the convicted bomber by scotland but its not specific to that case. Im interested to see how different cultures view compassion. After all the main stated principles of a "justice" system are protection of sociaty and rehabilitation

    so should people convicted of a crime (ANY crime) be freed because they are incapable of commiting further crimes through terminal illness?

    Note, poll is country specific because it would be interesting to see wether people from different cultures have different view points on this issue
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    For those who havent worked it out from my initial post i do surport it and im Australian. I aplaud Scotland (if not the UK) for having a system which recognisies compassion as a virtue
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Challenger78 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,536
    Passion, even compassion swings both ways.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    Depends upon the circumstances I'd think. If a person only had a few years remaining on his sentence then that person should be considered for a early release if they were dying. Again that is if they do not pose any threats to society and have been a good prisoner all the time they were in jail. If a person was sentenced to remain in jail until they died then I'd say let them die in jail for they must have committed a very bad crime to deserve that type of sentence.
     
  8. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    One of the benefits of compassion is to limit the harm from institutional presumptions of infallibility.

    Not in the US. See "three strikes" and similar rules.
     
  9. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    The three strikes means only you were given three opportunities to stop

    acting like a thug and criminal and to change your attitude. Many people who

    understand this cease their criminal activities because they know if THEY do

    something against the law, they were warned, then they go to prison to

    think about stopping their criminal ways when they come back out into

    society. If you choose not to obey the law then YOU and only YOU are to

    blame for you were given three chances to stop.
     
  10. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    really cosmic, what if its 3 loaves of bread because your staving?

    God the US is turning into England when they used to ship convicts over to Australia
     
  11. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    It would depend on what the goal of the justice system is. Whether it is state sanctioned revenge or a desire to rehabilitate the individual who committed the crime.
     
  12. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    I can't vote with the given info. I am completely opposed to releasing a convicted terrorist or any other murderer. In my opinion, they should all be put to death so the question should never even come up. But for other crimes, I'd have to decide on a case by case basis.
     
  13. breeze Registered Member

    Messages:
    62
    Well, I support Russian law regarding parole for persons who have terminal illnesses. Those who suffer from terminal cancer, tuberculosis, diabetes and other illnesses can`t be kept in prison. On the other hand for some prison is the only place where they can get any medical treatment. And tubercular patient is a threat to others, such people should be isolated. So it`s really a controversial point.
     
  14. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    and if they get better and they don't die, do they have to go back to prison?
     
  15. mike47 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,117
    Yes there should be compassionate grounds in all justice systems . We are humans and we make mistakes and at one point we should be receiving some compassion .
     
  16. breeze Registered Member

    Messages:
    62
    No. Only people with such illnesses do not recover.
    btw no terrorist ever was freed due to his health status in Russia, those convicted with gravest crimes can`t be granted parole.
     
  17. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    If my son and his best friend were both drunk and his friend drove and my son died in an accident, I would want a lot of compassion shown. If his best friend hadn't been driving, my son would have been. And my kid's friends are like family almost.

    This is a situation my husband barely lived through. It took close to a year for him to learn to walk again. My husband's family went to court for the friend.
     
  18. breeze Registered Member

    Messages:
    62
    Oops, I misinformed you, Orleander. Sorry. Such people can be put to prison again.
     
  19. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    so it would be best to get out and move far away then.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. Alien Cockroach Banned Banned

    Messages:
    886
    No. The justice system should have the very simple mission of safeguarding our lives, liberty, and happiness. If the best way to do this is to have our cops shoot jaywalkers in the head on their first offense, that's how it should be done. Obviously, this would be a ridiculous "extreme." That is, it is a hypothetical situation designed to illustrate the uselessness of emotional terms like "compassion" in the interest of our justice system functioning as it should.

    This argument is frequently used by advocates of harsher sentencing, but such advocates are misguided for similar reasons. If there are better ways to prevent recidivism than to impose a "harsher" sentence, then it should be employed. For example, if basic literacy or an education in philosophy tends to improve behavior in youth offenders, then they should be released early on the condition of having completed such a program. It's not as satisfying that way, is it? Tough shit. I want to be able to walk to the Safeway without a risk of a lead pipe being smashed into my skull by some illiterate punk.

    The justice system should be there to make life easier and to give me a feeling of security.
     
  21. swarm Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,207
    wow, and I thought my spelling was bad.

    I note this particular compassion can be cost effective since the last months of life tend to be very expensive.
     
  22. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    I answered "yes" to the poll, but I don't think that the Lockerbie bomber ought to have been released.
     
  23. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    What does that mean? You agree with the theory but not the practice?
     

Share This Page