Quote:
Originally Posted by MistressAngelica
punishment should ALWAYS!!!! fit the crime..Giving someone a shot that kills them is way to humane..they deserve something lingering and extremely painful..if they have raped,tortured a child they deserve something so horrible!!
|
Part of the reason we don't punish rapists with the death penalty, for instance, is that it would motivate them to kill their victims since they would no longer have anything to lose by doing so (and it might increase their chances of getting away).
Suppose you mutilate someone convicted of a crime, and new evidence later on reveals that they were innocent? Suppose they did something that was useful to society but because you've disabled them, they can no longer do their job? What is the point of retribution in punishment anyway? Retribution is a subjective, irrational sort of emotional desire. Or what if it's determined later on that what they did should not be considered a crime, or as severe a crime? At least if you imprison someone, that kind of sentence can be ceased. Our understanding of morality slowly changes over time. In Saudi Arabia they might think cutting off a hand for stealing is just but that's a horrendous waste of human capital, and it's humiliating and cruel from our perspective (well... my perspective, maybe not yours).
The arguments against medieval punishments you suggest are strong and numerous. But you're more than welcome to move to Iran and see how that works out.