07-28-2006, 07:02 AM
Pete is pretty much dead-on. An issue that has been skirted, but not really mentioned yet, is that "punishing" of the insane may not even be punishment. Even IF you believe that punishment is the answer, and you need vengeance and all that stuff, do they even know they're being punished if they're that far gone? If I'm living in my own world where Satan takes my children and whatnot, is locking me in a cell going to produce the usual effect of isolation, boredom, and that general "I'm being punished" feeling?
Another point that was brought up, I believe by Doc (but I may be wrong there) is that she knew it was legally wrong, but still believed it was right. This has been the subject for literature (and movies, plays, and everything else) for gawd knows how long, and it is almost always represented that the correct thing to do is follow what one believes to be morally correct. Somehow I'm drawing a blank on references right now, though I had one in mind when I started this up. Anyway, point is that a good portion of humanity agrees that sometimes the law is wrong, and that people DO need to disobey it. So yes, she is insane. Yes, what she did was wrong. But (if) she thought she was doing the right thing, doesn't that change something?
Here's a hypothetical example (that's probably ridden with holes). You're a witness in a murder trial. The suspect is innocent, and you are aware of this. However, you also know that if you testify as to what you saw, he WILL be convicted. Just to add some gravity here, let's say he will get the death penalty. So you have two choices; obey the law, tell the truth, and let him die, OR you can lie and save an innocent man's life. (I have NO idea how anything like this would come about, so please don't bother discussing the realism.)
Let's say you make the humane choice and save his life. Ten years down the line, it's discovered you lied. You are set to be tried. Is this justice? Does the answer change if the law knows he's innocent?
I forgot my original point. Rehabilitation is preferable here, and wherever possible, but I don't know how realistic it is. Can you EVER trust someone who has done this back in society? And if you are the guy in charge of her rehabilitation, and you let her out, and she does it again?
This is a pretty grey line. The knee-jerk reflex is of course to fry her and get it over with, but I think we need to look a little deeper than that.
--me
Another point that was brought up, I believe by Doc (but I may be wrong there) is that she knew it was legally wrong, but still believed it was right. This has been the subject for literature (and movies, plays, and everything else) for gawd knows how long, and it is almost always represented that the correct thing to do is follow what one believes to be morally correct. Somehow I'm drawing a blank on references right now, though I had one in mind when I started this up. Anyway, point is that a good portion of humanity agrees that sometimes the law is wrong, and that people DO need to disobey it. So yes, she is insane. Yes, what she did was wrong. But (if) she thought she was doing the right thing, doesn't that change something?
Here's a hypothetical example (that's probably ridden with holes). You're a witness in a murder trial. The suspect is innocent, and you are aware of this. However, you also know that if you testify as to what you saw, he WILL be convicted. Just to add some gravity here, let's say he will get the death penalty. So you have two choices; obey the law, tell the truth, and let him die, OR you can lie and save an innocent man's life. (I have NO idea how anything like this would come about, so please don't bother discussing the realism.)
Let's say you make the humane choice and save his life. Ten years down the line, it's discovered you lied. You are set to be tried. Is this justice? Does the answer change if the law knows he's innocent?
I forgot my original point. Rehabilitation is preferable here, and wherever possible, but I don't know how realistic it is. Can you EVER trust someone who has done this back in society? And if you are the guy in charge of her rehabilitation, and you let her out, and she does it again?
This is a pretty grey line. The knee-jerk reflex is of course to fry her and get it over with, but I think we need to look a little deeper than that.
--me