I suppose I’d be considered a proponent of restorative, rather than punitive, justice - but with a sort of hybrid approach.
Restorative justice says, “you broke it - you fix it,” while punitive justice says “we’ll break something of of yours so you won’t want to break other people’s stuff.”
The problem is that punitive justice as a deterrent just doesn’t work, because for it to work as a deterrent would require that people consider the penalties before committing crimes, and people who do this fall into three categories: [ul]
[li]they think they won’t get caught and punished;[/li][li]they’re angry enough to be considered temporarily insane, and so it doesn’t occur to them that they’ll get caught and punished, or;[/li][li]they have a compulsion to do it and so the fear of capture and punishment isn’t strong enough to be a deterrent. [/li][/ul] I prefer restorative justice. It gets the victim compensated, and allows the criminal the possibility of redemption - remember for every crime there are two victims - and is less expensive to society.
Now, in this case what would I do? The perp is sentenced to provide for the victim at least as well as she would have done for herself had he not done what he did. You broke it - you fix it. She is supported if she wishes, provided rehabilitation if she wishes, for as long as she wishes.
He won’t do it? He’ll just quit his job? Then we get to what makes my approach a hybrid. He’s given a job, and the money is used to compensate the victim as already specified. If he refuses to do the job he is taken out to some very public place and very publicly flogged.
Then he’s taken back to his place of work and invited to resume his labors. He can refuse every day if he wants - and get flogged every time - as many times as he prefers getting flogged over his work.
I wonder if it would be possible to surgically transplant the eyes to the woman, allowing her to see again. That would be far more useful and constructive.
A couple of things about that first point on punishment not being a deterrent. I’ve seen this idea that punitive justice doesn’t work quite a few times and I’m wondering whether it is actually true.
Murderers or acid throwers obviously don’t think they will be caught or they generally wouldn’t do the crime.
On the other hand they just as obviously believe there is a chance they will be caught or they wouldn’t take precautions against it.
I’ve seen some seriously punitive justice carried out and it would most certainly have deterred me. Just knowing there is a chance that I would be caught, however slight, and would wind up like the examples I watched, would certainly deter me.
No, it wasn’t a whoosh. The only thing I’ve put in a car battery is distilled water. I didn’t know I could drop by my local fill 'er up for a bucket of melt-your-face-off.
Yeah, the water tends to evaporate leaving a greater and greater concentrated acid behind. I think most modern batteries are sealed to more-or-less prevent this. The garages usually used acid to fill a new battery. Also, I saw some sulfuric acid at Walmart a few days ago for use in filling motorcycle batteries.
Regards
Testy
ETA: I bought some hydrochloric acid at Lowes a week ago. (For etching, not throwing!
Nope.
Apart from one or two experimental surgeries, the only part of the eye which can be transplanted is the cornea, which is associated with focusing light. I suspect in her case the damage goes beyond the cornea.
In a world where eye transplants were possible but there’s a long waiting list for organs…you could certainly make a case for taking the perpetrator’s eyes. I think I’d still be on the side of “no”, but it’s a more complex situation.
she has been to specialists in and out of iran to try to regain some sight; to no avail.
perhaps that is why she is opting for blinding him.
i’m wondering about sedating him. she had no sedation when he walked up to her and tossed acid in her face.
if you are going to do like for like, he should not know the time and place of sentence, and the time from his acid hit to help should be the same as her’s… otherwise just toss him in a cell for a good long time.
Punitive justice works sometimes. Look at Japan, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, North Korea…when punishment is severe enough and consistently applied, it is definitely a deterrent.
edit: I was taught than an eye for an eye means that the punishment should fit the crime, e.g., you shouldn’t murder someone for robbery. Also, even though you may deserve equal treatment, it wasn’t necessarily applied.
The cynic in me says that humans are barbarians by default. For me, the role of a justice system is to curb that barbarism but in this case, both the woman and the system are barbaric.
Yep, that’s the one. And don’t forget the USA which uses the ultimate punitive sanctions, with 5% of the world’s people now has barely a quarter of the world’s jail population. Surely a great advert for the deterrent qualities of of punitive justice?
Now what were the other bastions of civilisation left on that list?
Think about the policies on drugs. Would you do drugs on vacation in Japan?
Heck no!
Look, all cultures regulate certain activities: sex, marriage, and the raising of children are the obvious. When a woman is forced into sex we call it rape. (Well…here, anyway.) When a woman is forced to be in a relationship with a man for social, financial, or parenting reasons, it’s marriage. When a man kills his wife out of anger, it is murder. When the state executes the man for murder, it is justice.
Society has recognized that without law, ‘barbaric’ acts would rise. We have a legal system to regulate what are seen as negative human traits.
The legal system in Iran may be labeled as barbaric by some. But in this case, the responsibility is on the courts -not the woman- to see justice done.
I would if it was a Yakuza who sold them to me. I’d just have to say his name and the cops would apologize for bothering me and would I please not mention it to anyone especially not their department chief sorry please ?
OK, kidding - but that’s because I’d be just another unimportant baka gaijin who knows nothing about nobody. A Japanese national doing drugs, who may or may not have connections ? See above. Hell, the Yamaguchi Gumi (the largest family in the country) openly lists the names of their active hitmen. They’re on Wikipedia and everything.
Yakuzas are miles past the point of giving even the most token of fucks about the law, arbitrary and repressive or not.
It’s safe to say that corruption exists everywhere. It doesn’t mean that the average Tom Jones (or…whatever) is just as likely to do drugs as Tom Jones in the US of A.
Wouldn’t we just have barbaric justices? Lawmakers? Voters?
When a man kills his wife out of anger, it is murder. When the state executes the man for murder, it is justice.