Philosophy Discussion Forums

I would like to hear what 10 rules people would use for society and the hierarchy of punishment.

Example:

1- Rule one (punishment life term imprisonment)
2- Rule two (very long term imprisonment)
3- Rule three (long term in prison)
4- Rule Four (medium term in prison)
5- Rule Five (one year in prison and large fine)
6- Rule Six (six months in prison and medium fine)
7- Rule Seven (several weeks in prison)
8- Rule Eight (day/days in prison)
9- Rule Nine (medium fine)
10- Rule Ten (small fine)

note: Size of fine can be assumed to be appropriate to income and increasing exponentially with income.

If you wish to change the level of punishment feel free to do so, but please try and stick to punishments and apply appropriate crime.

I have not thought about this much myself so here is my gut reaction:

1- Genocide
2- Murder of children
3- Murder of adults
4- Physical sexual assaults
5- Physical non-sexual assaults
6- Theft
7- Destruction of property (environmental pollution)
8- Deception/fraud
9- Slander/misrepresting evidences
10- Social disruption (Fighting, noise pollution, littering)

That was tricky! I realise it is vague, but I don't expect you to spend all week thinking this out either. Just 5- mins if you can spare them.

Thanks

I'd include death penalty for those who engage in standover behaviours - violence, sexual or theft - while in prison. These people cause tremendous damage by interfering with other inmates' capacity to rehabilitate, which would have significant flow on effects to the public, including lost lives. It comes down to whole lives you are prepared to sacrifice - aggressors in prison or the victims of their behaviours' knock on effects?

Degree and manner of murder or other crime, and the chances of reform would ideally be taken into account. The rule of thumb for mine would be, if there is an alternative to prison, it might be worth a try. I do like the idea of hitting the wealthy hard in the hip pocket rather than imprisoning - many of those white collar criminals are no threat to society, which is what prison is for - to separate people from society who overly transgress (and are caught and poor). So it's better to gather up lots of moolah from white collar crims, including breaking into their trusts and other wealth shelters. The money made from the fines and saved from fewer prisoners to look after could be put to good use elsewhere perhaps.

Burning ghost wrote:I would like to hear what 10 rules people would use for society and the hierarchy of punishment.

Example:

1- Rule one (punishment life term imprisonment)
2- Rule two (very long term imprisonment)
3- Rule three (long term in prison)
4- Rule Four (medium term in prison)
5- Rule Five (one year in prison and large fine)
6- Rule Six (six months in prison and medium fine)
7- Rule Seven (several weeks in prison)
8- Rule Eight (day/days in prison)
9- Rule Nine (medium fine)
10- Rule Ten (small fine)

note: Size of fine can be assumed to be appropriate to income and increasing exponentially with income.

If you wish to change the level of punishment feel free to do so, but please try and stick to punishments and apply appropriate crime.

I have not thought about this much myself so here is my gut reaction:

1- Genocide
2- Murder of children
3- Murder of adults
4- Physical sexual assaults
5- Physical non-sexual assaults
6- Theft
7- Destruction of property (environmental pollution)
8- Deception/fraud
9- Slander/misrepresting evidences
10- Social disruption (Fighting, noise pollution, littering)

That was tricky! I realise it is vague, but I don't expect you to spend all week thinking this out either. Just 5- mins if you can spare them.

Thanks

OK, here's my 5 minutes worth.
The 10 rules can be collapsed into one. Let the punishment fit the crime.
This is retributive justice. Inflicted because the offender deserves it.
Who decides what is fitting and deserved?

It is not something that can be cooked up in 5 minutes,that's for sure.
Timed out.

I can't really answer your post, because I generally oppose the idea of punishment and correcting behavior via "force".

I say regardless of category, all rule breakers should just be rehabilitated, in the most efficient and humane way possible. Punishment is counterproductive and unconscionable.

1. Small fine
2. Community service + fine
3. More community service + larger fine
4.Weeks/months of Service in labor camp
5. Months/years of service in labor camp
6. Years of service in labor camp
7. 5 to 10 years service in labor camp
8. 10 to 20 years service in labor camp
9. 20 to life in labor camp
10. Life in labor camp
Prisons should be replaced with labor camps, which I believe to be a better deterrent.
1. Misdemeanors
2. Fighting (lowest degrees of assault degree 1)
3.Fighting (a higher degree degree 2), hit and runs (resulting in damage to vehicles), drunk driving caused collisions, and theft(lowest degree 1)
4. Theft (degree 2, degrees determined by monetary value), Sexual harassment, white collar crime ( degree 1, determined by monetary value)
5. Theft (degree 3), white collar crime( degree 2), fighting (degree 3)
6.White collar crime( degree 3)
7. Sexual assault, assault (not to be confused with fighting)
8. Manslaughter (unintended murder), Theft ( degree 4, armed theft)
9. Rape, murder
10. Murder

Atreyu wrote:I can't really answer your post, because I generally oppose the idea of punishment and correcting behavior via "force".

I say regardless of category, all rule breakers should just be rehabilitated, in the most efficient and humane way possible. Punishment is counterproductive and unconscionable.

I agree with the difficulty in answering the OP.
So, here we are talking about Retributive Justice v Restorative Justice and the different philosophical approaches.
I tend to think there is a place for both but with greater emphasis on solving the problems which might have led to the event, deemed criminal.
However, this might be heading off-topic. It certainly is an intriguing one to consider.
'Rules to live by'. Not always the current legal ones.

Will post part 2 tomorrow in new thread. Hope you can all reply there too.

Thanks

Where's the new thread?

I very much doubt all human misconduct can be reduced to ten rules, or that it can be corrected by prescribed punishments.
Or any kind of punishments, really - I'm with Atreyu on that.
My first choice would be prevention: reduce the opportunities, reduce the incentives, reduce the triggers, reduce the inclination; spot potential anti-social behaviour before it's acted out and give the potential criminal better options.
My second would be judging bad behaviour case by case, assessing all its aspects, before deciding the most appropriate response.
In all circumstance: Don't kill anyone unless you're absolutely sure they're unsalvageable. If you are absolutely sure, do it quickly, humanely and without fanfare.

Maxcady10001 wrote:Where's the new thread?

Just posted it, so I imagine it will appear within the next 24 hrs.

-- Updated November 16th, 2017, 12:03 am to add the following --

Here is the other thread: onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/viewtop ... mp;t=15200

Please reply there too if you've already replied here.

Much thanks and appreciation (unless you don't ... in which case SCREW YOU!! )

Burning ghost wrote:I would like to hear what 10 rules people would use for society and the hierarchy of punishment.

Example:

1- Rule one (punishment life term imprisonment)
2- Rule two (very long term imprisonment)
3- Rule three (long term in prison)
4- Rule Four (medium term in prison)
5- Rule Five (one year in prison and large fine)
6- Rule Six (six months in prison and medium fine)
7- Rule Seven (several weeks in prison)
8- Rule Eight (day/days in prison)
9- Rule Nine (medium fine)
10- Rule Ten (small fine)

note: Size of fine can be assumed to be appropriate to income and increasing exponentially with income.

If you wish to change the level of punishment feel free to do so, but please try and stick to punishments and apply appropriate crime.

I have not thought about this much myself so here is my gut reaction:

1- Genocide
2- Murder of children
3- Murder of adults
4- Physical sexual assaults
5- Physical non-sexual assaults
6- Theft
7- Destruction of property (environmental pollution)
8- Deception/fraud
9- Slander/misrepresting evidences
10- Social disruption (Fighting, noise pollution, littering)

That was tricky! I realise it is vague, but I don't expect you to spend all week thinking this out either. Just 5- mins if you can spare them.

Thanks

It all depends on why folks should be in prison to begin with. If the reason is rehabilitation, you may as well burn all the prisons to the ground, since they don't do that. If the reason is punishment, then your system makes some sense. I prefer to isolate bad guys from society to prevent ongoing crime, thus in my system the risk of future wrongdoing (as opposed to only the severity of the original crime) would have to be taken into account.

[It all depends on why folks should be in prison to begin with. If the reason is rehabilitation, you may as well burn all the prisons to the ground, since they don't do that.

But they conceivably could.

... the risk of future wrongdoing (as opposed to only the severity of the original crime) would have to be taken into account.

Most prisons in America increase the risk of future wrongdoing - if by nothing else, the difficulty of ex-cons finding decent employment.

Two good positive steps might be:
Stop making for-profit prisons
and
Put serious effort into teaching life skills, interpersonal skills, occupational training and post-release placement.

LuckyR wrote:If the reason is rehabilitation, you may as well burn all the prisons to the ground, since they don't do that.

That's why I support the death penalty (quick, humane, without fanfare as per Alias's post) for inmates that interfere with others' rehab - bashers, rapists and standover thieves. We need to get rid of the incurables and incorrigibles so that prisons can become places where inmates who are not irredeemably damaged can reflect and work through the issues that put them there.

Burning ghost wrote:I would like to hear what 10 rules people would use for society and the hierarchy of punishment.

Example:

1- Rule one (punishment life term imprisonment)
2- Rule two (very long term imprisonment)
3- Rule three (long term in prison)
4- Rule Four (medium term in prison)
5- Rule Five (one year in prison and large fine)
6- Rule Six (six months in prison and medium fine)
7- Rule Seven (several weeks in prison)
8- Rule Eight (day/days in prison)
9- Rule Nine (medium fine)
10- Rule Ten (small fine)

There is no 'free-will/choice'!
Punishment is all insane torture!
Stick and carrot, after all these years have done nothing to make this world a better place for all! It is just the insanity of blame and punishment and torture in the name of revenge/justice!
If 'spanking' actually worked as feverishly imagined, (or reward), this world would have been a utopia long ago!
The proof is in the puddin', Puddin'! *__-

Greta wrote:

LuckyR wrote:If the reason is rehabilitation, you may as well burn all the prisons to the ground, since they don't do that.

That's why I support the death penalty (quick, humane, without fanfare as per Alias's post) for inmates that interfere with others' rehab - bashers, rapists and standover thieves. We need to get rid of the incurables and incorrigibles so that prisons can become places where inmates who are not irredeemably damaged can reflect and work through the issues that put them there.

This is a perfectly logical, yet completely impractical solution to a thorny problem