Jump to content
dimreepr

What is justice?

Recommended Posts

Punishment for the previously punished?

or

Revenge for the victims of the previously punished?

Or??? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A person commits a crime, they are caught and tried, and given a sentence to serve. That's the rough outline of a justice system. 

One can debate whether that is punishment or revenge. I don't see how "previously punished" finds its way into a description of the options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justice is  constant and permanent giving to each one what they deserve.

 

(It may be expressed in better English wording than mine)  ---  to impart instead of giving  ¿?

Edited by Externet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justice is the subjective idea of what one deserves for something they have done or what has been done to them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justice is defined as the 'removal' of a person from society when that person has been shown not to abide by the 'rules' agreed upon by that society.
Their behavior is harmful to members of society, or their livelihood, and the 'removal' to protect society may include periods of incarceration, or even being put to death in certain societies.
( fines are never justice, but that is a personal interpretation )

Whether that agrees with your interpretation of 'justice' is a different matter.
I'm sure most people interpret the concept differently.

Edited by MigL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MigL said:

Justice is defined as the 'removal' of a person from society when that person has been shown not to abide by the 'rules' agreed upon by that society.
Their behavior is harmful to members of society, or their livelihood, and the 'removal' to protect society may include periods of incarceration, or even being put to death in certain societies.

True, on one hand. On the other, justice is reparation or compensation to aggrieved parties and/or accordingly, the modification of law(s) to protect the public interest.

Edited by rangerx
spelling, grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That might be true in Civil Justice, but it's hardly ever the case in Criminal Justice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MigL said:

That might be true in Civil Justice, but it's hardly ever the case in Criminal Justice.

It's often burdensome, but compensation for victims of crime is justifiable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, swansont said:

A person commits a crime, they are caught and tried, and given a sentence to serve. That's the rough outline of a justice system. 

One can debate whether that is punishment or revenge. I don't see how "previously punished" finds its way into a description of the options.

Bullies create bullies I remember a story I heard, again on the BBC, about a child who was relentlessly bullied over years which culminated in him being at the bottom of a ravine, his last memory (for the next few days) was of his attackers urinating on him; if you had heard this story before you heard of his later crimes, would his justice be different?

20 hours ago, rangerx said:

It's often burdensome, but compensation for victims of crime is justifiable.

Justifiable is a very different word.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Bullies create bullies I remember a story I heard, again on the BBC, about a child who was relentlessly bullied over years which culminated in him being at the bottom of a ravine, his last memory (for the next few days) was of his attackers urinating on him; if you had heard this story before you heard of his later crimes, would his justice be different?

His justice? I’m missing some context here.

This doesn’t clarify what you meant by “previously punished”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He still had a choice to make, Dimreepr.
What others did to him does not justify his actions/crimes.

( is justify a very different word also ? )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, MigL said:

He still had a choice to make, Dimreepr.
What others did to him does not justify his actions/crimes.

( is justify a very different word also ? )

Then let me ask you this... Can someone without food justify stealing a pie? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely !
Because once they put you in jail, they also feed you.
( so it is still your choice to make )

But seriously, what is wrong with ASKING for help, instead of just TAKING what you want ?
Again I'll remind you...
A person's right not to go hungry does not diminish another's right to his possessions.
( rights stop when they start infringing on the rights of others )

So you have #3 choices...
Everyone's rights are equal.
Some people's rights ( not being hungry ) are more important than other's rights.
Total anarchy, where robbery and taking what you want is justified ( is it MORE justified if you steal from the rich ? ) .

Pick one, and justify your choice, please.

Edited by MigL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Then let me ask you this... Can someone without food justify stealing a pie? 

That would depend on the circumstances. Theft is a crime, but there's mitigating circumstances when there's no other alternative.

That's justice and one reason why mandatory sentencing isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, MigL said:

Absolutely !
Because once they put you in jail, they also feed you.
( so it is still your choice to make )

But seriously, what is wrong with ASKING for help, instead of just TAKING what you want ?
Again I'll remind you...
A person's right not to go hungry does not diminish another's right to his possessions.
( rights stop when they start infringing on the rights of others )

So you have #3 choices...
Everyone's rights are equal.
Some people's rights ( not being hungry ) are more important than other's rights.
Total anarchy, where robbery and taking what you want is justified ( is it MORE justified if you steal from the rich ? ) .

Pick one, and justify your choice, please.

You're leading me down a tunnel with this, but if I had to pick one, my right to be alive; is more important than your right to kill me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People don't steal when they're about to die, Dimreepr, as they would be too weak; They might steal when they are hungry ( or need a fix, or just want your property ).
My wanting to keep my possessions is not killing you, or everyone who you don't steal from is also killing you, because they're not giving you any food either.
So this has nothing to do with your right to live, or my right to kill you, and I don't know what tunnel you're heading down.

It comes down to, either everyone has equal rights.
Or some people's rights are more important than others.
Or no-one has any rights, we all do as we please and damn the other guy.

So stop the hyperbole ( you can be hungry for a month without dying ) and pick one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MigL said:

People don't steal when they're about to die, Dimreepr, as they would be too weak; They might steal when they are hungry ( or need a fix, or just want your property ).
My wanting to keep my possessions is not killing you, or everyone who you don't steal from is also killing you, because they're not giving you any food either.
So this has nothing to do with your right to live, or my right to kill you, and I don't know what tunnel you're heading down.

It comes down to, either everyone has equal rights.
Or some people's rights are more important than others.
Or no-one has any rights, we all do as we please and damn the other guy.

So stop the hyperbole ( you can be hungry for a month without dying ) and pick one

It's never that simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, MigL said:

People don't steal when they're about to die, Dimreepr, as they would be too weak; They might steal when they are hungry ( or need a fix, or just want your property ).
My wanting to keep my possessions is not killing you, or everyone who you don't steal from is also killing you, because they're not giving you any food either.
So this has nothing to do with your right to live, or my right to kill you, and I don't know what tunnel you're heading down.

It comes down to, either everyone has equal rights.
Or some people's rights are more important than others.
Or no-one has any rights, we all do as we please and damn the other guy.

So stop the hyperbole ( you can be hungry for a month without dying ) and pick one

So until the 70s there was a law in effect where stealing things of little value for immediate consumption (like food) were considered a lesser crime than theft. Personal plight (e.g. hunger) were considered mitigating circumstances in the eye of the law. It is relevant in this context to emphasize that the laws has degrees of application and discussing justice and its application probably does not reflect the situation very well.  I.e. folks may have equal rights, but the application of law is very uneven, depending on a lot of circumstances. I.e. the discussion of Justice would necessarily need to involve the ideals but also the realities of its application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2019 at 7:00 PM, dimreepr said:

Then let me ask you this... Can someone without food justify stealing a pie? 

Depends on why they don't have food.

Im in the high risk category for future homelessness, and if I were to become homeless, I've already decided I would rather steal food than go hungry. But that couldn't be seen as me getting justice. I'm homeless for the choices I've made, nobody else. 

But here's the thing, most people I know would agree with both of those statements, they would steal for food, as well as it would be their own fault. Most people I know, would also be unlikely to press charges against homeless people for stealing food from them, even if they were homeless through there own doing.

This, to me, is the difference between justice and revenge. Revenge is just an eye for an eye (I'm thinking of Saudi), just a "f^^k you, see how you like it".

Justice takes into account the mitigating circumstances and allows for compassion, forgiveness, understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, if you are hungry, most people will give you food.

Why would you need to steal ( embarrassment maybe ) when all you need do is ask ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2019 at 4:26 PM, dimreepr said:

Punishment for the previously punished?

or

Revenge for the victims of the previously punished?

Or??? 

Gee Dim, since this is in „General Philosophy” I’ll go with - I stuffed myself with Sushi tonight and I’m looking for the remote for the Webasto for my car since its gettin chilly lately.

Edited by koti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Justice is close to equality in the sense that it creates a state of equilibrium in the distribution of rights and duties, but they are not identical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Curious layman said:

Depends on why they don't have food.

Im in the high risk category for future homelessness, and if I were to become homeless, I've already decided I would rather steal food than go hungry. But that couldn't be seen as me getting justice. I'm homeless for the choices I've made, nobody else.

Is it your choice to be in the high risk category?

People don't choose poverty or to have alcoholic parents and kids in care don't choose to be on the streets as an 18th birthday present and people only decide to go hungry when theres a lack of justice (hunger strike, food banks etc).

18 hours ago, Curious layman said:

Justice takes into account the mitigating circumstances and allows for compassion, forgiveness, understanding.

Indeed, you should move to Finland, they're a little less judgey.

 

14 hours ago, MigL said:

And, if you are hungry, most people will give you food.

Why would you need to steal ( embarrassment maybe ) when all you need do is ask ?

Begging is frowned upon in the UK, because they're making profits while having a home or they only spend it on booze and end up taking taking an NHS bed, which I pay for, from a member of my family (Daily Mail BS)

You should also read that Finland link.

Quote

 

Emerging from Helsinki's grandiose central railway station on a bitterly cold evening, it does not take long before you notice something unusual.

There are no rough sleepers and no-one is begging.

 

 

14 hours ago, koti said:

Gee Dim, since this is in „General Philosophy” I’ll go with - I stuffed myself with Sushi tonight and I’m looking for the remote for the Webasto for my car since its gettin chilly lately.

Gee Koti, since this is not in the lounge (or joke) section, you could also go with not replying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would then think a lot more people would be moving to Finland.
Yet, approximately 18000 people left Finland last year, and 16800 moved there.
Maybe they don't take that many immigrants.

How is that justice; Is it their choice not to be born in Finland ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.