the case of Baby Peter

Started by jaden1016 pages

i don't think the majority of people care whether they get "help" or not

i'm not against rehabilitation though...but i think it should come AFTER the punishment and not during....particularly in cases as extreme as this

I think protecting society and rehabilitation should always be the first issues that need to be addressed. Ideally, I'd say you don't need punishment at all.

unfortunately we don't live in an ideal society...punishment will always be a more effective deterent against our more primal and animalistic ways...as much as humans like to pretend we aren't animals...we are

Originally posted by jaden101
unfortunately we don't live in an ideal society...punishment will always be a more effective deterent against our more primal and animalistic ways...as much as humans like to pretend we aren't animals...we are
The deterent idea of punishment is what I can also see as useful. But there is a line when punishment becomes blind vengeance. And that shouldn't be crossed.

Rehabilitation of a person that commits a crime such as this is nearly impossible. Especially not at their age. It would take brainwashing, which is not rehabilitation. Had a child committed it, or had it been a crime of passion, a petty crime, then maybe, yes. You might be able to get them to see how what they did is wrong and repent, in a sense. However, this is an adult. A fully developed individual. Certain things are hardwired, and one of those is what drove them to commit these heinous acts. You wouldn't be able to rehabilitate a sociopath, or a serial killer, and these people are on par with the one's that committed this crime. Their's is a hunger or addiction for violence that needs to be satisfied, the same as but more severe that an addiction to a drug. Something went horribly wrong early in their development, at a stage where who they are as a human being is decided. Furthermore, the funds that would have to go in to said rehabilitation would be substantial. I agree with the idea that they should get assessed by a trained professional as to the likelihood that they may or may not be rehabilitated, prior deciding what course of action to take. However, not everyone BY FAR can be rehabilitated. Even then a person that is supposedly rehabilitated after committing a crime such as this is not one I would like to see back on the streets where they can possibly re lapse and do it again. Humans are only humans after all, no matter how much we try to glorify our existence. Some are just better than others.

Originally posted by Bardock42
The deterent idea of punishment is what I can also see as useful. But there is a line when punishment becomes blind vengeance. And that shouldn't be crossed.

A bit dramatic. And what's the difference, really? I mean their punishment is going to be a long term jail sentence. And whoever is sentencing them could decide they really want to avenge the baby and what's the worst a judge could do to them? Most likely dish out a long term jail sentence.

not to mention that much rehabilitation isn't directed at stopping urges as focusing on helping a person not to act on those urges....at least that's the way they tackle sex offender treatment so it's presumably the same in violent offenders

i don't believe the analogy to drugs is accurate though....drugs can be cleaned out of a body and a person removed from a situation whereby drug taking is likely...the psychological make up of a person is fixed...you cant clean the body and brain of the want to cause harm to others...

Originally posted by The Pict
A bit dramatic. And what's the difference, really? I mean their punishment is going to be a long term jail sentence. And whoever is sentencing them could decide they really want to avenge the baby and what's the worst a judge could do to them? Most likely dish out a long term jail sentence.
But there is a difference, revenge is not based on rational evaluation, you could feel anything is justified to avenge that child, the law should not be based on such feelings though.

Originally posted by jaden101
i don't believe the analogy to drugs is accurate though....drugs can be cleaned out of a body and a person removed from a situation whereby drug taking is likely...the psychological make up of a person is fixed...you cant clean the body and brain of the want to cause harm to others...

That's why I said that it is much more severe than a drug addiction and much less likely to be rehabilitated. You are tight though, a better analogy could have been brought forward. It's 2am here, I'm running on empty and emotion at the moment 😛

Originally posted by Bardock42
But there is a difference, revenge is not based on rational evaluation, you could feel anything is justified to avenge that child, the law should not be based on such feelings though.

All law, or punishment rather, to an extent is based on vengeance though, isn't it?. You do something bad, something bad is done to you in return. Just because it is discussed in parliment before it is passed does not make it otherwise.It is still decided by people, just a big group of them taking a vote.

Originally posted by Kosta
All law, or punishment rather, to an extent is based on vengeance though, isn't it?. You do something bad, something bad is done to you in return. Just because it is discussed in parliment before it is passed does not make it otherwise.It is still decided by people, just a big group of them taking a vote.

I think that's a wrong philosophical approach. It's not to avenge the wrong doing that someone should be punished. It's to protect society from further wrong doings by that person.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think that's a wrong philosophical approach. It's not to avenge the wrong doing that someone should be punished. It's to protect society from further wrong doings by that person.

That depends on your philosophy, but I respect your outlook. You're a wise one, Bardock. That much is evident.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think that's a wrong philosophical approach. It's not to avenge the wrong doing that someone should be punished. It's to protect society from further wrong doings by that person.

Part of the system should also be to deter future crimes from happening. Demonstrating the bloody handed vengeance of the legal system would certainly be a way to make people think twice before abusing children.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Part of the system should also be to deter future crimes from happening. Demonstrating the bloody handed vengeance of the legal system would certainly be a way to make people think twice before abusing children.
Yes, I addressed that earlier. It should just be equally applied. You shouldn't make an example out of one and let another go scot-free.

Originally posted by Kosta
That's why I said that it is much more severe than a drug addiction and much less likely to be rehabilitated. You are tight though, a better analogy could have been brought forward. It's 2am here, I'm running on empty and emotion at the moment 😛

Er, I meant you are right, not you are tight 😕. It IS late. I'm off to bed.

Punsihment is not the key, rehabilitation is, punishment could end up simply making them worse.

this is all over the news over here... its tragic... that poor kid...

Not really poor kid ,i cant imagine he knew much of anything if he was battered senseless to death at that age

Originally posted by Burning thought
Not really poor kid ,i cant imagine he knew much of anything if he was battered senseless to death at that age

...😐

Originally posted by Burning thought
Not really poor kid ,i cant imagine he knew much of anything if he was battered senseless to death at that age
I am pretty sure that babies can feel pain. So, yeah...poor kid.