Not really trying to be insulting, but perhaps you can understand my confusion?
What if the 10 guilty people rape 5 people and kill 5 people after being set free?
Would have been better off to put 1 innocent guy in jail maybe
I’d like to point out a number of things about the universe here
- Sometimes people play devils advocate to point out why issues are not clear cut and simple
- The word “maybe”
- None of what I said implies I think we should convict everybody.
My actual belief is that there is some optimal “false conviction” to “false acquittal” ratio that will vary depending on the crime in question.
In the case of a murder or rape suspect, that ratio is probably a bit different than theft
In the case of drug use they shouldn’t convict anyone at all
=)
Also the smartass question about whether I would volunteer to be the false conviction is exactly the same as me asking him if he will volunteer to be the victim of the false acquittal. I make a good point. Someone is getting their life ruined either way. A society that minimizes how many people get their life ruined isn’t an asinine idea!
What if the 10 guilty people rape 5 people and kill 5 people after being set free?
Would have been better off to put 1 innocent guy in jail maybe
It is a good ethics type of question. Utilitarians would argue that the right choice is whatever results in the greater net utility so wrongfully convicting one to put 20 in jail would be the right choice from a utilitarian perspective. Before you dismiss this too quickly, take a look at all the moral choices that we make using utilitarianism (war for example), immenent domain (probably spelled that wrong…whatever), giving up rights in the name of national security etc… However, if you take a rights perspective, you cannot justify it because it would violate that person’s rights. In the US, our legal system seems to heavily favor the rights perspective.
In the US, our legal system seems to heavily favor the rights perspective.
The US legal system favors heavily the rights of the individual. Other legal systems don’t favor the individual as much and “common interest of the community” is more important.
Now guess what… the international sports movement is not based on the US legal system, which leads to some misinterpretations in the US of issues regarding Olympic sports.
Furthermore people in the US (Floyd) don’t understand the difference b/w the criminal justice system and the civil justice system. Floyd’s case would fall under the civil justice system with loss of a privilege, not loss of a right.
Pat
Everyone deserves a fair trial and everyone deserves to know his/her rights upon arrest. It doesn’t matter what the crime is or the defendant’s history, everyone has the right to a fair trial – which means knowing your rights. \
No arguement, I think I pretty much said that. I was just pointing out the system that we Americans are brought up with, and how it just might skew our opinions on a world stage that doesn’t quite mesh with ours…
I thought he was talking about O.J.
Would you be willing to be the victim of the released murderer?
Hmmm. How interesting that you didn’t answer my question. Your question is irrelevant.