I sometimes wonder it it wouldn’t be better if the victims of a crime were to deliver the punishment. Or in the case of the victim being dead or otherwise physically unable to carry out the punishment their nearest living relatives or friends could be assigned the task.
The convicted criminal would be sole property of the victim for three days and would be presented to the victim in stocks with a wide variety of tools available for inflicting punishment or the victim could bring their own. The victim do anything from set them free, to sell off their organs, and torture and/or kill them. It would be all be recorded and made available to the public. This would put some social pressure on the victim to deliver a just punishment.
Of course this would totally violate the Eight Amendment so suspend that objection for now and consider this just some random thought. As the anti-gun people do, only consider the plausible benefits and not the adverse consequences.
- We would save a lot of money by not having prisons.
- Since child abusers get such a rough time in prisons I believe this means that child abusers are believed to be inadequately punished (it could also mean it is just part of some ranking system with them being at the bottom of the respect hierarchy). I suspect there would be a lot less child abuse in the world if it were the parents or other close relative delivering “justice”.
- With the current system of fixed punishments for crimes criminals can easily make rational decisions to be criminals. As in, “I can do the time so why not commit the crime?” With the punishment being unknown the potential criminal does not know if they can “do the time”.
- Pacifists would be forced to carry a greater burden of their convictions. Known pacifists would be much more likely to be selected as victims. Yes, I realize this system would also result in “baiting” by sadists who portrayed themselves as pacifists which would reduce the likelihood that the pacifist would carry their full burden.
- If there were no victim there would be no punishment. It would mean the end of victim-less crimes.
The thing that brought this to the forefront of my consciousness today was this story. What sort of punishment is this guy going to get from ejaculating into his co-workers water bottle? A fine? Somehow that just doesn’t seem right.
If his victim were to decide the punishment I would expect him to be stripped naked in the hot sun for three days with one hand free to drink from the water bottles within his grasp. When he finished drinking all the bottle contents he could go free. I’m sure the male friends of the victim would be glad to provide the bottle contents. He could drink or die from dehydration. His choice.