BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Tom Francis - SWSports

On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 07:47:54 -0600, wrote:

To state the case generically does not do the topic justice. There is
a distinction here between retributive justice and preventive
sanctions.

Ok - the first is criminal and the second is misnamed - I believe you
meant to say civil sanctions as a means to prevent disorder.

The question is which application respects an individual's
personal autonomy and responsibility.

Neither do.

Preventive sanctions presume that the individual must be
compelled by legislation to be civically, morally, and ethically
responsible. In this sense, the individual's autonomy must
necessarily be reduced for what is considered the social good.

I don't understand the difference as you state it. Both are considered
deterrants to further criminal or uncivil behavior. One is based in
criminal law (in fact, it is the original codification of social
behavior as presented in the Law of Moses and/or the Code of
Hammurabi) and the other is simply an extention of criminal sanctions
into the civil arena.

IMO, this stands in contrast to the deference given to personal
autonomy and liberty by the earliest lawmakers in this country. We've
become to conditioned over time, as a society, to accept the utility
of preventive sanctions at the cost of personal liberty, and this to
the point that a perspective such as mine is considered savagely
extreme.

I wouldn't say "extreme" - I would say misguided. 18th century
jurisprudence stayed firmly entrenched in the arena of retributive
justice - hence debtors prisons, lack of women's rights, cororeal
punishment for minor infractions and such. Most issues considered as
civil matters in today's society were dealt with as criminal in the
18th century with the corresponding "justice". The entire
Constitution and Bill of Rights is nothing more than an experiment in
socially engineering an entirely new legal and governance construct.
You'd really have to explain that a little more because I don't
understand your thesis.

I don't think my perspective would have seemed extreme in
this country's youth. Retributive justice does not presuppose that
the individual must be necessarily be constrained for the good of
society.

Huh? That's the whole point of retributive justice if I remember my,
admittedly minor, education in civil law.

If you do get the time, I'll be very interested in what you have to
say.