= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
FAWS comments on Crime and punishment - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (189)
This is not exactly something society teaches you. It is inherent in the concept of "crime." With a few exceptions, a crime is a thing that is forbidden by law, and being forbidden by law means that it carries a punishment. If you aren't punished for it, it isn't a crime. If you shouldn't be punished for it, it shouldn't be a crime. This observation is more linguistic than social.
And, incidentally:
is a similar truism. "We should do X to people who deserve having X done to them" is pretty much tautologous. Disagreement ensues only once X is defined.
Also, you are either deliberately or negligently muddling the insanity defense. It's usually defined as, "unable to tell the difference between right and wrong." This is not crystal clear, but it's not particularly vague, considering how broad of a concept it entails.
The first is not completely tautological. For instance if you commit a crime strictly to prevent a greater harm, have no other approach available, there is no pre-made legal exception and it's the sort of crime that rightfully carries a punishment because I causes actual harm and usually net harm I believe you should still be convicted, but pardoned shortly afterwards.
What about the necessity defense? (That seems to exist only in the United States; I always thought that it was derived from English Common Law.)
ETA: Here's some discussion on the necessity defense in the context of law school, and it includes our old favourite, the trolley problem. (It also cites an 1810 court case which suggests that the necessity defense does derive from English Common Law, but Wikipedia disagrees.)