Isn't the non-aggression principle violated when we punish?

[torchbearer]

caging people like animals should only be used on people who are genuine threats to the community.
it should not be for punishment or reformation.
It is simply to put the sociopaths away because they will continue to hurt people.

 

[Truth Warrior]

caging people like animals should only be used on people who are genuine threats to the community.
it should not be for punishment or reformation.
It is simply to put the sociopaths away because they will continue to hurt people.

How many are in the COTUS? Easier question, how many in the COTUS are not?

 

[tremendoustie]

If it were me, I'd let the victim decide the punishment with the limitation that the punishment does not go beyond the crime.

In our society punishment has been delegated to "jail time".

Jesus came up with "an eye for an eye" not as a punishment, but as a delimeter. He saw that if one neighbor killed someone's goat, the other neighbor would kill two of his goats as punishment, which would result in four of the other neighbor's goats, and so on and so on..."an eye for an eye" would set the punishment as one goat to one goat.

Actually, the "eye for an eye" thing is from the Old Testiment.

Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'[a] 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."


Although in civil law a person has a right to self defense in these situations, I think as a Christian, the right thing is not to respond in kind. It is certainly a hard thing to do.

Of course, I think there are limits -- trying to take one's coat is not the same as assaulting one's wife.

 

[Truth Warrior]

Actually, the "eye for an eye" thing is from the Old Testiment.

Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'[a] 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."


Although in civil law a person has a right to self defense in these situations, I think as a Christian, the right thing is not to respond in kind. It is certainly a hard thing to do.

Of course, I think there are limits -- trying to take one's coat is not the same as assaulting one's wife.

Aggression IS aggression.

Aggression is Wrong, by Robert LeFevre

 

[torchbearer]

How many are in the COTUS? Easier question, how many in the COTUS are not?

I'm using the term sociopath in the DSM definition.

Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) is defined by the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual as "...a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood."[1] Deceit and manipulation are considered essential features of the disorder. Therefore, it is essential in making the diagnosis to collect material from sources other than the individual being diagnosed. Also, the individual must be age 18 or older as well as have a documented history of a conduct disorder before the age of 15.[1]People having antisocial personality disorder are sometimes referred to as "sociopaths" and "psychopaths", although some researchers believe that these terms are not synonymous with ASPD.[2]


There may be a majority in congress that fit this role. But I wouldn't start swinging the axe until they were given a trial and were proven a threat in this manner.

 

[tremendoustie]

caging people like animals should only be used on people who are genuine threats to the community.
it should not be for punishment or reformation.
It is simply to put the sociopaths away because they will continue to hurt people.

I agree with this. Those who have comitted crimes but do not continue to be threats should be put into work programs to pay the victim, in my view. A 5 year term to work for the victim makes a lot more sense than 5 years rotting in jail ... plus, the criminal would be less likely to get worse, as most who serve prison terms do.

 

[Kludge]

I agree with this. Those who have comitted crimes but do not continue to be threats should be put into work programs to pay the victim, in my view. A 5 year term to work for the victim makes a lot more sense than 5 years rotting in jail ... plus, the criminal would be less likely to get worse, as most who serve prison terms do.

I don't think Madoff's labor is actually worth enough to pay the victims restitution...

(but I agree, nonetheless)

 

[torchbearer]

I agree with this. Those who have comitted crimes but do not continue to be threats should be put into work programs to pay the victim, in my view. A 5 year term to work for the victim makes a lot more sense than 5 years rotting in jail ... plus, the criminal would be less likely to get worse, as most who serve prison terms do.

reparations are essential. Victims should be compensated for their loss of property or damage to body.
but we must be wary of an indentured servant program that seeks to make slaves of people.
I have had this debate with other libertarians before... and I do recall some 'holes' in the system.
I've had a loved one caged like an animal for drug use. It was horrible. They are treating people like animals... and they don't deserve that for doing so little wrong.

 

[Truth Warrior]

I'm using the term sociopath in the DSM definition.

Antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) is defined by the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual as "...a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood."[1] Deceit and manipulation are considered essential features of the disorder. Therefore, it is essential in making the diagnosis to collect material from sources other than the individual being diagnosed. Also, the individual must be age 18 or older as well as have a documented history of a conduct disorder before the age of 15.[1]People having antisocial personality disorder are sometimes referred to as "sociopaths" and "psychopaths", although some researchers believe that these terms are not synonymous with ASPD.[2]


There may be a majority in congress that fit this role. But I wouldn't start swinging the axe until they were given a trial and were proven a threat in this manner.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sociopath

Right, like the Clintons.

Flash! The jury is in, verdict MANY of them ( perhaps even a majority ) are "guilty".

~4% of the US population are sociopaths. That's just somewhere around 12 MILLION folks. What's the current US prison population?