Criminals and Innocents
Religious brainwashing makes the religious majority believe, that for suffering on earth there will be compensation in the afterlife and that the full punishment for the evil also is postponed and left to the deity in afterlife. Christians are supposed to forgive as their own requirement to reward.
Therefore society fails to protect the innocent well enough. There is too much leniency, once someone has given evidence, that he is dangerous. It is absurd, that quite often, the brutal criminal gets a few years in prison, and gets out back into a content, normal life, and leaves his own deed emotionally behind him. He has been punished by the law, so for him, it is over. The victim suffers forever, and the next victim is prone to pass his path.
It is not acceptable that becoming a victim is considered a risk of life. Nobody should be allowed to run free and be a hazard, once he is known to be dangerous. The innocent deserve safety and freedom of movement everywhere at any time of the day and night. The country should be the innoncents' country.
For centuries, there was massive injustice in some societies, when for example there were free people with privileges, that were denied to the slaves. But to my knowledge, there was never a society, where important privileges were reserved to the innocent, while evildoers and criminals were forfeiting them. As far as I know, even the criminals, who were transported to Australia were allowed back after completing their term.
There should be two levels of citizenship. The full citizenship with all human rights and the attribution of human dignity should be the privilege of the innocent, of those, who have never done serious, especially physical harm to others. They should have a status of being called truly human. As soon as someone does any cruel act to someone else, he should loose once and for all that status and be reduced to a limited citizenship of status of a asocial and dangerous, who is deprived of some civilian rights.
He should be controlled in his movements, his mail, telephone data etc should be monitored. There should be a sign on his door warning people, maybe a RFID or some other chip planted into him, so that everybody near him can know that he is dangerous. He should loose the right to vote. Every restriction should be applied, that contributes to the prevention of his doing any more harm to others. Since he has already inflicted harm and suffering upon another, he is the one to suffer from restrictions to prevent more pain to others.
In short, the innocent should be protected from him, no matter, what disadvantages this brings to him. He had known, what damage he has no right to inflict upon others, and he had done it knowingly. He has to live with the consequences. Leniency cannot be justified, when it brings danger to innocent persons. What somebody has done once, is as a possibility in him, there is a probability, that he might do it again. He is the danger, because he made himself a danger.
It is not a question of punishing for the sake of punishing. Punishing does not undo the damage and suffering of the victims, prevention is much more important, so that nobody becomes another victim.
If someone is dangerous enough, then he need to be locked away for ever. Lions are locked in cages in the zoo, so that they cannot hurt anybody. Dangerous people need to be locked away too, if nothing less severe is not enough to protect others.
Taxpayers' money is wasted on rehabilitation for the purpose of releasing those dangerous persons. The money would be much better spent on all methods of prevention, but that will be another posting about how to keep the prisons empty.
