Mercy vs Justice

[4april 374]

What is more important for society? Should we focus on reconsiliation of criminals and treat them like normal citizens or should we punish them severely for crimes.

 

Singapore has a very (very) strict justice system and has a low crime rate....

..... while Norwey has a more liberal system and also has a low crime rate.

Edited October 18, 2015 by 4april

[PROJECT: Simon 3,953]

Justice, always will be justice <3 Too much kindness can bring destruction :c 

[Plume 922]

Oooohhh I should vote but I really can't decide.

 

I'd say a bit of both, to be honest. Depending on the severity of the crime, sometimes Mercy can be valued over Justice. Also, I feel it depends on the circumstance of the crime/criminal.

[Kenshiro 13,492]

Justice and mercy are both important but sometimes we made tough choices.For ex; even if a child try to break a window, you must bust that child because one day,years later prehaps s/he ll steal from you or s/he may hurt somebody that you love...

[Limeblossom 482]

Justice and mercy are both important but sometimes we made tough choices.For ex; even if a child try to break a window, you must bust that child because one day,years later prehaps s/he ll steal from you or s/he may hurt somebody that you love...

I agree with you that it's important to confront/call out someone for his/her actions. We've seen enough examples of people who've gone further without being confronted.

[green 331]

I could write a 4 page essay on this topic. But In short, I think a mix of both is the best way.

[Dark Horse 12,799]

I'd be inclined to lean more towards Justice myself here, but as others have mentioned it depends on the severity of the crime and possible motive. I am generally one to think though that punishment of some sort must be forthcoming to those who break the law, otherwise there is little to deter them from trying it again if they feel they can get away with it, and these days some people are bold enough to just act on instinct. Being merciful to these people just doesn't help in that way I feel.

[Blaze Bronson 343]

I live in "Norvey", but I hope you mean Norway here 

 

There is a saying on the internet that the liberal system we have here is: "If you treat criminals like humans, they will be humans".

I definitely agree to this. Show love and respect to everyone, and make them understand that it isn't they as a person who is wrong, it is the actions they did.

Only when you stop believing they are humane, they are sure not to be.

 

 

 

I believe a big part of this is "janteloven". It's essentially just an integrated social code found in Norwegians (and somewhat in Danes and Swedes as well) where we take pride in not boasting about our abilities.

 

An example: If you are rich, you don't necessarily buy a big house or a fancy car, you buy a modest home and a nice car, because "we don't need more, we can manage with this".

Being the "everyman" is the ideal.

 

Showing wealth and power is signs or arrogance in our social norms.

I guess this is reflected in our prisons, where we don't want to act superior to our prisoners. They are just as human as us.

 

Sorry for the quality, but here is a bit of context 

 

 

Edit: formating

Edited October 18, 2015 by Blaze Bronson

[Guest]

The average person in the US's perception of justice could be likened to a child's sense of justice in that "you took from the cookie jar, so I should be able to."

[Nila Bean 133]

I tend to lean more toward justice. It depends on what the person did to be honest. 

 

Severe crimes like abuse, murder etc. I have NO mercy for those people, I don't care what they've been though/whatever problems they faced. We all have a sob story we could tell, that doesn't make what you did okay...

 

I don't really have pity for criminals...heartless? I don't really know, or care.

[4april 374]

 

 

I live in "Norvey", but I hope you mean Norway here

 

Opps. I edited it now. Sorry

[Xeltor23 704]

Juctice. Always Justice. Mercy or pity is not useful in any way. Justice doesn't have to be too stirct, but I'll choose Justice anyway.

[Galen 1,353]

What is more important for society? Should we focus on reconsiliation of criminals and treat them like normal citizens or should we punish them severely for crimes.

 

Singapore has a very (very) strict justice system and has a low crime rate....

..... while Norvey has a more liberal system and also has a low crime rate.

 

Singapore is a really bad example to showcase how a strict justice system can work. That's because the country is literally a city, hence why it's referred to as a city-state.

 

Norway isn't the only example. Sweden and probably Finland have very similar penal systems.

 

Also, rather than looking at crime-rates (altho that is also a very good indication of how well a system works), you should also consider recidivism (rate of repeated crimes by specific individuals). In Scandinavian countries where a reformation-based system is used, recidivism is also very low.

 

This contrasts with the US, which boasts the largest prison population in the first world (probably the world in general at that) and still has one of the highest crime rates and recidivism.

 

Other factors beyond the justice system are also at work, such as unemployment, distribution of wealth, education and healthcare along with ease of access to either one. All these things factor into what motivates people to commit crime. As far as the justice system goes, so long as prisons operate on the ideal of making profits as opposed to actually making sure criminals don't commit crimes again, the US system isn't going to yield any long-term results. Making sure criminals don't repeate crimes also doesn't have to mean executing them. Reforming them and allowing them another chance after they're out works much better. The issue is with the way former criminals are treated in the US in that they're often stigmatised by society. Someone who's been in jail for something and has served their time, paid their dues and all else will still find it nigh impossible to find work because of past criminal records. They'll still be viewed with contempt. Afaik, that doesn't happen in Scandianvian countries (or many other places for that matter). This also leads to crimes being repeated when they don't have to be.

[I used to be a stranger 7,989]

This post has been redacted by the author.

Edited May 10, 2021 by Blue

[Kagami-sama 319]

Legally, I personally believe justice should always be met. No exceptions.

 

Let's change the word justice to redemption.

And the word mercy to forgiveness.

 

That's how I see it.

 

For the guilty party, redemption gives the feeling of peace.

You did wrong and paid the price. A new beginning I guess you could say.

 

But here's where forgiveness comes in.

 

Once redeemed, forgiveness should always follow. Don't hold personal grudges against someone.

And don't judge. Know that the person has served his time.

 

I think EVERY CRIME SHOULD BE FORGIVEN.

When I say forgiven, I mean on a personal level. You still gotta pay for your crimes.

 

It's like when you were a child and your mother spanked you every time you did something really bad, but after that she gave you a hug and said let the past be the past and move on and never spoke of it again.

 

That's how I think the justice system should be. You do a crime. You pay the price. You're redeemed and thus forgiven.

 

I am HIGHLY against public humiliation! Say you did something stupid and it was caught on video.

You serve your time in jail. You come out and find that your "mistake" went viral on youtube.

 

And now you're famous... It's like the gift that keeps on giving. People wont forget. And for every one person who forgives you, there will be 20 more to take their place. I don't think that's right.

 

"What about a murder?" You do a crime. You pay the price. You're redeemed and thus forgiven.

"But what about a child rapist?" The same thing. You do a crime. You pay the price. You're redeemed and thus forgiven.

 

 

This is all just my own opinion. Don't hate me for it! ^^;

[Tee Kay 29]

How about mercy and justice.

 

Justice without mercy - without the consideration that everyone involved including the guilty party on whom the punishment is dealt is a human being with rights - is no justice at all. It's merely vindictiveness, revenge.

 

On the other extreme, showing excessive leniency/leeway to a "bad person" means you are not being kind to those who are harmed by them. It stops being mercy and becomes something else.

[Star Blossom 160]

Sometimes cruel mercy is a wonderful punishment. Forgiving someone after something horrible often upsets and haunts them for a long time. At least, I've always done that with my enemies, I realized "I forgive you" scorned them more than any insult, so.

[Invincible 2,090]

Justice. As long as society remains infirm towards criminals, even for a crime done of selflessness, criminals will emerge. Only by allowing ourselves to submit to a strong judicial system will everyone be deterred into obedience. When people don't respect the smallest of rules, how can you expect them to respect bigger ones?

[Courageous Thunder Dash 7,809]

Think of "Keep Calm and Flutter On"...

 

Discord thought he could take advantage of Fluttershy because she was being very kind to him and being a friend. 

 

In terms of criminals, we should do both. We should show mercy to them, because it is the right thing to do, and although there are super evil criminals out there, no one deserves to be treated like trash. However, we should take appropriate action and deliver the justice necessary. 

 

In short, there's not really a versus, we must show both, and ultimately, find the perfect balance between mercy and justice. 

[green 331]

Legally, I personally believe justice should always be met. No exceptions.

 

Let's change the word justice to redemption.

And the word mercy to forgiveness.

 

That's how I see it.

 

For the guilty party, redemption gives the feeling of peace.

You did wrong and paid the price. A new beginning I guess you could say.

 

But here's where forgiveness comes in.

 

Once redeemed, forgiveness should always follow. Don't hold personal grudges against someone.

And don't judge. Know that the person has served his time.

 

I think EVERY CRIME SHOULD BE FORGIVEN.

When I say forgiven, I mean on a personal level. You still gotta pay for your crimes.

 

It's like when you were a child and your mother spanked you every time you did something really bad, but after that she gave you a hug and said let the past be the past and move on and never spoke of it again.

 

That's how I think the justice system should be. You do a crime. You pay the price. You're redeemed and thus forgiven.

 

I am HIGHLY against public humiliation! Say you did something stupid and it was caught on video.

You serve your time in jail. You come out and find that your "mistake" went viral on youtube.

 

And now you're famous... It's like the gift that keeps on giving. People wont forget. And for every one person who forgives you, there will be 20 more to take their place. I don't think that's right.

 

"What about a murder?" You do a crime. You pay the price. You're redeemed and thus forgiven.

"But what about a child rapist?" The same thing. You do a crime. You pay the price. You're redeemed and thus forgiven.

 

 

This is all just my own opinion. Don't hate me for it! ^^;

Wow. That pretty much sums up all my thoughts. As long as you pay for your crime and never do it again then a second chance can come into play.

[Tee Kay 29]

When people don't respect the smallest of rules, how can you expect them to respect bigger ones?

This argument never convinces me.

 

Firstly, not all rules are equally valid. Some are useless, inconvenient, or actually actively harmful.

 

Secondly, when people don't think there's a lot at stake, they bend the rules or don't follow them, because why should they? There's not a lot at stake, not following the rules often makes more sense/convenience than following them, the chances of anyone getting hurt is remote.

 

For more serious stuff, like murder or arson, well most people agree that they are Bad Things that cause far more harm than good and pretty much everyone follow the rules that reduce or prevent their occurrance.

 

A well-functioning society can be measured by many different ways and strict adherence to the rules is one of the least useful ones IMHO.

[Galen 1,353]

 

 

"What about a murder?" You do a crime. You pay the price. You're redeemed and thus forgiven.

"But what about a child rapist?" The same thing. You do a crime. You pay the price. You're redeemed and thus forgiven.

 

The thing is a lot of people have the strong opinion that the only way to redeem such people is to kill them. But like @@Tee Kay said, responding to a murderer with death makes us murderers as well. Humans have always been capable of monstrous things. We've done it arguably from the very beginning of our existence. What makes us truly intelligent beings is to be able to recognize when an act is indeed that of a monster and to rise above it. We recognize killing fellow humans is monstrous, so there is no sense in committing the same monstrous act to dispatch a monster. Those serving justice are then no different than those receiving it. Only by displaying kindness and forgiveness do others take example and behave with virtue.

[DubWolf 16,605]

You fix nothing by punishment, but you don't discourage crime without it.

You punish as a means of saying "don't do that", but is it likely that person really doesn't want to do something anymore internally just because of that punishment? Remove the punishment and they'll do "it" again...

However, if you rehabilitate someone, you /change/ that person and destroy any of those bad intentions they have, thus preventing future crimes (not preventing the past though).

In my opinion, there should be a punishment to prevent people from crime, and then rehabilitation while they receive that punishment. If their crime had permanent effects, their punishment should too be permanent, but people should work towards rebuilding the person.

Although... I understand why people support the death penalty, and I won't get into the ethics of forgiving the murderer, but leaving the victim to a life of... No life, or worse....

 

For said reasons, my faith/choice of faith is unstable.

Edited October 21, 2015 by WackoWolf

[Invincible 2,090]

This argument never convinces me.

 

Firstly, not all rules are equally valid. Some are useless, inconvenient, or actually actively harmful.

 

Secondly, when people don't think there's a lot at stake, they bend the rules or don't follow them, because why should they? There's not a lot at stake, not following the rules often makes more sense/convenience than following them, the chances of anyone getting hurt is remote.

 

For more serious stuff, like murder or arson, well most people agree that they are Bad Things that cause far more harm than good and pretty much everyone follow the rules that reduce or prevent their occurrance.

 

A well-functioning society can be measured by many different ways and strict adherence to the rules is one of the least useful ones IMHO.

 

Well said, but I disagree. Useless rules have no place in society. Blind faith is indeed a bad thing. However, rules are there to enforce order on the chaos that humanity brings. Nobody should care that a law is inconvenient - a good law or a rule is there to protect you from others or others from you in one way or another. Add a consequence for rule breaking, and you'll see that most people will avoid breaking said rule. 

 

The less adherence you have to rules, the more rebellious your society is. 

[Solid 1,326]

You can actually have both.

 

A common opinion on mercy is that it is on par with allowing someone get away Scotfree with whatever the hell they did, putting it somewhat in the opposition of justice.

 

But mercy has another meaning to it and it's forgiveness. Sure you still get punished for doing something wrong, but mercy comes in when people offer you forgiveness afterwards, on both objective and personal perspectives, instead of repetitively punishing you for the same wrongdoing over and over again, be it physically or mentally. Some court systems offer just that, but the general population could be a different case.

 

So it is entirely possible to have both Justice and Mercy. It is really up to what kind of Mercy is one is looking at.