Explain to me why my attitude is wrong.

[Darryl_P]

[ QUOTE ]
Shooting him in this case would be almost purely out of vengeance and has no place in a society that considers due process a right.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's consider philosophically why due process exists...if I'm missing something please point it out but I see two key reasons:

a) To make sure the facts are straight
b) To make sure society's consensus values are applied and not those of any particular individual

Reason a) I agree with whole-heartedly and so I would only shoot the guy if the case was 100% clear cut and I could prove it. I wouldn't want people thinking I'm a random killer myself so I'd make sure everyone gets to see the videotape, transcripts of witness testimony etc. If there is any doubt as to what the true facts are, then I'd be in favor of due process myself.

Reason b), however, I reject with all my heart because of the heavy liberal slant to the judicial system. If the judge and jury were made up only of the top 25% most right-wing segment of the population I'd gladly accept their verdict. Sadly, though, there are so many liberals who are more concerned with the rights of criminals than those of honest businessmen, that I cannot accept a due process in which such people are in power.

If you are in favor of due process, I'm assuming it's because of a combination of a) and b) above. In the case of b), are you saying you agree with society's consensus values, or at least are willing to compromise, or are you just pointing out the fact that the system forces us to accept them whether we like them or not?


[ QUOTE ]
And there's no mention of this robber "beating the rap".

[/ QUOTE ]

No, but there is mention of him getting away which means there is a chance he will escape.

I suppose a lot depends on how big the chance is and what the expected rap will be. In my value system it would have to be 100% and either life imprisonment or execution. If someone threatens my life and I can prove it, I believe I have the right to a 100% guarantee that that person can never again threaten or cause harm to me or my family. Under the current system the only way to achieve that is to kill him. If there were another way, I'd be all for it.

I assume the real-world values of roughly 80% and a few years' imprisonment would be acceptable in your value system. Just wondering, though, what if they were lower? What if it were only 20% and the expected rap were only 1 year of community service? What would your position be then? If you are still in favor of letting him go, how low would the probability have to be before you took matters into your own hands?