• gian @lemmy.grys.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    We agree on the last part. But my feeling is that if a crime isn’t “bad” enough to require actual jail time then it probably shouldn’t be a crime at all.

    Define “bad enough”, because this is a very slippery slope. What about thefts ?

    Speeding, DUI, and other risky behaviors should be punished if, and ONLY if, an actual incident occurs. Because then there is actually a victim, and not just some nebulous might-have-been.

    Following this reasoning, there are no crimes until you get caught and/or there is a victim. To me this is unacceptable in a decent society.

    Hurt someone while drinking and driving? That’s no accident, that’s an intentional attack. Kill someone? Again, not an accident, but premeditated murder.

    And why we should not to try to avoid to have a person in jail and one killed in the first place ?

      • gian @lemmy.grys.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Without an actual victim there is no crime.

        And I understand this. What I don’t like is the idea that to try to prevent that there will be victims is bad.

        • HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The way to prevent crime isn’t to punish those who haven’t hurt anyone, but to more strongly punish those who have.