68
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2023
68 points (98.6% liked)
Aotearoa / New Zealand
1648 readers
22 users here now
Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general
- For politics , please use !politics@lemmy.nz
- Shitposts, circlejerks, memes, and non-NZ topics belong in !offtopic@lemmy.nz
- If you need help using Lemmy.nz, go to !support@lemmy.nz
- NZ regional and special interest communities
Rules:
FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom
Banner image by Bernard Spragg
Got an idea for next month's banner?
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So you think punishing this abused kid earlier and more severely would have prevented him from committing crimes?
While he remained in prison, yes. Certainly failing to imprison him earlier didnt work, did it
And talking about punishment completely misses the point. Sentencing needs to about risk management, not punishment. He was clearly a very serious risk, multiple people could see that and said as much, the judge failed to manage that risk adequately by incapacitating him until he no longer posed a risk and could be treated/ rehabilitated (if indeed he could be treated/ rehabilitated at all which is another discussion)
Punishment by itself achieves nothing, offenders like this cannot be deterred. And sometimes incapacitation is all we have got
Nothing was done though. You make it sound like the only two choices were to jail him or do nothing.
Risk management would be to find him some treatment to overcome his childhood trauma.
And sometimes we have other options but the cruel and sadistic public is always braying for blood and guts and hurting abused children as much as humanly possible.