Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Troubleshooter
Not at all because the role of the judicial system, ideally, is adjudicate such cases, based on facts, and apply the sentence based on the situation. That's why there are so many flavors of prosecution for taking someone's life.
|
I was responding to this:
Quote:
|
Taking someone's money would require repayment, breaking someone's things would require their replacement, causing someone to lose their life would require you to lose your own.
|
and other posts of the same ilk. In a theft case, if the stolen goods are recovered, they may be returned to the owner. This can't be done in a violent crime. In an assault case, beating the convict wouldn't erase the victim's wounds or trauma. In a rape case, raping the convict wouldn't unrape the victim. Likewise, in a murder case, killing the convict doesn't revive the victim. The victim gets no repayment.
Quote:
|
Also, I'm not taking the killers life. The justice system is taking his life as part of a well known and documented process of redress. That's why we put them there in the first place.
|
It was a generic "you". As in, "you can't jump over the moon" isn't singling you out as an individual; nobody can.