I would point out, that the retributive theory is very compatible with both rehabilitation, and also considering underlying social reasons that may contribute to crime. I think there is some truth to the idea that "poverty causes crime", but it's imo a very dangerous truth in the hands of so-called progressives. For sure we should look at things like poverty and opportunity which is a focus on the left-wing. We should also maybe be looking at the damage done by undermining the traditional family, which is a focus on the right-wing. Retribution has its theoretical issues, sure; but then if you get rid of the idea of deserved retributive punishment, and lock up people as a deterrent, that's basically punishing the innocent for social good. It's completely immoral in theory. Or you lock people up indefinitely to protect the wider society, and that's obviously got its own issues. As for restorative punishment, for more serious crimes, (1) there may be no way to even come close to "restoring" the damage done by sexual or violent crime, (2) the victim may want nothing to do with it, and be offended at the very suggestion, (3) the criminal may not be willing to participate. They have a moral duty to try to "restore", but you can’t punish them if they refuse? This is a recipe for people thinking that the social contract with the government has been broken, and they are now at liberty to "take the law into their own hands" and seek personal acts of revenge. And how is "restorative justice" going to handle that, when people don’t believe they have even done anything wrong for seeking revenge, and the "justice system" is actually an injustice against them? I think one of the biggest issues of too-much-focus on a social factor like poverty, is that it's kind of insulting to other people that grow up in a bad environment with limited opportunity, and don't go down a criminal path. Such people can get preyed upon by criminals and then progressives will make excuses for the criminals, when they themselves may be lucky enough to live in better circumstances, and don't have to deal with the consequences of their own political positions. So I see this, as very easily, middle class progressives patting themselves on the back for their "enlightened approach" while they make other people's lives even worse; allow them to be preyed upon by criminals or antisocial scumbags, and deny them justice and the chance of living in a safe environment.
![[Gegagedigedagedago] NEW Help Gegagedigedagedago Nugget escape from Nikocado Avocado Challenge](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hJWnwRC2Fz8/mqdefault.jpg)
I would point out, that the retributive theory is very compatible with both rehabilitation, and also considering underlying social reasons that may contribute to crime.
I think there is some truth to the idea that "poverty causes crime", but it's imo a very dangerous truth in the hands of so-called progressives. For sure we should look at things like poverty and opportunity which is a focus on the left-wing. We should also maybe be looking at the damage done by undermining the traditional family, which is a focus on the right-wing.
Retribution has its theoretical issues, sure; but then if you get rid of the idea of deserved retributive punishment, and lock up people as a deterrent, that's basically punishing the innocent for social good. It's completely immoral in theory. Or you lock people up indefinitely to protect the wider society, and that's obviously got its own issues.
As for restorative punishment, for more serious crimes, (1) there may be no way to even come close to "restoring" the damage done by sexual or violent crime, (2) the victim may want nothing to do with it, and be offended at the very suggestion, (3) the criminal may not be willing to participate. They have a moral duty to try to "restore", but you can’t punish them if they refuse?
This is a recipe for people thinking that the social contract with the government has been broken, and they are now at liberty to "take the law into their own hands" and seek personal acts of revenge.
And how is "restorative justice" going to handle that, when people don’t believe they have even done anything wrong for seeking revenge, and the "justice system" is actually an injustice against them?
I think one of the biggest issues of too-much-focus on a social factor like poverty, is that it's kind of insulting to other people that grow up in a bad environment with limited opportunity, and don't go down a criminal path. Such people can get preyed upon by criminals and then progressives will make excuses for the criminals, when they themselves may be lucky enough to live in better circumstances, and don't have to deal with the consequences of their own political positions.
So I see this, as very easily, middle class progressives patting themselves on the back for their "enlightened approach" while they make other people's lives even worse; allow them to be preyed upon by criminals or antisocial scumbags, and deny them justice and the chance of living in a safe environment.