It is very useful to understand, visualise and criticise laws and the organisation of it. The repressive system for example is well studied in sociology. The goal of a repressive trial aside the civil trial (which purpose is for the victim to ask for compensation) is to compensate the damage caused to society. In this schema, when there is an infraction without a victim, the society is always the victim. That’s why we have prison

While it’s useful for enforcing circulation laws (cars, traffic, parking) we can question the fact that it’s a fundamental concept in most juridical systems. Maybe the principle should be softened, and the repressive system, if maintained (because some argue that it shouldn’t exist at all) should be reserved to situations where victims do exist

Because this has lead to very weird situation in France : actual victims never get to have the author on trial but authors of infractions without known victims (smoking a joint…) are a priority. Questioning this principle would lead to justice to be less of a threat and more of an help. It would also lead to retrograde police from repressive cowboys to real investigators

That is all for today. I'll for sure tell you if anything else comes to my mind lol.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
ACP 🎉🍰

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!