I agree on self defense. In many ways it is cleaner than even letting it get to the courts in the first place. However, it's also a huge hypothetical, as not everyone is going to be able to defend themselves against would-be murderers, and we'll still have murders. But, as I said elsewhere, I certainly won't shed any tears if aspiring murderers end up getting defensed.
One flaw I'd like to point out with your argument though. Imprisonment can be just as cruel, if not crueler, and is frequently used to break people for daring to challenge the elite. Just look at Julian Assange. The poor bastard was first cornered, then arrested, silenced, and now... likely broken.
That will happen in any system, though. Would you rather they executed Assange? At least with unjust imprisonment there is hope of being freed, which is part of my whole point. In the case of murderers, we have to do something with them. So just not imprisoning them, in the fear of potential abuse, isn't really an issue. We have to minimize chances for abuse, and I think part of that is keeping prisoners alive. It's an absolute tragedy what they did to Assange, no question. But it's not a flaw inherent or unique to imprisonment. Unless you want to go full vigilante, something has to be done with bad actors, and sometimes corrupt governments will use that against innocent people. But, even in a full vigilante system, you'd just have them pay some hitmen to kill Assange, or something. Every system has possibility of abuse.
Yeah, I could've worded that a little more delicately. I'm not saying there's any better solutions, of course, just that it's something that's still unfortunately unsolved, and maybe unsolvable no matter what.
I agree on self defense. In many ways it is cleaner than even letting it get to the courts in the first place. However, it's also a huge hypothetical, as not everyone is going to be able to defend themselves against would-be murderers, and we'll still have murders. But, as I said elsewhere, I certainly won't shed any tears if aspiring murderers end up getting defensed.
That will happen in any system, though. Would you rather they executed Assange? At least with unjust imprisonment there is hope of being freed, which is part of my whole point. In the case of murderers, we have to do something with them. So just not imprisoning them, in the fear of potential abuse, isn't really an issue. We have to minimize chances for abuse, and I think part of that is keeping prisoners alive. It's an absolute tragedy what they did to Assange, no question. But it's not a flaw inherent or unique to imprisonment. Unless you want to go full vigilante, something has to be done with bad actors, and sometimes corrupt governments will use that against innocent people. But, even in a full vigilante system, you'd just have them pay some hitmen to kill Assange, or something. Every system has possibility of abuse.
Yeah, I could've worded that a little more delicately. I'm not saying there's any better solutions, of course, just that it's something that's still unfortunately unsolved, and maybe unsolvable no matter what.