So serving a prison sentence is not enough in this case? If someone is convicted of things like pirating, we should punish them permanently in random domains for the rest of their life? Gee, I wonder why recidivism rates are so high...
What is the point of the legal system if everyone is just going to apply extra-legal, -arbitrary- punishments on top of it?
Firstly, this ignores the fact that most crime occurs due to socioeconomic reasons. So you're kicking someone in the head after they're already down and have served a punishment doled out by a judge.
Secondly, obviously the -type- of crime should make things more difficult or impossible in certain cases. But arbitrarily punishing people for having any conviction at all is the opposite of what a healthy society should be doing. This thoroughly ensures that recidivism rates will remain high, because what's the point in trying to cooperate with a society that brands you as a criminal no matter what punishment you serve or what you do throughout the rest of your life?
We need to focus on rehabilitation, not continuing to punish people for the rest of their lives.
"That might not be fair, but that's how it is."
Sorry to be blunt, but hopefully this punitive attitude will die out as older people die out. This is one American attitude that I absolutely despise.
It seems strange that a state solely determines the boundary for a crime, solely enforces that boundary, solely executes the related punishment, and then suddenly everyone’s piling on.
If it’s the job of the state, it should be the job of the state.
> What is the point of the legal system if everyone is just going to apply extra-legal, -arbitrary- punishments on top of it?
To control the application of violence and to make sure the preexisting rules are being followed before it is applied.
If you don't have any verification that the rules are being followed, those in power tend to do pretty horrible things. At the same time, if those in power use no violence, the populace tend to resort to extra-legal violence to deliver what they see as justice, which results in a different class or horrible things happening (and threatens the government's monopoly on legitimized violence).
It's basically a local maximum that still kind of sucks, but works better than anything else we've tried at scale.
We've tried getting the government involved in social punishment, but it tends to work out very poorly and it seems best just to have them not enter that sphere.
> what's the point in trying to cooperate with a society that brands you as a criminal no matter
Potentially nothing, but that's a question for society, not for the government/legal system. Society is supposed to control the government, not the other way around (or at least that's the theory, practice is sometimes pretty spotty).
It should also be noted that there's no requirement for people to add these extra punishments. So, it should be pretty easy to turn around if people ever pull their heads out of their asses.
It doesn't have to be, though, and it's something that can be changed. And it must be, else the US will collapse under the weight of its own incarceration and injustice.
I'm not sure if you're advocating for the "way it is" but I hope not. The way it is isn't fair and the legal system, and society in general, should realize that and improve it.
