A question on what should we do with our criminals

But, we argue, the law can do more than simply offer forgiveness to those who have paid their dues by amending such stigmatising procedures. But it can stem from either in-group or out-group members, predicting different responses.

The judge sentenced me to 10 years in state prison. What we hope to have established thus far is more theoretical, namely, that reconceiving punishment as proceeding with forgiveness represents an ideal towards which we have instrumental and ethical reasons to strive.

In other words, before we are willing to countenance forgiveness, we may be minded to ask offenders in effect to take the first step: to acknowledge without excuse or justification the entirety of their culpability and the nature of their offence, experience the full psychological weight of their wrongdoing, and accept punishment for it.

If indeed forgiveness functions to repair relations while reducing the risk of future re-offending then these values suggest that we ought—so far as possible—to replace blame with forgiveness as a guiding ideal within penal philosophy and criminal justice policy, and promote practices within criminal justice institutions that move away from blame and towards forgiveness within the vast spectrum of possible real-world responses.

They go to jail because they have no other place to go. There are, however, two risks inherent in this strategy. Let me illustrate: Take the poorest person in this room. If we do nothing and as a result have an increasingly upset and needy population, what kind of parents will these young people grow up to be?