OrionTheWolf
Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006 Status: offline
|
In most cases yes. The sentencing should be left in the hands of the judicial system to determine the best course of action for someone that has shown themselves to be a menace. First would come treatment, and then a review at a set period of time. once the person was determined to be competent, the judge would review all the factors and determine if further punishment was necessary. In this the person gets treatment, if they are truly of the sort that cannot be held accountable, then a judge determines that, and no further punishment may be given. If it is determined that it was something not severe that impeded them, then further punsihment or imprisonment may be needed. Possibly parole or probation. Each case should be handled by the merits of the case, and determined by the judge. The guilty portion is an admitting that the crime actually took place, and done by the person, the other portion is to get them treatment, and if needed further isolation from society, or whatever the judge determines. There would always be exceptions, but those would be for the judicial system to determine, and not a get out of jail free card. quote:
ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf ~FR~ I have always prefered "Guilty by reason of insanity or mental defect." Then the person gets treatment, and possible punishment if the insanity is treated enough to understand what they had done. So you should be "punished" for being mentally ill to the point of not being able to discern delusion from reality? Seriously?
_____________________________
When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."
|