Philosophy

I have a very "Kantian" interpretation of morality when it comes to killing people: It's wrong. Always. Every time. But this oh so rational and elegant morality is insufficient to satisfy my need for this guy to pay for his crime. The "Humian" in me would like to see him turned inside out over a very long period of time. And then get medieval on his ass. And as you say, how do we use our morality to punish the malefactor or teach him to not commit his crime again?

I don't think it's possible to adequately punish him to make his suffering commensurate with his crime. A criminal justice system that would provide for that would truly be medieval. And a categorical imperative not to kill must apply to us all equally. I am compelled to hold myself to the same standard that I use to condemn him. But he must be made to understand the horror of what he has done and the revulsion of those who are tasked to judge him. I think that might be the nature of punishment; for us to understand the suffering we have caused others as opposed to simply suffering it ourselves. If someone simply makes us suffer for our sins we can simply blame our persecutors without reflection, but if we are compelled to empathize with those we hurt we have to blame ourselves for our crimes and hopefully learn from our mistakes.

But here's the rub. As high minded as the categorical imperative not to kill may sound, it binds us in punishment as well. It would be a great relief to simply put the fucker down like the rabid dog he is and forget about him, but instead we have to let him live and deal with him. If we have to teach him, we have to understand him. And understanding him requires us to empathize with him.

This whole "brotherhood of man" thing can make for a pretty shitty Thanksgiving.