An empiricist government might address the whole '16 hours of continuous driving' that is rampant in the industry, make sure he never drives again, and make the sentence include some kind of restitution.

But performative punishment is more fun yeah? Stockades and then chopping off a hand might satisfy those folks.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

How do you decide when a prison sentence is appropriate, or vengeance? Maybe there shouldn't be any jailtime if the offender is just really, really sorry.

[–] SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Onoff, eh? 'I can't think of an easy answer so there must be none'

That lack of nuance combined with an aversion to improving shitty systems that don't work, and an aversion to whatever the science says in combination with front-line problem solvers, characterizes conservative policy.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I have to be honest, I don't know what you were trying to say. I am disappointed the people that put this driver on the road without the proper training aren't in front of a judge. That's where the crime started.

[–] SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I didn't say make the sentence community service, which you seem to imply. New justice systems will be complex and results-oriented. Yeah responsibility for dangerous jobs needs to focus up the ladder. Jail as punishment doesn't solve any of the problems except preventing interaction with free society. Victims don't see justice or restitution, only vengeance. The expense is huge. Accomplices go free.

[–] CanIFishHere@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago

So, in your opinion, jail (prison) doesn't solve any problems, except interaction with society.

Why isn't that enough? Do you want a system without vengeance? (your words). Why not consider the impact on the victim and their families?