Morality of revenge

[strijder20]

I just took a test on http://www.yourmorals.org/ in which I had to assign fines/imprisonments to crimes. The samples were rather small, but still large enough (+- 200 people) to exclude major exposition to randomness.

Two almost identical crimes were in it:

'A man runs into the office of his ex-employer after having been fired and shoots him'

'A man runs into his employer's office and shoots him'.

I assigned 25 years of imprisonment to both crimes, but what surprises me was the other testtaker's point of view:

First situation (Revenge):
Liberals: 36.8 years
Conservatives: 26.8 years

Second situation
Liberals: 46.1 years
Conservative: 54.5 years

So apparently being driven by revenge and not thinking the situation over warrants a reduction of imprisonment of 20 years? I'd shave off some years for acting impulsively, but surely not that many.

The relative conservative laxness towards impulsivity and harshness towards cool-blooded murder sticks out though.

What are your thoughts about this? How many years would you assign to each of the criminals?

 

[Zelig]

I'd strip the citizenship of both criminals and deport them to Somalia.

 

[strijder20]

I'd strip the citizenship of both criminals and deport them to Somalia.

I think Somalia's amount of murderers is already high enough

 

[Eukaryote]

I agree with the OP. 25 years a piece for both murders. The revenge aspect is irrelevant.

 

[metatron]

Two almost identical crimes were in it:

'A man runs into the office of his ex-employer after having been fired and shoots him'

'A man runs into his employer's office and shoots him'.

I assigned 25 years of imprisonment to both crimes,

I don't understand how one is supposed to judge the second case without any further information.

The relative conservative laxness towards impulsivity and harshness towards cool-blooded murder sticks out though.

Well, the employer has unilaterally abandoned a social contract, which should make him almost as much "a bad person" as an adulterer.

Due to capitalist propaganda most Anglosphere conservatives wouldn't put it that way, but the sentiment comes through none the less.

 

[strijder20]

I don't understand how one is supposed to judge the second case without any further information.

I assume they just wanted to compare the former case to a 'normal' murder while changing as ltitle as possible.

 

[warpus]

I agree with the OP. 25 years a piece for both murders. The revenge aspect is irrelevant.

But motive does isn't, IMO

 

[strijder20]

But motive does, IMO

Are you talking about the revenge motive of the first man or the (unknown) motive of the second man?

 

[warpus]

Are you talking about the revenge motive of the first man or the (unknown) motive of the second man?

Both. They both need to be considered, each one independently from the other, with regards to the appropriate facts as they relate to the case. I don't think it's a simple case of "revenge = x +/- such and such time in jail" or whatever, but from what I understand motive usually plays a large role in such trials, and so in some cases revenge might have an effect on sentencing. I have no idea if that actually ever happens in any court on the planet, but my instincts say that it perhaps might.

I hate to be that guy, but there really aren't enough facts there to conclude how much time you'd send the person to jail for. I wouldn't answer the question, because vital facts are missing.

edit: I have corrected my post above - was worded a bit.. awkwardly fully incorrectly. Hopefully it makes more sense now

 

[Chiteng]

Not enough information to make an informed judgement.

Remember that revenge, is the most human, of all emotions.

Almost no other creature indulges it.

 

[Souron]

I think the reason for the difference is with revenge you can empathize, but not with straight out betrayal. So the second is more scary than than the first. A better explanation of motive in the second case may lead people to suggest a lighter sentence.

But I agree that without more information, the two cases should receive the same penalty.

 

[Tarquelne]

But I agree that without more information, the two cases should receive the same penalty.

Maybe he was fired for shooting another employee.

Motive can be part of mitigating circumstances. Extreme example: Boss tells employee he's fired as employee finishes loading gun. "Poor impulse control" is no excuse... but geesh.

 

[Berzerker]

i gotta register and give these people my email?

no thx, but i would like taking the test

bummer

 

[Souron]

Maybe he was fired for shooting another employee.

Motive can be part of mitigating circumstances. Extreme example: Boss tells employee he's fired as employee finishes loading gun. "Poor impulse control" is no excuse... but geesh.

I agree, but revenge is not a mitigating circumstance here, and no further information is available.

 

[Berzerker]

if executing a murderer brings some peace of mind to the victims' loved ones then I'd be reluctant to get in the way.

 

[Zelig]

I think Somalia's amount of murderers is already high enough

I wouldn't ask for Somalia's opinion on the matter.

 

[strijder20]

I wouldn't ask for Somalia's opinion on the matter.

Then I'd prepare for Somali take-over of the U.S., I heard they have a lot of armed men over there

Yes, the situations aren't really fleshed out. However, I just assumed 'average' circumstances - and therefore a reason to shoot the boss (in the second case).

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

Revenge implies that someone has been wronged. Why is that being assumed in the case of the guy being fired? If he's unreasonable enough to kill his ex-boss I'm highly skeptical to any claims he may have as to being wronged anyway.

 

[Farm Boy]

Motive can be part of mitigating circumstances.

Motive has to be a part of mitigating circumstances, particularly if we attempt to adhere to incapacitation, atonement, rehabilitation, and release principles of criminal justice rather than merely retributive punishment. There is constant moaning about voluntary manslaughter/heat of passion murder from some circles calling it the "jealous husband escape clause(or something along those lines)" but assuming we take more humanity into account than just punishment for punishment's sake it seems to me to be a sensible distinction.