Is the contemporary Western legal system the most just that

What is justice?

No, its overrated af too.

>misdemeanors are publically visable
Enjoy never earning over 100 grand/year. Be careful, this board is full of humanities majors so that doesnt change anything for them.

>>836023
>loads of people, mostly black, mass incarcerated at embarrassing levels
>the system is so thorough about incarcerating that it devastates communities and builds gang affiliations that drastically increase crime, all the while failing to deter crime
>resulting crime, plus retardedly litigious culture, results in a system clogged to shit
No. idk about other countries but if you think US criminal justice functions, you're delusional.

>>836113
The question is always "functions for who?"

It functions terrifically well for the boss class.

>institutionalized terror directed towards the working class
>just

wew

>>836113
Black people commit more crime though.

>>836023
Probably, seeing as it's one of the most liberal.

>>836023
Not really, it's still heavily tipped in favor of the wealthy. Public defenders are overworked as fuck and white-collar crimes, in my opinion, receive disproportionately light sentencing

Don't know about the most just but it's certainly the most exhaustive.

>>836023
Yes, though here in the UK at least legal aid cuts have seriously hampered it as a tool of anyone but a wealthy person. Plus the U.S didn't quite grasp that the justice system is supposed to be about restitution, not full on compensation, so people sue for fuck all and win payouts in the millions instead of the tens of thousands regularly.

>>836023
>the contemporary Western legal system
What do you mean? There are two fundamentally different legal systems used in different Western countries.

>>836023

Not if you are talking about the US system. The US justice system is absolutely appalling.

>JUST

File: 1397047042893.webm (949KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

949KB, 480x360px

>>836023
>the contemporary Western legal system
Well that's a bit of a generalisation isn't it? Where do I even begin here?

>>836023
No, because it values property over human life and freedom.

>>837916

In what way?

>>836023
define "just"

Which one, OP? We have two.

>>837916
>the ability to own property
>not a requirement for freedom

wew lad

>>836023
Better question: Is lifelong imprisonment really more "humane" than the death penalty? How about forced labour? How do these compare to banishment? Isn't it the most humane punishment?

>>838046
>Is lifelong imprisonment really more "humane" than the death penalty?

It certainly is, because murdering people who are not a threat(they are in a 4x4 cell), is immoral.

>>838058
immoral =/= inhumane
surely robbed his freedom for life the subject suffers more than being swiftly killed. both are inhumane of course, unlike banishment, which retains the subject's freedom to move and live freely, although somewhere else.

>>838046

>Is lifelong imprisonment really more "humane" than the death penalty?
Absolutely. I think executions should be banned in general, if only because there's a chance of a person being wrongly convicted. However, I do think people that are in prison for life should get an option to end their own life should they so choose.
>How about forced labour?
Depends on the amount and type of labor, but I don't see what's so wrong about forced labor on a core conceptual level.
>How do these compare to banishment?
Banishing criminals doesn't do anything other than put the potential burden on other countries/states. It's the most humane punishment in some cases, but it's the biggest crapshoot by far.

>>836113
The question was "is it the most just," not "does it function the best?"

>>836034
https://youtu.be/Iw-pvCREZTY

>>838046
>How about forced labour?
That goes against human rights hon. Nowadays (in Europe anyway) prisoners are offered work with under the minimal level wages. I heard some lawyers wanted to change that because theorically they're allowed, as human beings, normal wages, but that could lead to less work for everyone because of prison budgets so it will probably stay like this

>>838161
>the most just
Justice's goal isn't to be just or fair. If it were fair, stealing food wouldn't be judged as an offense if you were really poor and hungry and the owner of that bread you stole was really rich and mean to you.
If justice happens to be just it's purely unintentional

>>836039
>>836113
>>836686
>>836779
Name a system from the past that was more just.

File: 1407941884503.jpg (22KB, 324x299px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 324x299px

>>838198
>If it were fair, stealing food wouldn't be judged as an offense if you were really poor and hungry and the owner of that bread you stole was really rich and mean to you

File: 1409737066351.jpg (83KB, 598x658px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 598x658px

>>836023
>Western legal system
Wat? We share a legal system with other western countries?
Also istn "just" relative to the individual system? I mean wouldnt sharia if its used consistently be just by definition because it sticks to the legal framework it made up?

In theory, yes.

In practice, no.

What's wrong with needing money to gain the system's favor? Fuck poors.

>>838625
Your choice of Common or Civil.

>>838599
not that guy, but I believe in some countries this is a thing.