Noted this in a comment above, but restating it here: If someone has wronged me or my family or society at large in some kind of serious manner, rehabilitating is not really a concern for me. I think they should be punished. Plain and simple.
Not really.
I hope you or your family are never hurt by a criminal. However, if that does happen, I assume you will be okay with the criminal going to a summer camp where they sing songs, play games, and eat bonbons. ;)
Well, I won't call you a liar. I've seen people do this before, and I've always been just... confused.
> I want what is best for my community, and retribution is not.
I think this is the crux of the disagreement.
My belief is that retribution is the immune system of civilization.
Have you engaged with any justice system that isn't based on retribution? Have you seen the results they achieve? Norway is the classic example. They give more lenient punishment for crimes, their prisons are vastly more comfortable, and actively try to educate their prison population. All things Americans (as a general point) would scoff at.
The result? Norway has a vastly lower recidivism rate. 20% vs 75+% in the US. Norway is a uniquely good example, but similar results play out across Northern Europe.
Most people here who live in SF have done just that, not by their own choice - and the results are not pretty. "Restorative" justice might or might not work in places like Norway, but let's just say other implementations have been quite bad.
That compassion and concern for the wider community is this alien to you is sad.
I haven’t been, but I’ve been close with multiple people who have been wronged personally (near-deadly assault, unprovoked, all cases unrelate) and they all came around quickly to not wanting any vengeance on the assailant, legal or not. I was surprised, frankly.
In all cases survivors just wanted to move on, and simply not hear about the perps.