I'm sure this gent is a lovely human, the photo is to illustrate my point. |
In the wake of evil acts we are left to grasp at solutions.
That’s a good thing. We all want to reduce malignancy
in the world.
Many of our solutions turn to arguments, assertions,
and aspersions on both sides because we often start our arguments in
pre-existing camps where our tent-pegs of opinion are driven into concrete
instead of soft ground where they can be moved if/when confronted with a
compelling bit of new information.
Today let’s offer not a solution, but perhaps a
deterrent. I say only perhaps, as I have no idea how to truly get inside the
mind of evil scum nor do I have a desire to do so.
The deterrent I offer may be distasteful to some, trivial
to others, and it has zero guarantee of success but…if you’ve got the time hear
me out.
I offer the following ideas with zero expectation for
anyone to take them seriously as one…
My idea calls for a change in the Constitution which
is anathema to approximately half of the United States.
Me? I’ve got no problem with changing the Constitution,
we’ve done it before and for damn good reasons. Article 1, Section 2 for example
counts some humans as only 3/5ths a person and excludes Indians altogether.
We’ve also changed it for poor reasons, prohibition
and taxation comes to my mind.
Lest my gun-owners out there think I wish to alter the
2nd Amendment, stand down.
Not at all.
I’m for sensible gun regulation but it seems the
gun-genie is out of the bottle and I have seen no reasonable data that suggests
deeper 2nd Amendment changes would have altered any of our shootings
to the present moment.
My constitutional changing eye is on the 8th
amendment.
The 8th in full: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor
cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
My change has nothing to do with bails or fines and has
all to do with cruel and unusual punishment.
A change to the 2nd Amendment acts as an infringement
on the rights of all citizens,
with heaviest burden on the law-abiding gun-owning citizenry.
My change in the 8th would only
fall upon those who have been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt of crimes
that are considered exceptionally heinous in nature, mass shootings for example.
My argument is not one of capital punishment, which more
than a few states do still have, although good data shows that the lengthy duration
between incarceration and enacting the punishment offers little to no deterrent
effect. That’s a problem.
If there is no deterrent effect then the killing of a
human is merely an act of Old Testament vengeance, I’m not necessarily against vengeance,
but here I am more concerned with deterrence, preventing future acts rather than
flailing away after the fact to little effect for future victims.
We also have the not uncommon, “Oops! We’ve got the wrong guy” problem.
My faith in the effectiveness of bureaucracies makes
me leery of passing along the power to kill when it has little to no deterrent
effect.
Also, it seems that many shooters have no problem taking
themselves out, taking capital punishment off the table and leaving us to
wrangle with what they have left in their wake.
But still, that is not the crux of my proposed constitutional
change.
I offer that in cases where we have decided beyond a reasonable
doubt, “Yep, this piece of scum is the malicious
turd” why not take the “unusual punishment” route?
A non-lethal unusual punishment route that by-passes
the morass of capital punishment arguments and bases our deterrent effect on the experiment of using shame as a tool
for good.
We know that SEAL Team Six appropriated scads of porn
favored by Osama bin Laden.
What if, rather than withholding that porn for national
security reasons [BTW-My porn is in a file marked “State Secrets”], we released
his un-pious porn preferences to allow the world to see what the vaunted
villain was pulling his “My God is better than your God” pud to?
What if with every malignant bastard we put to trial
with guilty results we focus not on their selfie they think makes them look
like a bad-as wannabe, but their “I thought
I deleted that” dick pics?
What if their porn search histories and logged hours
of self-stimulation were made public record just as much as their currently
fair-game search histories of extremist site views?
Another fine human. |
What if along with easily accessible mug shots your
post cold prison shower non-sexual government-mandated naked photo was also on
display forever?
I see no logical argument against such photos, such
practices. If convicted we can take your right to freedom, why not your right to
privacy?
This punishment is non-lethal, and perhaps not so unusual
as many regular folks and celebrities have been made subject to such unwanted
attention.
If Jennifer Lawrence can survive it with dignity intact,
surely some “bad-ass” asshole with a rifle can do the same.
My constitutional amendment calls for no violence.
My constitutional amendment calls for no infringement on
law-abiding citizens’ rights.
My constitutional amendment simply takes the narrative
of bad-ass or “troubled loner” posterity away from the bad-actors of the world who
want us to see them as memorable and turns them into perpetual laughing stocks,
a legacy they may not have had in mind.
My constitutional amendment is on one hand silly, but
I am deadly serious about it.
Would it have a deterrent effect?
I don’t know, but at this point could it hurt to try?
Let’s make losers losers forever and leave no foothold
for the next loser to see something cool about being mocked and shamed for eternity.
Comments
Post a Comment