Thought of the Day 12.01.09

Consider for a moment the cumbersome process for incarcerating someone:

We have professional debaters present both sides of the issue.
We hear from as many witnesses as possible.
We give the accused a chance to defend himself or to say nothing at all, a choice which cannot be used to incriminate him.
We give him the right to confront all those who accuse him.
We carefully screen twelve jurors to prevent partiality or bias, then teach them the law, give them all available information, and require a unanimous decision.
In sentencing, information on character, background, and ongoing activities (or prior convictions) is presented so that the punishment fits the total context of the situation.
This is all overseen by a professional judge who operates within a complex system of appeals which takes a very long time to avoid the errors of haste.
And despite all of this, we still occasionally make mistakes.

So, if this is a reliable process for judging people, the question is, “How closely does your own mechanism for doing so resemble it?” I’ll let you judge what to do based on your answer.