Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    If the state imposes criminal penalties on innocent and h... — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Coercion that wrongfully restricts autonomy should be withdrawn rather than compensated.

    If the state imposes criminal penalties on innocent and harmless activities (e.g., walking on the beach), that coercion wrongfully restricts autonomy.

    Justice & PunishmentRights & Liberty
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Justice & PunishmentRights & Liberty

    Related

    Coercion that wrongfully restricts autonomy should be withdrawn rather than comp...The appropriate remedy for wrongful legal coercion is repeal of the offending la...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Justice & Punishment
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    The state's massive coercion of individuals within its jurisdiction is...83%When the state imposes punishment, it treats some people in ways that ...80%Imposing massive coercion on individuals is a presumptive violation of...77%Either state coercion is morally acceptable, in which case no special ...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: egalitarianism
    View source passageHide passage
    A difficulty with this view is that imposition of a massively coercive scheme either need pose no threat to individual autonomy or if it does pose a threat, does so only in circumstances in which the autonomy that is downgraded is worth very little. The law issues credible coercive threats that if, for example, I were to murder someone, I would be arrested, prosecuted, and subjected to capital punishment or a long prison sentence. If I have no desire whatsoever to murder anyone, the coercion sit

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective