Saint of the Confucian way

Many people pondered over the name of robber law, while Fang Yun continued to speak.

"Therefore, it is very simple to judge whether a law is a just law or a robber law. If a law tends to protect victims and potential victims, it must be a just law. If a law tends to protect murderers, it must be a robber law."

"I use an example to illustrate why some laws are robber laws rather than just laws."

"If someone swindles, for example, he says he wants to do a big business, let his relatives and friends lend him money, and then double it back to his relatives and friends. But in fact, he takes the money as his own, spends it lavishly, and then deceives his relatives and friends that he has lost money."

"As we all know, the punishment of fraudsters in various countries was not capped before, and there were capital crimes. However, some countries now believe that all fraudsters should not be sentenced to death because they did not kill directly. However, the fraudster's business is not over. The cheated people have no money, and even some people borrowed money from others to fraudsters. These people are difficult to do as usual As a result, some of them committed suicide, and even the whole family took arsenic to commit suicide, killing dozens of people. "

"According to the current laws of some countries, this fraudster has been exiled for up to 20 years, but in fact, this criminal has done far more harm to the society than ordinary death penalty criminals. They have indirectly killed too many people. Any righteous ethnic group will think that such people deserve death. However, if a country thinks that such criminals can not die no matter how many people they have indirectly killed, This means that the law of this country does not protect the victims to the maximum extent, and also gives up the maximum protection of the nationals who may be killed in the future. It is protecting the murderer and the robber law. "

"Then, what is the maximum protection of citizens? Very simply, eliminate the direct factor endangering citizens, that is, the existence of murderers. Therefore, the existence of the death penalty is to maximize the protection of good citizens."

"Some Legalists like to say that once a criminal realizes that he has committed a capital crime, he will abandon himself and intensify his efforts, and he will die anyway. If this logic is true, there will inevitably be another criminal who would not commit a crime because of the death penalty, but it is found that without the death penalty, no matter how many crimes he commits, he can't die, so he simply acts recklessly and changes his nature Intensify. "

"In fact, really ferocious criminals are not afraid of any threat. Whether they have the death penalty or not, they will commit heinous crimes. Not so ferocious criminals often give up their crimes because they are afraid of death. So, are more ferocious criminals abandoning themselves and increasing destruction and killing, or more people who are afraid of the death penalty and reducing destruction and not killing? We don't have exact data, I don't know Knowing the result, I can't open my mouth like some Legalists and say that the death penalty will not deter criminals, but will make them worse. "

"There is a lot of evidence that after the abolition of the death penalty in a region, vicious crimes will increase sharply, so that some regions have to restore the death penalty after the abolition of the death penalty. Moreover, in different regions with similar wealth, the vicious crime rate of regions with the death penalty is often lower than that of regions without the death penalty. Of course, there are a few regions with different results, but they can only be reduced For example, it doesn't make any sense. "

"Others believe that everyone's life is equal. It's wrong for the murderer to kill people. We have no right to deprive the murderer of his life. If we do, we are equal to the murderer. At first glance, this view is very reasonable."

"We should understand that a person has not only one life, but also a lot of existence, his feelings, his concerns, his experience, his ability, his contribution, etc. in him, there are other people's sustenance for him. He carries the love of his parents, the feelings of his relatives, the feelings of his husband or wife or children, the friendship of his friends, and the country The mission of family and ethnic groups. A person is an infinite collection. "

"Well, the murderer killed the victim, not only the victim's personal existence, but also the feelings placed on him by his relatives and friends. Do relatives and friends have the right to punish him? I think so. The murderer killed a member of the country and ethnic group, representing the strength of the country. Do they have the right to punish him? I also think so."

"Some people say that because there will be unjust cases, the death penalty will lead to the killing of good people in vain. Then, if there is no death penalty, there will be no unjust cases? According to this logic, since there may be unjust cases, we can simply give up justice and not catch all criminals. This is a typical reason that children will understand. We know that we may choke to death when we eat So what we have to do is to avoid choking, not eating! "

"There are all kinds of statements, but they can't avoid a problem. The executors of the law can do their best to ensure that the death penalty criminals really deserve to die. However, what can those who oppose the death penalty do to ensure that no more innocent people will be killed? They can't do it, they will only talk there, because they don't die."

"There is another purpose for a few Legalists to abolish the death penalty. Like the means used by the robber group I mentioned before, that is, in order to master greater power, the Legalists must formulate a new legalist standard, and only the Legalists can understand, explain and apply this standard. Only in this way can the Legalists take charge of the law alone. Imagine, if everyone can film What will be the status of the Legalists if they can use the law when they ring the law? Therefore, the Legalists must monopolize everything related to the law, deny the original moral standards and rebuild their own legal standards. "

"This explains why the Legalists do not use the generally applicable moral standards of the human race, but create or borrow various new theories and standards, and then formulate laws according to the new standards. In Jingguo, this is not allowed to happen!"

Fang scanned the venue with cold eyes.

Many Legalists feel guilty because Fang Yun is right. In order to protect their own interests, the Legalists continue to influence the law. In fact, they are another form of bandit group.

Fangyun Road: "Then, will there be bandit laws for good ethnic groups? My answer is that there will be. Some people will wonder, doesn't it mean that the descendants of good ethnic groups don't have the blood of robbers? Yes, some people don't have the blood of robbers, but like robber ethnic groups, some people clearly realize that they are far more likely to commit crimes than ordinary citizens, which is very consistent with the instinct of robber descendants."

"Let's take an example. Will a farmer who can only farm land think he is more likely to commit crimes than others? No. because his desire may be great, but his strength is very small. He can't do bad things even if he wants to do bad things."