but, i mean, it's not the disincentive game that i'm focusing on. if bezos wants to kill his wife badly enough, he's going to do it, regardless of the consequences.

to me, there's just little justice in punishing somebody. retribution is some kind of blood lust; it's authoritarian, designed to keep a system in order for the benefit of the rulers. any crime is only wrong in this context because it's upsetting the order, and threatening the king's authority over the people. that's a fundamentally warped concept of law.

the common law, which centralizes tort, is more based on ensuring that people actually right the wrongs they commit. it's about undoing transgressions, about making sure that if somebody is harmed then they're compensated for it.

not retribution, but reconciliation, as best as is possible. just make it right; make it whole.

again: call me a barbarian. but, i know which side of the danube was free and which one wasn't.