We cannot lightly allow the perpetrator of a serious crime to go free simply because that person believed his actions were reasonable and necessary to prevent some perceived harm.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
It is more dangerous that even a guilty person should be punished without the forms of law than that he should escape.
If, at the limit, you can rule without crime, you cannot do so without injustices.
I think if we wish to live in any kind of a moral universe, we must hold the perpetrators of violence responsible for the violence they perpetrate. It's very simple. The criminal is responsible for the crime.
No one is truly free, they are a slave to wealth, fortune, the law, or other people restraining them from acting according to their will.
When public officials turn to financial gain for official acts, we have no choice but to prosecute.
Stripped of ethical rationalizations and philosophical pretensions, a crime is anything that a group in power chooses to prohibit.
Without private thoughts and actions, we can never truly be free.
If we were brought to trial for the crimes we have committed against ourselves, few would escape the gallows.
Our constitutionally-based criminal justice system places a high value on protecting the innocent. Among its central tenets is the idea that it is better to let a guilty person go free than to convict someone without evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
I come from the liberal side of thinking: Better one guilty man should walk free than one innocent man found guilty.