Perspectives on Non-Violence

[George]

Assuming medical and neurological science advances sufficiently far, I would like to see seriously violent criminals (I mean, the truly dangerous), upon being convicted by a jury of citizens, sentenced to a medical procedure such a brain surgery to remove the capability or desire to engage in violent acts. It would only be used after all procedures had been pursued, much as we enforce the death penalty now. They would be rendered harmless, possibly then even released.

While may suggestion may sound frightening to some, I believe it much more civil and humane than tossing people into hell hole prisons and throwing away the key, as we do today.

One potential problem - and perhaps the reason people see it as frightening - is that by performing an act that changing a person's nature significantly we could be seen as essentially killing that original person, even if the process also creates a new person out of that act. We can see from instances of traumatic brain injury, for example from automotive collisions, cases where friends and family of a seriously injured person descibed them as being a 'different person' after the injury.
My personal thoughts on this is that procedures such as brain surgery, or medical castration for some sex offenders, should be offered as an alternative to custodial sentences for some prisoners but only carried out with their consent.

On the matter of the death penalty I am totally and utterly against it - although would not necessarily refuse a prisoners request to ask for euthenasia when facing a long term, or permanent, custodial sentence, as we should be looking at ways to ensure the safety of society with minimum further suffering to all parties, including the perpetrator of the offense.

Gassho,
George

[Jundo]

One potential problem - and perhaps the reason people see it as frightening - is that by performing an act that changing a person's nature significantly we could be seen as essentially killing that original person, even if the process also creates a new person out of that act. We can see from instances of traumatic brain injury, for example from automotive collisions, cases where friends and family of a seriously injured person descibed them as being a 'different person' after the injury.
My personal thoughts on this is that procedures such as brain surgery, or medical castration for some sex offenders, should be offered as an alternative to custodial sentences for some prisoners but only carried out with their consent.

I agree with the first part, that it would change the original person ... perhaps substantially. However, locking someone away in a violent, rape-filled, squalid prison for years also seems to change people significantly too.

I also would be willing to perform the procedures "without their consent", just as now we lock people away (or execute them) without their consent ... based on a fair trial by jury, appeals and review.

Gassho, J

[Jakugan]

Hi Jenell,

Can't speak for Yugen but the way I interpret what he is saying is that he isn't condoning the violent actions that relate to Bin Laden etc, just that actions have consequences. This doesn't make it justified, just that you reap what you sow. That's what I think he is saying anyway.
I tend to agree with you about the brain surgery point. I can see what Jundo is saying in principle but the problem with such a punishment the principle upon such a proceedure should be administered appears to be abitrary. After all, how do you argue that one person should should get the treatment but that another should not? Also, if a person has been wrongly convicted of a crime and they have brain surgery, you cannot take back that mistake.

Gassho,

Simon

[Jundo]

But then, of course, who gets to determine who is the most violent of the violent?
I have to say I find this idea despicable.

That makes two of us. I find it despicable too.

It is just that I find it less despicable than dropping someone in a maximum security prison for life, let alone handing them the death penalty. In my vision, the recipient would be released back out in the world, able to marry and have kids, enjoy life peacefully, work and contribute to society. How is that "denying someone their humanity?" It seems like a restoration to me.

I guess the people who will decide who is the "most violent of the violent" would be the same who do now, the judges and juries that hand out the death penalty or "50 years to life" in Jail.

What I would really hope to see is a procedure that is reversible (yes, like that vasectomy that someone might later rectify). Then, we could also reduce the effect of wrongful conviction. Unfortunately, that is not something as easy to do now with the death penalty or wrongful incarceration in a hell hole prison.

Gassho, J

[Jundo]

Hi Jenell,

I would love to change the prisons, and the schools and the neighborhoods. I just spent the day listening to two episodes of This American Life that were stunning, both looking at a high school where students are subject to shootings and violence on almost a daily basis, a single school where 29 students were shot just last year. All the money and "good ideas" poured into the school have done little.

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/487/harper-high-school-part-one

When I was a chaplain volunteer for a Zen group in a maximum security prison in Florida a few years ago, I had a small taste of what our prisons are like. Inhumane.

I hope we can see a solution where, someday, violence can be regulated and controlled within the human brain so these individuals can be returned to productive life. For example, how about an implant that would be able to detect hormonal releases and neurological impulses associated with anger/violence and chemically counter-act them before the person has a chance to do harm? That seems a far cry from the "lobotomy" you think I am proposing. I would like to see violent individuals robbed simply of their tendency to extreme anger and violence, leaving the rest.

In fact, I am sorry to say this ... but it is only a matter of time, and the technology is around the corner.

Gassho, J

[Jakugan]

Hi Jundo,

You are starting to convince me a little more with what you are saying. However, I sense a slippery slope. If it is acceptable to physically change a person's brain so that they act a certain way, what's to stop people arguing about the same surgery being used to change someone's political views or any other part of someone's personality for that matter. The possibilities of missuse seem endless. Where do we draw the line?

Gassho,

Simon

[Jundo]

Hi Jundo,

You are starting to convince me a little more with what you are saying. However, I sense a slippery slope. If it is acceptable to physically change a person's brain so that they act a certain way, what's to stop people arguing about the same surgery being used to change someone's political views or any other part of someone's personality for that matter. The possibilities of missuse seem endless. Where do we draw the line?

Gassho,

Simon

Yes, I agree.

And what is to stop someone from sending political dissidents today to Siberia, prison camps, torture, mental hospitals, execution. Unfortunately, that goes on around the world now ... and is no better.

What keeps this from happening (Guantanamo aside) in our Western countries? Why, a system of courts and trials with constitutional protections, appeals, checks. That is what prevents the "slippery slope" now, and what can prevent it in the future.

Gassho, Jundo

PS - VERY dangerous to disagree with me, Simon and Jen. I know a doctor who can change your mind ... literally!

[McGettigan]

I would like to share with everyone my rather idealistic dream ... maybe even too radical for the taste of many.

First, I would love to see developed countries such as the United States answer violence ... even something like the destruction of the World Trade Center ... by turning the other cheek, responding by spending the same billions of dollars in the military budget by building schools, hospitals, roads and other "good will" projects in the countries of our enemies, "killing them with kindness" instead of bullets. It would be an all out effort to win the hearts and minds of those who hate.


Gassho, J

I agree. Turning the other cheek is often a misunderstood passage. Though your comment expresses the correct meaning . Christ made the comment in response being hit by a soldier or a person who held greater social power than the one taking the hit. The common practice was to hit with the back of the hand, the way one would hit a dog. To turn the cheek wasn't to offer yourself to further subjugation, it was to take the hit and respond by turning to face your aggressor, this time offering the other cheek. Meaning, force them to hit you with the palm of their hand, as an equal. It's a powerful message about non-violent protest.

The message doesn't say take it. It rather says to fight back on your terms, which are non-violent.

And I've thought a lot about something Alan wrote in the request for Metta for Boston. He mentioned the suffering of one becomming the suffering of many. On a philosophical level, to stop the suffering of one (say the bomber in boston before the race), would stop the suffering of all those who died or were hurt and their families. And what happens if that requires ending someone's life?

I don't have an answer. But on a personal level, I have been in a situation where I acted violently to stop someone from harming someone else. And though I struggle with the meaning of that situation, and others, I ultimately believe it was the right thing to do in that moment.

Gassho,
John

[Jakugan]

PS - VERY dangerous to disagree with me, Simon and Jen. I know a doctor who can change your mind ... literally!

I retract my statement now! .

Gassho,

Simon

[Yugen]

Jennell wrote,
"But who is meting out this karmic justice? If we do it it's not justice, it's revenge, isn't it? If we can't give life back to someone who deserves it because of great karma deeds and right living, then maybe we shouldn't think it's okay to take someone's life just because they deserve to die. Not for us to decide, not for us to act."

Hi Jenell,
I struggle with the idea of sanctioned killing, whether by drones, or special operations soldiers, or whatever. I struggle with the idea of killing, period. I am not addressing the issue of "who gets to decide" or anything of that type. I am just observing that karma is unerring - almost like the Newtonian principle of gravity - what goes up must come down. There is a corresponding physical or universal response to every action that restores equilibrium. It may not be immediate, or take place today or tomorrow or next year, but ultimately the universe restores equilibrium. I am not applauding or condemning how OBL was waxed or how his remains were handled - simply observing that I am not surprised he met the end he did.

Simon's comments were in line with my intent -

Deep bows
Yugen

[Jakugan]

@ Jundo.

I still see problems with regards to brain surgery. Democracies are not immune from missuse of power either (Guantanamo is a prime example, there are unfortunately too many others) and I feel this would open up a can of worms. Checks and balances can work in theory but gives too much trust to those in power (eg: they didn't stop Hitler from coming to power in democratic Germany). The same applies to prison of course but I see less complexity from the problems that come with it. The way I see it, there seems little appetite for reform of the prison system in the uk. Start changing the way people perceive justice. That would be a start.

Gassho,

Simon

[tedmac]

Utah Phillips wrote about Ammon Hennacy:

...he had to reach out and grapple with the violence, but he did that
with all the people around him. These second World War vets, you know, on
medical disabilities and all drunked up; the house was filled with violence,
which Ammon, as a pacifist, dealt with - every moment, every day of his life.
He said, "You got to be a pacifist." I said, "Why?" He said, "It'll save your
life." And my behavior was very violent then.

I said, "What is it?" And he said, "Well I can't give you a book by Gandhi -
you wouldn't understand it. I can't give you a list of rules that if you sign
it you're a pacifist." He said, "You look at it like booze. You know,
alcoholism will kill somebody, until they finally get the courage to sit in a
circle of people like that and put their hand up in the air and say, 'Hi, my
name's Utah, I'm an alcoholic.' And then you can begin to deal with the
behavior, you see, and have the people define it for you whose lives you've
destroyed."

He said, "It's the same with violence. You know, an alcoholic, they can be dry
for twenty years; they're never gonna sit in that circle and put their hand up
and say, 'Well, I'm not alcoholic anymore' - no, they're still gonna put their
hand up and say, 'Hi, my name's Utah, I'm an alcoholic.' It's the same with
violence. You gotta be able to put your hand in the air and acknowledge your
capacity for violence, and then deal with the behavior, and have the people
whose lives you messed with define that behavior for you, you see. And it's
not gonna go away - you're gonna be dealing with it every moment in every
situation for the rest of your life."

I said, "Okay, I'll try that," and Ammon said "It's not enough!"

I said: "Oh."

He said, "You were born a white man in mid-twentieth century industrial
America. You came into the world armed to the teeth with an arsenal of
weapons. The weapons of privilege, racial privilege, sexual privilege,
economic privilege. You wanna be a pacifist, it's not just giving up guns and
knives and clubs and fists and angry words, but giving up the weapons of
privilege, and going into the world completely disarmed. Try that."

Peace,
-Untei

[arnold]

Please everyone, read Enkyo's post

"I think we never can fully oversee the consequences of violence? Sometimes, after knowing all facts and reasons for others to go on the path of violence, we can get to the point where we maybe gladly would lie down our lives to end the cycle. I'm a Bosnia Vet and it will always stay with me weather the violence I used, carrying out orders, caused more harm than good? What are the consequences of taking a life and for those around the person that got killed by our hand? Can we ever fully oversee all and make such a decision? No, so we can never take a life based on our own decisions. Not in war, not in self defense and even not in death punishment of a criminal. A human never has the right to end the life of another human, no matter the circumstances. There is always another way.
I’d like to share something on this, that happened in my life.

I was in a NATO IFOR squad doing night patrolling close to Sarajevo once. We were wired and jumpy because of reports and briefings about danger levels in the area etc. Every shadow was a potential danger and as the night went on all of us got into a certain state of mind. In the early morning, I remember the sun coming out over the mountains, we came to a few houses built close together. Not a town really but more a road crossing. A small child was playing war and took an aggressive attitude towards us. He was just playing, came out running from the shadows with something in its hand. He was going to throw that something at us. Our guys in point saw him coming, never hesitated and gunned the poor kid down. I was the medic in the squad at the time and tried all I could to save the kid but failed in the end. People came out running and I sat on my knees near the shot kid watching mother and father take the it into their arms and then just walk away. Just walked away without a word! The image never left me since then.

Turns out later that what the kid had in his hand, was a CocaCola can, wrapped in silver paper. A self made grenade to play war with, like his hero daddy. It turned out a deadly grenade all right. So much for self-defense split-second decisions, made by humans. Like Forrest Gump once said: that’s all I have to say about this.

Goes to show we cannot take back what we do, even if the reasons for doing it were the right ones.

Gassho

Enkyo

"[/QUOTE]


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Enkyo, thank you so much for sharing something so deeply personal (and painful). This is very courageous of you. I must say that you have a much more intimate understanding of the consequences of the types of life and death decisions that are being discussed here than I do. I also have military experience but never deployed to a combat zone.

Honestly, your story silences me, I do not feel I have anything deeper to offer. I can only express my gratitude to you for your efforts to save that child, for the support and understanding that you offered to your fellow soldiers and your compassion for the child's family and community. Truly heartbreaking. This is Samsara, in the midst of tremendous suffering tremendous compassion and the willingness to have our hearts broken.

I hope that these words are of some small comfort to you but I am sure that they fall far short in the face of something so profound

With Deep Gratitude,
Arnold

[Jundo]

Hi guys,

I like to comment on this:

I think we never can fully oversee the consequences of violence? Sometimes, after knowing all facts and reasons for others to go on the path of violence, we can get to the point where we maybe gladly would lie down our lives to end the cycle. I'm a Bosnia Vet and it will always stay with me weather the violence I used, carrying out orders, caused more harm than good? What are the consequences of taking a life and for those around the person that got killed by our hand? Can we ever fully oversee all and make such a decision? No, so we can never take a life based on our own decisions. Not in war, not in self defense and even not in death punishment of a criminal. A human never has the right to end the life of another human, no matter the circumstances. There is always another way.
I’d like to share something on this, that happened in my life.

I was in a NATO IFOR squad doing night patrolling close to Sarajevo once. We were wired and jumpy because of reports and briefings about danger levels in the area etc. Every shadow was a potential danger and as the night went on all of us got into a certain state of mind. In the early morning, I remember the sun coming out over the mountains, we came to a few houses built close together. Not a town really but more a road crossing. A small child was playing war and took an aggressive attitude towards us. He was just playing, came out running from the shadows with something in its hand. He was going to throw that something at us. Our guys in point saw him coming, never hesitated and gunned the poor kid down. I was the medic in the squad at the time and tried all I could to save the kid but failed in the end. People came out running and I sat on my knees near the shot kid watching mother and father take the it into their arms and then just walk away. Just walked away without a word! The image never left me since then.

Turns out later that what the kid had in his hand, was a CocaCola can, wrapped in silver paper. A self made grenade to play war with, like his hero daddy. It turned out a deadly grenade all right. So much for self-defense split-second decisions, made by humans. Like Forrest Gump once said: that’s all I have to say about this.

Goes to show we cannot take back what we do, even if the reasons for doing it were the right ones.

Gassho

Enkyo

Yes, thank you Enkyo for opening and sharing this tragedy with us. Unfortunately, I know too many veterans from various wars and police officers ... some close friends and family ... who can share like tales of being involved in innocents, children, killed in the heat of combat. They all carry scars, and will do so forever. Even those who believe it was unavoidable feel the weight. Such is the weight of Karma.

I long ... I foresee ... a world in which our capability to do violence against each other has been evolved past. There will be a world without wars and violence.

I do feel that some wars ... although tragic ... are needed to preserve life and society (which is also a way of preserving life). Having had my own relatives die in the Holocaust during WWII (Jews in Poland, my grandparents' family although I did not know them), I believe that some wars may be necessary to fight true evil. On the other hand, they must be avoided at every cost, and some wars ... over nationalism, religion, land which all could share ... are not excusable.

I believe that you were there as a peace-keeper, a Bodhisattva's mission. You were protecting innocents. In the heat of the moment, an innocent was killed. It is tragic, it is something to carry always. It also may have been unavoidable in the circumstances, an accident on a terrible peace-keeping mission. It is my belief that one is truly not liable ... in society's law or Buddha Law ... for unintended actions short of true recklessness. Nonetheless, accident or not, we feel the weight of what was done.

Gassho, Jundo

[Andrea1974]

Imagining a world without violence would be like pretending that the ocean is just filled with dolphins...nope, there are sharks too...and they do have their function. Violence as a mean to keep things in balance is more than justified in my view. If you hit me or my wife I will surely hit you back...if not, guess wuat?...you will keep hitting me again. In deciding when violence is necessary and when it is not we may make some mistake such as the tragedy in Sarajevo the other reader was talking about; but tragedy...just like its opposite...is unavoidable.