So many of you seem concerned with attacking the effects of crime and not the causes. It's like the quack doctor who prescribes some medication to fix the symptoms of his/her patients while not helping them to the knowledge of the methods of the prevention of sickness. The disease will return and so the patients will flock back to the quack doctor for more medication. The quack profits by it and the clientele will grow in numbers. Prisons and rehabilitation systems attack the symptoms of a diseased society, but they do little or worse -- nothing -- to change the root causes of these problems. I think that the advocation of violence leads to its acceptance by society, sanctioned or not. An understanding of the proper way to die is a good thing but I do not think that a knowledge of the best ways to kill people will lead one to this knowledge. Knowledge of the proper way to live will reveal knowledge of the proper way to die. Besides, the Coliseums of the old Empire were meant to serve as a distraction to the populace in much the same way that television functions today; the Emperors knew they were giving the people something to think and talk about which would offer them some escape from their banal, unobserved existences. The Roman people saw the Empire abiding by the sword and so the sword became the way of life, either in service to the Emperor or service to the self in a life of crime. Violence has its place but I do not think that violence done in the service of the State, vengeance, or any other arbitrary human value is the correct usage. A greater understanding of human nature is what is needed to overcome the problems of our system of justice. We need to take a very close look at the systems that work in other parts of the world and we need to figure out why it is that these systems work. Then we will have to incorporate these reasons into our own system. Essentially, American culture has inherited Hammurabi's body of laws and although the words have changed the basic meaning is still the same: an eye for an eye. I believe it was Ghandi who said something to the effect that if everyone took an eye for an eye the world would be filled with blind people. And filled with blindness it is, in my opinion. People don't see so much of the hypocrisy inherent in our system of justice. Most would draw their lines separating black areas from white, figuratively speaking, when in reality there is so much gray area. Everyone's concept of justice differs from each other person's. This ties into the epistemological theory of a "higher" or objective justice but which among us can validly make the claim of a perfect understanding of this sense of justice?? There are things that are good for society and there are things that are bad. I think that positively reinforcing the negative aspects of our society is not a good thing; confinement and death accepted by society at large leads to society's greater use of confinement and death. I feel that we should provide positive reinforcement for the POSITIVE aspects of our society. We must set aside the wicked and offer greater encouragement to those people that are pursuing the good; the wicked will become good in order to partake of these incentives. I think that the way things are now, in America, there is more incentive to be bad and that is why we see corruption on so many levels. This trend must be reversed.