Justice goes to the dogs

Today's oversimplified notion

The trouble with our judicial system… well, one problem with it: From the standpoint of modifying unwanted behavior it's ridiculously ineffective. If one sues another person who has wronged him, even if one wins the case, the amount of time that will have elapsed makes it so any punishment levied against the wrong-doer is not associated with the action, so it leaves lingering resentment but not actual behavioral change.

If one were house training a puppy, when the puppy performed the unwanted action (taking a crap in the house), one would not hire an attorney, collect evidence, wait months, and then convince a jury that the puppy should get punished, then mete out the punishment and expect the puppy to learn that it should not do what it did. Only by immediately associating a negative consequence with the unwanted action would there be any reasonable chance of the puppy getting the message and modifying its behavior.

Am I suggesting that people are like dogs in the way we learn? Of course not.

Dogs actually want to learn how to avoid punishment by doing right. People want to learn how to avoid getting caught so they can continue to do wrong. It's not the same at all.

However, to the extent that people can be taught lessons that do result in genuine behavioral modifications (not just the appearance of them when the authorities are around), waiting months is unlikely to do the trick.

Am I suggesting that we need "frontier justice" back, where everyone carries a gun and disputes are resolved without involving the courts? No, I'm not suggesting that. (Besides, the way the economy is going, it may only be a matter of time before that happens anyway, so really, what's the point of implying it's good?)

I'm not saying I know how to deal with such situations in a way that isn't tantamount to lawlessness; I'm just saying that B.F. Skinner never would have gotten a dog to salivate by going through a judge and jury.