“This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn” How is the murder and rape of an innocent comparable to the punishment of a murderer and rapist?
How do you measure reform? Are their limits to what should be reformed? Do the risks of relapse ever outweigh the benefit of reform? An example to consider are the France Shooters or the Boston Marathon Bomber.
It doesn't work with everyone (that's why we have prisons), but AFAIK it's not that uncommon for people to tunr their lives aeound in this way. Most criminals are not inherently sadistic: they do care about other people. Their upbringing and circumstances just lead them to a bad place and they ended up taking that out on someone else.
That doesn't mean they aren't repsonsible for their actions or that they shouldn't be punished, but it doesn mean that they can often be rehabilitated with the right support. And that's generally a win-win scenario where it is possible.
Reform is better than revenge. Not only would society lose a bad person, we'd gain a good one.
> How about asking questions, then torturing, then killing. You'd get the cake and eat it, too.
This would serve only to turn good people into that which they condemn.