Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 100

Thread: The Crime Thread - Cause, Effect, Sentencing, Empathy

  1. #51
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,961
    Quote Originally Posted by CypressDahlia View Post
    Eliminating a threat to our society without having to cough up tax dollars to support a felon for the rest of their life. We essentially provide for them from food to clothes to facilities. We don't do that for all of our upstanding citizens. We don't do that for our cops, who regularly give their lives undoing the damage of criminals. So why are we responsible for the people who hurt us? Especially people we've never met, therefore could have done nothing to provoke their criminal acts?
    First of all, is your argument that money is more valuable than human life? Second, okay, I'll accept your argument. All criminals should be immediately executed upon being found guilty because as you have pointed out, we should not pay to upkeep their lives when we do not do this for other people. The logical conclusion is that all criminals should be executed. This is not a strawman, this is the logical outcome of your argument.

    It also demotes amoral activity, just as putting them in jail does. It seems strange to fight for the humanity of a person who has deliberately committed an inhumane act. Why should we try to redeem these people?
    It must be nice to have so little empathy and compassion for your fellow man. I imagine your life is very easy and cozy, isn't it?

    Let me put it in crude and inhuman terms, since you might relate better. When your car is not doing what it is supposed to, what do you do? Do you destroy the car, or call it bad? Or do you examine the car, try and find out what is wrong with it, and then try and correct that?

    Actually, yes. The purpose of justice is to punish.
    I was not aware. Do you have any other nuggets of wisdom to share with me? See, I always thought that protecting the innocent and rehabilitating the guilty was more important, but I guess it's all about punishment for you.

    Our court system exists to determine the degree and necessity of punishments. In truth, punishment and rehabilitation are not so far apart. Punishment is also a conditioning method. And I'm usually one to give a person the benefit of the doubt, but to believe we can rehabilitate those who are deemed so lethal and dangerous to warrant execution is a little lofty, even for me.
    In Texas criminals are made to take a test known as the Hare Psychopathy Index. It is not recognized by psychiatrists. If you score a 19 or higher on this test, you are eligible for execution.
    In some counties, being gay is grounds for execution.
    But you're right - there's definitely no way that the people on death row can ever be helped. An mistakes certainly never happen.

    Besides, you have to do quite a bit in America to be sentenced to death.
    Like "live in Texas" or "be accused of serious crime and don't be white" or "fail a psuedoscientific test."

    So it's not like we're just picking off any 'ol criminals. And it's not like they're blindsided by it, either. Earning yourself a death sentence has to be a pretty deliberate thing. That's not to say everyone who has been sentenced to death was sentenced fairly. Just saying the death sentence itself is neither unfair or illogical.
    Fairness is not justice. Revenge is fair, but it is not just.

    And I don't see how eliminating a lethal criminal is //not// protecting the innocent. Criminals, even in jail, are the burden of the innocent. We are paying our criminals for hurting us. What kind of justice is that? I also don't see how a life sentence is any more effective than a death sentence.
    Eliminating a criminal is protecting the innocent, yes. But it is also murdering a person who could theoretically redeem themselves. However slim the chances of rehabilitation are for any criminal, they are still greater than for a corpse. If only one death row inmate in the entire history of humanity ever rehabilitated himself that would still be an infinitely greater rate of rehabilitated criminals than if we execute people.

    And again, I agree. The innocent should not have to pay for the guilty. We should execute all criminals.

    EDIT: Cype, are you aware that Judge Dredd was just entertainment and not, in fact, a how-to for life?

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  2. #52
    Lord of Death jubeh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Space
    Posts
    12,829
    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    Cype, are you aware that Judge Dredd was just entertainment and not, in fact, a how-to for life?
    Bullshit. Enjoy your ban.

  3. #53
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,961
    I AM THE LAWRR

    EDIT: They are making a new movie, if you did not know. Here's hoping it does not suck.

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  4. #54
    Devilish Member Black_Shaggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Somewhere near the Grus Quintet
    Posts
    739
    The reason why you can't see what I mean by human beings being equal is you've become jaded in your own ideas on why shit in the world today is fucked up (please...please qoute me on this when you harshly try to destroy my point of view). Yes. YES wer ARE equal because we're created in the same way, we have the same potential for comprehension & we all have the same choice (some call this free will) to do what may or may not be considered right and wrong. Again, condition...any condition does NOT play into this equality at all.

    Go ahead & call me an idiot if you will. I don't care what you or anyone has to say on the matter of equality. I think you're confusing what people do as what defines their equality. That's not what I was saying at all. Just because someone does soething doesn't make the any more or less human because it is the very ability to make a moral choice that [I believe] is one of the qualities that make us human in the first place. Since we all possess this ability & there's no way to measure it...we're all equal in that ability. We possibly the only sentient beings on this planet & if we can't see that we're all essentially the same sickens me. Your words sound just as close minded to me as some of the fucked up humans that you've used to argue that we're not equals.

    And when did I ever say that I'm not in judgement of what others do? That's a ridculous notion. Even the most devout Christian who's been taught that only God can judge mankind judges mankind. This is just another example of where humanity is equal. You're judging me right now & trying argue that what I am saying without even atempting to get the gist of what it is that I'm trying to say.

    You're so stuck on what you believe as the truth dude that you're blind to the ideas of others.

    Fuck dude, we all know that Constantine divided the Roman empire was split into two empires: the East & the West. We know that when Odoacer deposed Romulus who ruled the Western Empire in 476 AD is the accepted military fall of Rome. Shit, we know that Rome exists today. I was speaking of the political & economical actually. You know...the coruption in the government...the declining value of Roman coin...all of these things caused the pepole to revolt. That weakened the power structure even more. By the time the Visigoths paid them a visit in 410 AD, they didn't have much a leg to stand on. 42 years later it was an easy task for Atilia to put them out of commision. None of this could've even happened...as slowly & as painfully as it did without the people rising up against the corruption of thier government & the merry-go-round of ceasars that could not control a populace as vast as Rome was. Kodos, you focus far too much on semantics my friend & you're quick to condemn someone without even trying to understand what they're talking about.

    Of course, you will dissect all of this and find error in my logic and my wording. That's cool. But I still think we're all equals.

    Anyway...


    Because executing criminals demonstrably has no effect in lowering crime rates, demonstrably has led tot he murder of many innocent people, creates a culture in which vengeance is seen as an adequate substitute for justice, and in no way contributes to justice? What does murdering criminals accomplish? What is accomplished in practical or moral terms by executing a criminal as opposed to keeping them in prison forever?
    If you were to look into the matter you will find that the death penalty (execution) does actually deter the crime of murder.

    Also it's not like the purpose of justice is to protect the innocent and rehabilitate the guilty. It's to punish, amirite?
    It's my belief, and this is only a matter of opinion, that the purpose of justice IS to protect the innocent & to rehabilitate the guilty.

    Go head. Yell at ne some more.

  5. #55
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Black_Shaggie View Post
    The reason why you can't see what I mean by human beings being equal is you've become jaded in your own ideas on why shit in the world today is fucked up (please...please qoute me on this when you harshly try to destroy my point of view). Yes. YES wer ARE equal because we're created in the same way, we have the same potential for comprehension
    We do not all have the same potential for comprehension. Intelligence is at least partly genetic. And we are not all created the same way. Some humans are born with birth defects, others fare unusually well in the genetic lottery. Some humans are born into crushing poverty, others into decadent wealth.

    Almost no two humans come into the world with the same genes and social class, let alone memetic influences.

    we all have the same choice (some call this free will) to do what may or may not be considered right and wrong.
    Free will does not exist. Also schizophrenics and other people with serious mental illness do not have the same degree of agency as neurotypical people.

    Again, condition...any condition does NOT play into this equality at all.
    Again, I'm arguing for human value being determined by actions and beliefs, not condition. What are you arguing against?

    Go ahead & call me an idiot if you will. I don't care what you or anyone has to say on the matter of equality. I think you're confusing what people do as what defines their equality. That's not what I was saying at all. Just because someone does soething doesn't make the any more or less human because it is the very ability to make a moral choice that [I believe] is one of the qualities that make us human in the first place.
    It does not make them less human, but it makes them a bad human. They are equal in that they are both human beings, but they are not equal in other standards. A genius is not any more human than a mentally retarded man, but the former is certainly more intelligent. They are not equal in intellect. Carl Sagan and Adolf Hitler are not equal in moral character.

    Since we all possess this ability & there's no way to measure it...we're all equal in that ability. We possibly the only sentient beings on this planet & if we can't see that we're all essentially the same sickens me.
    Adolf Hitler and Carl Sagan are not essentially the same. They are equal only in that they are both homo sapien sapiens, they both lived on Earth, they both were born and died before the present, they both ate food, and other trivial equalities. They were not equal in any context worth caring about - contributions to humanity, intellectual merit, moral character, etc.

    Your words sound just as close minded to me as some of the fucked up humans that you've used to argue that we're not equals.
    Because saying that not all humans are equal in moral character and intellectual merit and should be judged and treated accordingly in interpersonal relations and moral judgments is equivalent to saying that Jews, Roma, Sinti, Poles, and other ethnic groups are not human and ought to be exterminated. Okay.

    And when did I ever say that I'm not in judgement of what others do? That's a ridculous notion. Even the most devout Christian who's been taught that only God can judge mankind judges mankind.
    To judge something is to proclaim an inequality. Unless you judge things equally. To judge one man trustworthy and another not trustworthy is to recognize and proclaim an inequality in trustworthiness.

    This is just another example of where humanity is equal. You're judging me right now & trying argue that what I am saying without even atempting to get the gist of what it is that I'm trying to say.
    I get what you say better than you do. You don't understand what you are saying because you are spouting talking points devoid of real meaning or weight. You cannot say every human is equal in practice while also claiming to judge people.

    You're so stuck on what you believe as the truth dude that you're blind to the ideas of others.
    I've heard this so many times it's not funny. No. I'm open to any and all ideas. I just refuse to embrace ideas that are bad or lack sufficient justification.

    Fuck dude, we all know that Constantine divided the Roman empire was split into two empires: the East & the West. We know that when Odoacer deposed Romulus who ruled the Western Empire in 476 AD is the accepted military fall of Rome. Shit, we know that Rome exists today. I was speaking of the political & economical actually. You know...the coruption in the government...the declining value of Roman coin...all of these things caused the pepole to revolt. That weakened the power structure even more. By the time the Visigoths paid them a visit in 410 AD, they didn't have much a leg to stand on. 42 years later it was an easy task for Atilia to put them out of commision. None of this could've even happened...as slowly & as painfully as it did without the people rising up against the corruption of thier government & the merry-go-round of ceasars that could not control a populace as vast as Rome was. Kodos, you focus far too much on semantics my friend & you're quick to condemn someone without even trying to understand what they're talking about.
    Rome would have fallen with or without the people rising up. Rome fell because of numerous factors, but it would have gone down the same without the people rising up, as you claim. Weak leadership and declining military might were more than sufficient.
    And I only bring up semantics when it is necessary.

    If you were to look into the matter you will find that the death penalty (execution) does actually deter the crime of murder.
    This is objectively false.

    It's my belief, and this is only a matter of opinion, that the purpose of justice IS to protect the innocent & to rehabilitate the guilty.
    That was mine too. Could you really not detect the sarcasm?

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  6. #56
    Devilish Member Black_Shaggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Somewhere near the Grus Quintet
    Posts
    739
    Ha! I like Kodos. You rock!

    Okay. Some weight to my argument then. I'll try not to spout empty words at you.

    It is a matter of opinion that free will does or doesn't exist. Seeing as I do believe it does, perphaps my perception of all human beings being equal is more a metaphorical claim. I do see your point that actions & beliefs define humanity too. People with birth defects & the like go further to proove your argument of inequality as well.

    I guess if were to boil what I'm trying to say down to its essence, what I mean is that we all have a choice in our actions. Perhaps this doesn't define us all as being equals. I do feel that humans seem to wind up doing similar things in similar situations though. I apologize for 'beating a dead horse' too, but I won't make any excuses.But I feel that we're all the same though. I mean, why else would we all be considered a species if we didn't essentialy possess the same basic quailites? I know that people will act as individuals & do different things than someone else. We all find different solutions to the same problems too. Maybe what I'm trying to say (but can't find the right words) is that we're equals because we all possess the same ability to come up with our own conclusions in how to act or react to something?

    I still can't say that we're not all equal. But I do see your point. I just can't fix my mind to hold someone in a position greater & lesser than my own & this is a personal hang up I suppose. Who am I to say that I am better than someone else because of my choices in life? Who's say that they're better than I am because of the choices that they've made? I mean if they're choices, then the action or reaction of that choice doesn't make the ability to make a choice & act upon it superior or inferior...right?

    I went to same source as you did on the execution thing. Maybe I was reading the graphs wrong I dunno. But despite the fact that not having the death penalty in a state lowered the crime rate more, having the death penalty did deter the crime as well.

    I get your sarcasam dude. I like to keep shit going sometimes just to be sarcastic myself actually!

    That's why I've been arguing my point so hard all along. Basically, at least in my mind, this is really a matter of personal opinion. Of course, you don't agree & will more than likely tell me why it's not & I welcome it with open arms.
    Last edited by Black_Shaggie; 09-03-2011 at 11:42 PM.

  7. #57
    Super Senior Member CypressDahlia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,317
    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    First of all, is your argument that money is more valuable than human life?
    No. You asked for a practical benefit of execution and I gave you one. I thought the quote -> rebuttal format would clearly show that. I'm not saying money is more valuable than life, I'm saying the innocent shouldn't be forced to take responsibility for criminals. This is not to say that nobody should. If I thought money was more important than life, I would be on the same boat with the many of the criminals I condemn.

    This is not a strawman, this is the logical outcome of your argument.
    Not really, considering people sentenced to life/death are hardly "all criminals". To quote myself: ..."without having to cough up tax dollars to support a felon for the rest of their life." You asked how execution is more beneficial than a life sentence.

    I imagine your life is very easy and cozy, isn't it?
    Irrelevant. Don't expect me to have empathy and compassion for serial killers and rapists. I evaluate who deserves my empathy and compassion on a case-by-case basis. Those people failed that evaluation because of what they've done. This is, on a more personal level, exactly what the court does when sentencing the guilty. Am I wrong?

    When your car is not doing what it is supposed to...
    Any car can be fixed with the proper tools and knowledge. Humans aren't quite that programmable. I hope you understand this is a bad analogy.

    I always thought that protecting the innocent and rehabilitating the guilty...
    Punishment, like other forms of conditioning, is a type of rehabilitation. Also, I don't see how I'm against protecting the innocent. In fact, the reason I support death sentences is for that purpose exactly.

    In Texas...And mistakes certainly never happen.
    Quote Originally Posted by me
    That's not to say everyone who has been sentenced to death was sentenced fairly. Just saying the death sentence itself is neither unfair or illogical.
    Seriously?

    Like "live in Texas" or "be accused of serious crime and don't be white" or "fail a psuedoscientific test."
    Now you're just being melodramatic.

    Fairness is not justice. Revenge is fair, but it is not just.
    I would like you to define justice, then.

    Eliminating a criminal is protecting the innocent, yes...
    I'm not saying rehabilitation shouldn't be practiced. But I'm saying there is such a thing as a lost cause. Besides, rehabilitation, even when deemed "successful" is hardly foolproof. How many people are released and violate their parole? How many repeated offenders? How many people just end up in jail again? Every time rehabilitation fails, more innocent people are harmed. To be entirely honest, I would rather take the life of a criminal than let him ruin that of innocent people a second time. Rehab is just about as foolproof as the Hare Psychopathy Index.

    And again, I agree. The innocent should not have to pay for the guilty. We should execute all criminals.
    I never said we should execute them. I said justice isn't served if the act of the criminal is still the burden of the innocent. It should be the burden of the criminal and only himself. The only person who should be punished for a crime is the perpetrator.

    Cype, are you aware that Judge Dredd was just entertainment and not, in fact, a how-to for life?
    No, because I grew up playing that on Super Nintendo and modeled my life after him. I even have a funky Captain Falcon helmet emblazoned with golden wingflaps.
    Last edited by CypressDahlia; 09-04-2011 at 12:11 AM.

  8. #58
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,961
    I. "Justice isn't served if the act of the criminal is still the burden of the innocent. It should be the burden of the criminal and only himself. The only person who should be punished for a crime is the perpetrator."
    II. Any criminal housed in any prison for any amount of time is a burden on the innocent who must pay for the upkeep of the prison, it's staff and the prisoner.
    III. Justice is not served if dangerous criminals are not kept isolated from society and instead are allowed to freely prey upon the innocent.
    Conclusion: Justice can only be served by immediately executing any and all criminals.

    That is your argument. The only premise I have added is the third. This is a deductive argument, and if you cannot fault one of the premises, or demonstrate a flaw in reasoning, then the conclusion must follow. The first premise is your own argument, verbatim, and the second is an undeniable fact.

    Thanks in advance.

    EDIT: I just realized, an alternative conclusion would be to ship any and all criminals to an abandoned island and to leave them to fend for themselves. So you can add that as an alternative for the conclusion. So the death penalty, or exile to an uninhabited land.

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  9. #59
    Super Senior Member CypressDahlia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,317
    Quote Originally Posted by Kodos View Post
    I. "Justice isn't served if the act of the criminal is still the burden of the innocent. It should be the burden of the criminal and only himself. The only person who should be punished for a crime is the perpetrator."
    II. Any criminal housed in any prison for any amount of time is a burden on the innocent who must pay for the upkeep of the prison, it's staff and the prisoner.
    III. Justice is not served if dangerous criminals are not kept isolated from society and instead are allowed to freely prey upon the innocent.
    Conclusion: Justice can only be served by immediately executing any and all criminals.
    Well, you've hit the nail on the head regarding my thoughts on dead-end criminals. Criminals sentenced to life are not only the greatest possible burden to the innocent but also share the same fate as death row inmates. So why should we sustain their lives if it's going toward the same end? It's not like a lifetime prisoner has a chance to be rehabilitated anyway.

    As far as other criminals are concerned, send them to isolated work camps. Make them work for the commodities they are otherwise handed on a silver platter. Make them produce profit that goes toward their own maintenance costs. Why are we giving criminals freebies when average law-abiding people are working for their commodities? They should at least be doing the same.

  10. #60
    Palindrome Member ClockHand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    4,789
    wow, are you talking about pro-slavery?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •