Prison justice

[Meshugger]

Lol justice

 

Lol good and evil

 

Death penalty is stupidly flawed as a concept, and is, in fact, an incentive for people not to obey the law. I mean, if there's a (remote) chance that I might be randomly killed by the state, what's the point in being a rightful, law-abiding citizen? After all, there's no guarantee I'm not going to be punished as if I had broken the law, in a very drastic and quite permanent way.

 

Also, death penalty is a waste of valuable resources. Why kill criminals when you can have them build the Four Gorges Dam? Sadly, forced labor is terribly underrated.

 

A human being is only human as far as he is able (and most importantly, willing) to act as such (the problem here lies in defining "human" from a moral standpoint, but that's a different issue). Otherwise, he's no human being, but simply a base animal. Human rights don't generally apply to animals, save in extreme examples of legislative idiocy. The idea that just because one is born a Homo sapiens sapiens one has a number of rights that can't be revoked under any circumstances is almost as ludicrous as it is random.

 

No need for me to state my POW, you just did it perfectly.

 

And stop the childworship-syndrome. A felony doesn't change by age of the person doing it or whom doing it to.

[Judge Hades]

I do agree that the Death Penalty is not a deterrent, but I do disagree with the resources spent. If we can make the appeals process more streamline and efficient and keep the cost of executions down the death penalty would cost a whole lot less than having a prisoner in for life.

[Colrom]

It is wrong for people to take it upon themselves to maliciously mark/mutilate other people.

 

It is not suprising that some prisoners would cut up and mark another prisoner or even worse if provided the opportunity. After all, they are in prison because society has determined they did something seriously wrong already. They had trouble in the past telling right from wrong.

 

It is disappointing they were given the opportunity to commit such a time consuming crime while in prison.

 

Those who support this are lucky to be out of jail themselves - saved perhaps by not having stumbled yet into the circumstances that seem likely to induce them to this kind of violence.

 

Edited October 1, 2006 by Colrom

[Dark Moth]

[Judge Hades]

Colrom, he will recieve no sympathy from me. The bugger deserves much much worse. Maybe you should put that sympathy towards his victim who is dead and buried.

Edited October 1, 2006 by Judge Hades

[Colrom]

It's not a question of sympathy so much as a question of right and wrong.

 

You seem to be thinking of the situation in "us vs them" rather than "right vs wrong" terms. Crimes of mutilation are similar in character to crimes of sexual abuse. You shouldn't let yourself be drawn by anger and a yearning for vengence into supporting that type of behavior.

 

(Edited to remove an uncalled for comment.)

Edited October 1, 2006 by Colrom

[Judge Hades]

Colrom, as I said the man deserves worse than that. He gets to live a life where he never has to worry about where is next meal is coming from, nor does he have to worry about maintaining a roof over his head, nor medical bills. The same cannot be said about his victim.

 

There can never be a way to exact justice on this man as long as he lives so vengence is the only alternative.

[Dark_Raven]

He does have to worry about other inmates though.

[Judge Hades]

Yeah. He better not drop that soap. HA!

[Colrom]

Yes.

 

Now you feel the power of the dark side!

 

Let it flow through you.

 

[Dark Moth]

.......

 

Those who support this are lucky to be out of jail themselves - saved perhaps by not having stumbled yet into the circumstances that seem likely to induce them to this kind of violence.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not a huge fan of violence but that part made me laugh.

[Maria Caliban]

Gifted1:

"Ive always heard there was a "prison code" wherein other inmates consider child abusers the lowest on the totem pole and enact their own form of justice."

 

The irony of this is that we end up with men who've raped, assaulted, and murdered adults enacting 'justice' on those who've raped children by raping and assaulting them. After years in this environment, we release the criminals and wonder why they haven't reformed.

 

Walshingham:

"Wait... so you're saying its OK to torture people? So long as they're bad..."

 

Indeed. Moreover, if we find out a few years later that they weren't actually guilty, we'll just let them out and give them a balloon in apology.

[Maria Caliban]

astr0creep:

"And yet, animals have no laws, they live in chaos and all is perfect.

Why is that?"

 

It's perfect for the lion. Would the zebra say the same?

[LoneWolf16]

astr0creep:

"And yet, animals have no laws, they live in chaos and all is perfect. 

Why is that?"

 

It's perfect for the lion. Would the zebra say the same?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's perfect for the zebra. Would the grass say the same?

 

May not be an animal, but the principle is the same.

Edited October 2, 2006 by LoneWolf16

[thepixiesrock]

You haven't provided a counter point, you've just continued Maria's point.

[Surreptishus]

You haven't provided a counter point, you've just continued Maria's point.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

..and to an absurd extreme.

[alanschu]

1) If you are pissed off if one near you gets executed while being innocent HOW exactly would they go about and make him the suspect? Like I mentioned before; If they only kill people who are proved guilty with DNA the change is so small it is neglectable. Science made it possible again; and we should take advantage from that change.

 

DNA evidence is overrated, overstated, and not infallible.

 

I guess I should thank CSI.

 

 

2) Why counterproductive? People who value life would think twice before commiting a heavy crime; and public executions are an excelent way to scare off people who think going into the crime-scene...

It worked pretty fine in the past to scare off criminals and/or military leaders; why should *that* be different in the present time?

 

It actually didn't work at disuading people from committing capital crimes.

 

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V113/N53/morrison.53o.html

http://www.truthinjustice.org/922death.htm

http://www.indiatogether.org/combatlaw/vol...2/deathmyth.htm

http://www.aclu.org/capital/general/10441pub19971231.html

Edited October 2, 2006 by alanschu

[Nartwak]

Were you going somewhere with that Lonewolf16?

[Hildegard]

I like the way they deal with pedofiles in prison, right on.

[LoneWolf16]

Honestly, I have no idea where the hell that came from....been a long, long day.

[metadigital]

Colrom, as I said the man deserves worse than that.  He gets to live a life where he never has to worry about where is next meal is coming from, nor does he have to worry about maintaining a roof over his head, nor medical bills.  The same cannot be said about his victim.

 

There can never be a way to exact justice on this man as long as he lives so vengence is the only alternative.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So are you advocating the Muslim justice system instead? Perhaps honor payments, as well?

 

The whole point of removing people's liberty (and nothing more) is to show that we have a free society to live in.

[Dark_Raven]

I like the way they deal with pedofiles in prison, right on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Drop the soap.

[Judge Hades]

So are you advocating the Muslim justice system instead? Perhaps honor payments, as well?

 

The whole point of removing people's liberty (and nothing more) is to show that we have a free society to live in.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I am advocating that those who do such heinous crimes that they recieve life without possibillity of parole as their sentence should be executed. If there crimes are so great that they have no place in society then they forfiet their life as well.

[alanschu]

So you'd have little problems if the government in power, which you have been exceptionally critical of, started determining what "heinous" crimes are?

 

 

An interesting thing I found while looking around is that the studies have a disproprotionate amount of murder convicts that get executed tend to be both poor and from minorities. People without high quality legal counsel (i.e. public defenders) tend to have juries and judges consider their crimes more worthy of execution moreso than those that can afford higher quality attorneys.

 

There's also the idea that the government serves as an example of the correct way of how things should be done. In other words, an eye for an eye is perfectly acceptable.

Edited October 3, 2006 by alanschu

[LoneWolf16]

So you'd have little problems if the government in power, which you have been exceptionally critical of, started determining what "heinous" crimes are?

 

 

An interesting thing I found while looking around is that the studies have a disproprotionate amount of murder convicts that get executed tend to be both poor and from minorities.  People without high quality legal counsel (i.e. public defenders) tend to have juries and judges consider their crimes more worthy of execution moreso than those that can afford higher quality attorneys.

 

There's also the idea that the government serves as an example of the correct way of how things should be done.  In other words, an eye for an eye is perfectly acceptable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So a guy who kills a bus load of people, one at a time, methodically, and constantly screams that he'd do it again, and again, while in prison....should be kept alive, taking up tax dollars?