Page 4 of 7 [ 112 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

NarcissusSavage
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

11 Feb 2012, 10:41 am

This is not directed to me, but I have answers to these questions. (My own answers, of course)

meems wrote:
What lead you to your beliefs about what is or isn't realistically possible in the scope of criminal rehabilitation?

The better question isn't what is possible with rehabilitation; it’s whether we should rehabilitate at all. Certain crimes cannot be taken back, once you cross a certain line, you should not be allowed back, and certainly shouldn't be coddled by society. Some actions are too heinous to allow rehabilitation.

meems wrote:
And how did you come to the conclusion that if a criminal can't be rehabilitated or made fit for reintegration into society, that the correct option is to end the person's life?(other than the drain on taxpayers)

Many crimes, most even, should have rehabilitation and prison time. Lock them up, fix em, let em go when they're safe and productive. But locking someone in a cage, stripping them of freedom, is cruel, it is torture. Death is a better option.

meems wrote:
Are there crimes that you believe warrant a lifetime in prison but not a death sentence?(if so, could you name some?)

No. Life sentences are not for people. They are for monsters, and they should be put down, not locked up.
meems wrote:
Which crimes do you believe strip a person of their humanity?

Committing an act that strips a person(s) of their humanity.

meems wrote:
Is there anything else you believe strips human beings of their humanity?

It can be taken. If it is, the perpetrator should be executed.

You destroy another human being; you give up your right to your own life. Take a life, and yours is void.


_________________
I am Ignostic.
Go ahead and define god, with universal acceptance of said definition.
I'll wait.


JNathanK
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,177

11 Feb 2012, 10:46 am

I don't agree with giving the state the power over life and death, as they've historically had a tendency of extending capital punishment beyond violent criminals to non-violent political dissidents and advesaries.



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

11 Feb 2012, 11:04 am

artrat wrote:
abacacus wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
artrat wrote:
How do you know if they can never be rehabilitated? If you ruled the world then many people would already be dead. To make capital punishment legal is an abuse of government power. Capital punishment is hypocritical. It's okay for the government to commit murder but it is not okay for anyone else. I believe people that support are one step away from becoming sociopaths. To support it so strongly is quite sick if you ask me.

QFT+!
you tell 'em! :)
give 'em hell, artrat :thumleft:


And to believe that all people can be rehabilitated is naive in the extreme. It's a dream, not reality. And as I'm sure you can understand, making a decision in the real world based off of a dream is not a very good idea.

And, if someone can't be rehabilitated, what possible excuse is there to keep them alive? On the taxpayers dime no less? Bullets are cheap. Kill them and get it over with.

You're right artrat, if I was in power a lot of people would be dead. I have no patience for some crimes, and I believe that anyone who commits them are stripped of humanity and are only fit to die before they re-offend.

I think that you are the naive one. Prisoners who have committed the most inhumane crimes have been rehabilitated in the past.
Many have found God while on death row. I don't understand how it is a dream?

The taxpayers waste more money on politicians then even comes close to what it costs to keep a prisoner alive.
I think that a human life is worth more than money.

Who decides when to strip a person of humanity? A failing government run by wealthy sociopaths or you?
I don't think that either has the right. It's a form of torture and yet you support it.

Many people that commit murders suffer from mental illness and don't know what the hell they are doing. should we just kill them for being mentally ill? If we don't then the greedy taxpayers will lose money.


since finding religion can look good to others i would hestitate to call anyone in that kind of pressure a true believer,


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


b9
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,003
Location: australia

11 Feb 2012, 11:09 am

i never use capitals.
i do not think that people who use capitals should be punished however.

doyyyy

off to bed i go
high ho
high ho
high ho.
how many 'ho's" are high
is something i will never know.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Feb 2012, 12:12 pm

JNathanK wrote:
I don't agree with giving the state the power over life and death, as they've historically had a tendency of extending capital punishment beyond violent criminals to non-violent political dissidents and advesaries.


Ah! You noticed.

Any rightful power the government has will soon be put to non rightful ends. It is the nature of government to grow worse with the passing of time.

ruveyn



artrat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,269
Location: The Butthole of the American Empire

11 Feb 2012, 12:33 pm

peebo wrote:
artrat wrote:
The taxpayers waste more money on politicians then even comes close to what it costs to keep a prisoner alive.
I think that a human life is worth more than money.


politicians are just the tip of the iceberg. the amount of resources thrown away on useless, conter-productive and ethically questionable activities is truly disgusting. i hate when people use this sort of cost argument in debates of this nature. it comes up all the time in the debate over the shocking treatment of the disabled and vulnerable in receipt of state benefits. it's simply a false argument.

Quote:
Many people that commit murders suffer from mental illness and don't know what the hell they are doing. should we just kill them for being mentally ill? If we don't then the greedy taxpayers will lose money.


you repeatedly come out with this line, but where are you getting this idea? the fact is that people with mental health issues are no more likely to commit violent crime than anyone else, in fact many of them are far more at risk of being victim to violence and manipulation.

mental health is only a factor in crime statistics where there are co-morbidities such as drug dependence etc which ultimately come down to poverty, and i would even argue that these co-morbidities are in actual fact the primary factor here, rather than mental ill health, which often itself is caused or exacerbated by poverty related issues.

i wouldn't certainly have had you down as a prejudiced daily mail reading type, but this specific line of reasoning is treacherously close...

I believe that anyone that commits an inhumane crime has some sort of mental illness.
There has been some instances when a schizophrenic person has heard voices which caused them to commit a crime.
There are more people that aren't considered mentally ill that commit a murder then mentally ill. How do we know that they don't have a mental illness? I believe that most humans are good and something must be mentally wrong if the commit a cold-blooded murder.

I have nothing against the mentally ill and to say so is ignorant.
I don't even know how I come off as prejudice!


_________________
?During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" ~George Orwell

"I belive in God, only I spell it Nature."
~ Frank Llyod Wright


abacacus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,380

11 Feb 2012, 1:07 pm

meems wrote:

I have several questions, which seems aggressive sometimes I think, but I'm not looking for a defense of your beliefs, I'm just trying to get a better understanding of what you're saying.

What lead you to your beliefs about what is or isn't realistically possible in the scope of criminal rehabilitation?

Logic and common sense. Some people simply can't be rehabilitated. Some of them are very mentally unstable, some of them are stable but just don't care, it happens. Some people aren't capable of being in society.

And how did you come to the conclusion that if a criminal can't be rehabilitated or made fit for reintegration into society, that the correct option is to end the person's life?(other than the drain on taxpayers)

Also logic. If someone can't become at least neutral in society, it is a waste of time and resources to keep them alive.

Are there crimes that you believe warrant a lifetime in prison but not a death sentence?(if so, could you name some?)

No. If someone is going to spend the rest of their lives in jail with no chance of parole, there is no need to make that life any longer than the time necessary for one or two appeals.

Can you tell me very specifically what you mean when you use the word "humanity" in the context of the above quoted post?

Humanity in this case would be... well... humanity. After some crimes I don't think we should treat the criminal like a human being.

Which crimes do you believe strip a person of their humanity?

Murder, rape, child abuse (not punishment, abuse) in physical mental and sexual forms.

Is there anything else you believe strips human beings of their humanity?


Nothing that comes to mind.


_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.


abacacus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,380

11 Feb 2012, 1:22 pm

artrat wrote:
I think that you are the naive one. Prisoners who have committed the most inhumane crimes have been rehabilitated in the past.
Many have found God while on death row. I don't understand how it is a dream?

The taxpayers waste more money on politicians then even comes close to what it costs to keep a prisoner alive.
I think that a human life is worth more than money.

Who decides when to strip a person of humanity? A failing government run by wealthy sociopaths or you?
I don't think that either has the right. It's a form of torture and yet you support it.

Many people that commit murders suffer from mental illness and don't know what the hell they are doing. should we just kill them for being mentally ill? If we don't then the greedy taxpayers will lose money.


It is a dream because not everyone will be rehabilitated. It will not happen. Some will, some won't. That is why it is naive :wink:

Politicians are a necessary evil. Keeping some criminals alive, not so much. You may believe that life is worth more than money, but reality says you're wrong. Lives can be bought and paid for. A human life is worth next to nothing, no matter what you believe. Reality is what is real, and it does not line up with what you believe.

Torture? A quick death is hardly torture. What about the torture the criminal inflicted on the victims of his crimes? Justice for the victim, not the criminal.

That depends on whether or not they can learn to function in society. If they will always be dangerous, then yes they should be killed. It's much the same as removing a cancerous tumour from a body, you kill the malignant cells so that the body may survive. However, if they are no danger to people, there is no reason to kill them.


_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.


meems
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,869

11 Feb 2012, 1:43 pm

League Girl, I know what you're talking about, but Texas hardly abides by that.

NarcissusSavage, I appreciate your input but I may have failed to ask the right questions... I'm not looking for a blanket statement like "some crimes can't be undone" to explain the beliefs, I'm looking to understand what specifically makes (not just you or posters here, but many people) people certain of the belief that one can distinguish one type of killing from another in terms of morality.

And I assume the belief holds that the execution of criminals is not something one would feel remorse for, how human life can be either deserving of protection, or the absolute opposite, deserving of elimination.

I'm trying to get a clear understanding of that.

What my brother did profoundly impacted my perception of what taking human lives means... He brutally slaughtered three of the most important people in my life. Lehya and Andre weren't my children, but I was heavily involved in their care, and I don't know how parents survive losing their children. Eight years have passed and I am pretty functional most of the time but I have come to accept that I may never stop feeling like he cut my heart out too.

I wanted a clarification of what humanity was meant to convey because the only definition I can think of that fits into the context it's being used is the shared psychological traits of humans, fear, aggression, empathy, compassion.

I don't think Andre has any humanity. He cut their hearts out and calmly placed them in his pockets to deliver to the trash can at his place, then went to the police or maybe the sherriff's office I don't remember... and I don't think it's a matter of public record that he wasn't confessing, he was doing his duty as a man of "god" to report to the proper authorities that he had slayed some demons. He had no humanity. He was so far gone, I don't know what makes a person turn into that.

I'm trying to understand how anyone could be certain that ending a human life is the correct thing to do, or do that without remorse for the survivors of the executed person... unless they lacked humanity too.

And I don't think anyone posting in favor of the death penalty lacks basic humanity,(or specifically, I think that's highly improbable) which is why I'm asking what it takes for someone to reach the conclusion that people should be killed. I want to understand it from a better perspective, it all looks like the same thing to me on a moral level, when people can advocate executing anyone.

I can understand when people say that people like Andre should be killed, I can actually see compassion in that notion.

But I'm having a hard time understanding what lies behind the assertion that people who kill should be killed etc.



kestrel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jan 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 574
Location: Ohio

11 Feb 2012, 11:03 pm

abacacus wrote:
It is a dream because not everyone will be rehabilitated. It will not happen. Some will, some won't. That is why it is naive :wink:

Politicians are a necessary evil. Keeping some criminals alive, not so much. You may believe that life is worth more than money, but reality says you're wrong. Lives can be bought and paid for. A human life is worth next to nothing, no matter what you believe. Reality is what is real, and it does not line up with what you believe.

Torture? A quick death is hardly torture. What about the torture the criminal inflicted on the victims of his crimes? Justice for the victim, not the criminal.

That depends on whether or not they can learn to function in society. If they will always be dangerous, then yes they should be killed. It's much the same as removing a cancerous tumour from a body, you kill the malignant cells so that the body may survive. However, if they are no danger to people, there is no reason to kill them.

This strikes me as incredibly cynical. We have a penal system - a philosophy underlying the penal system, even - which criminalizes an expanding swath of society for victimless infractions, and the lower rungs on the economic ladder get dragged into the social decay that mars every inner city in the country. The biggest component of this philosophy is the cheapening of that which is common; namely, life. Work is cheap. The environment is cheap. Animals are cheap. Human beings are cheap. Everything is cheap except for those large corporations which feed off the decay. They're quite valuable and their stock prices prove their worth.

And capital punishment is a bandaid to cover the problems caused by the same philosophy which formulated the solution. You can talk all you want about the cheapness of human life, but its valuation must be measured in like kind - dollars and cents are paper and a nearly devalued base metal medium. At worst, dollars and cents are just bits on a screen - hardly worth anything in reality. They're only worth something in the imaginings of a huge amount of human beings. Imagination isn't reality, though. I have no interest in paper and zinc. I'm only interested in living my life, and that medium of trade - worthless, as it is in reality - is the absurdity of living in modern times.



abacacus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,380

12 Feb 2012, 1:12 am

kestrel wrote:
abacacus wrote:
It is a dream because not everyone will be rehabilitated. It will not happen. Some will, some won't. That is why it is naive :wink:

Politicians are a necessary evil. Keeping some criminals alive, not so much. You may believe that life is worth more than money, but reality says you're wrong. Lives can be bought and paid for. A human life is worth next to nothing, no matter what you believe. Reality is what is real, and it does not line up with what you believe.

Torture? A quick death is hardly torture. What about the torture the criminal inflicted on the victims of his crimes? Justice for the victim, not the criminal.

That depends on whether or not they can learn to function in society. If they will always be dangerous, then yes they should be killed. It's much the same as removing a cancerous tumour from a body, you kill the malignant cells so that the body may survive. However, if they are no danger to people, there is no reason to kill them.

This strikes me as incredibly cynical. We have a penal system - a philosophy underlying the penal system, even - which criminalizes an expanding swath of society for victimless infractions, and the lower rungs on the economic ladder get dragged into the social decay that mars every inner city in the country. The biggest component of this philosophy is the cheapening of that which is common; namely, life. Work is cheap. The environment is cheap. Animals are cheap. Human beings are cheap. Everything is cheap except for those large corporations which feed off the decay. They're quite valuable and their stock prices prove their worth.

And capital punishment is a bandaid to cover the problems caused by the same philosophy which formulated the solution. You can talk all you want about the cheapness of human life, but its valuation must be measured in like kind - dollars and cents are paper and a nearly devalued base metal medium. At worst, dollars and cents are just bits on a screen - hardly worth anything in reality. They're only worth something in the imaginings of a huge amount of human beings. Imagination isn't reality, though. I have no interest in paper and zinc. I'm only interested in living my life, and that medium of trade - worthless, as it is in reality - is the absurdity of living in modern times.


I concur with the first paragraph for the most part.

As far as the second paragraph goes, not so much. Money is worth something because of imagination, yes, but it hold real value. I can go to the store, and with those dollars and cents procure whatever that store is selling (assuming I have enough of them). Life can be bought in much the same way, hence I say it is cheap. I can buy a life by hiring a hitman, or simply take one by killing someone (at low or no monetary cost, cheap).


_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.


kestrel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jan 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 574
Location: Ohio

12 Feb 2012, 1:18 am

abacacus wrote:
I concur with the first paragraph for the most part.

As far as the second paragraph goes, not so much. Money is worth something because of imagination, yes, but it hold real value. I can go to the store, and with those dollars and cents procure whatever that store is selling (assuming I have enough of them). Life can be bought in much the same way, hence I say it is cheap. I can buy a life by hiring a hitman, or simply take one by killing someone (at low or no monetary cost, cheap).

Did you know that if you melt a pre-1983 penny, it's worth 2.5 pennies in terms of its constituent metal composition? A post-1983 penny in total value, melted, is worth $0.0055. The value is entirely subjective - imaginary, and the basis of a consensual delusion.

On the other hand, a bullet, I'm sure, is worth more than the sum of its component parts, provided a gun to fire it. This is the only reason our currency has any value - real or imaginary.



abacacus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,380

12 Feb 2012, 1:28 am

kestrel wrote:
abacacus wrote:
I concur with the first paragraph for the most part.

As far as the second paragraph goes, not so much. Money is worth something because of imagination, yes, but it hold real value. I can go to the store, and with those dollars and cents procure whatever that store is selling (assuming I have enough of them). Life can be bought in much the same way, hence I say it is cheap. I can buy a life by hiring a hitman, or simply take one by killing someone (at low or no monetary cost, cheap).

Did you know that if you melt a pre-1983 penny, it's worth 2.5 pennies in terms of its constituent metal composition? A post-1983 penny in total value, melted, is worth $0.0055. The value is entirely subjective - imaginary, and the basis of a consensual delusion.

On the other hand, a bullet, I'm sure, is worth more than the sum of its component parts, provided a gun to fire it. This is the only reason our currency has any value - real or imaginary.


Correct. A bullet is quite cheap to make, the added value is there both because of the time spent to create, ship, and store the bullet and also a mark up that is there just because we will pay it.


_________________
A shot gun blast into the face of deceit
You'll gain your just reward.
We'll not rest until the purge is complete
You will reap what you've sown.


kestrel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jan 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 574
Location: Ohio

12 Feb 2012, 1:32 am

abacacus wrote:
Correct. A bullet is quite cheap to make, the added value is there both because of the time spent to create, ship, and store the bullet and also a mark up that is there just because we will pay it.

It can also be used to enforce the arbitrary order imposed on human beings by other human beings who enjoy the advantages of a currency they control and may devalue at will. The cancer in society is this maladaptive and improper view of value in terms of material commodities that are, in reality, nearing the worthless end of the spectrum. Human life has value - but that value is not weighed in dollars and cents.



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

12 Feb 2012, 4:11 am

I think it would be interesting to see if there is a significant difference in empathy between pro and anti death penalty people.



donnie_darko
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,981

12 Feb 2012, 4:14 am

kestrel wrote:
I oppose capital punishment.

I have a very simple reason for opposing it. I don't like the idea of treating symptoms of a problem (so some people can sleep better at night) than treating the cause of the problem itself. It's a foolish approach to everything from medicine to engineering. It's no less foolish when discussing penal systems.


Yeah, I feel like the death penalty is mostly about making the average person feel better about themselves. It's no different than when you were a kid and enjoyed seeing your siblings get punished when they made a mistake, it's just on a much larger scale.