All in perspective I would say. I wouldn't be comfortable in prison on day or week 1, but 1 10 15 years later I am sure I would be comfortable in my surroundings. This then becomes a way of life and not so much punishment. I want punishment. Removing someones' personal responsibility for anything, feeding them giving them a gym to work out in a library to read in, tv to watch, everything we are paying to do in our lives, is hardly punishmentd4rkst4r wrote:
il take a stab at this. the comfort zone of a harden criminal is not the same for a first time offender, so you can't treat them the same. However, on the otherhand, all it takes is one murder to end up on death row...Would it be accurate to say that life in prison is worse for the non-hardened criminals while death is worse for hardened criminals? I never thought of your argument that way before, really changes the perspective.lowing wrote:
well I already made my argument for life in prison, and it went ignored so I will tell you.Jenspm wrote:
I understand the argument, but I disagree with it.
Although the victim may have been a better asset to society, and of higher value in that sense, the molester's right to life isn't of any less value than anyone else's - it can't be, it is, in my opinion, infinite - and no-one has the right to take it.
If faced with the choice of saving Ghandi or a child molester from a burning building? Ghandi.
If given a gun and a bullet, I'd kill neither.
If life in prison means, life of routine, life of responsibility, life of complacency and comfort zone. That is not a punishment.. If you favor life in prison with anxiety, and turmoil, you have won me over for life in prison.
As I said before, ex cons commit crimes for the sole purpose of going back to prison and their comfort zones. When life in prison really does become worse than death for criminals, and they fight to be executed instead of fight to stay alive, I will support life in prison.
For non violent criminals, a life time of rejection, and hardship should be deterrent enough not to commit crimes. It does not appear to be.Jenspm wrote:
If that is a regular occurrence, then that is obviously awful. It doesn't, however, mean we need to "toughen up" the prison cells. If someone wants to give up his free life to live in prison instead, then there is clearly something that has gone wrong in the process of getting him out of prison and into society. A solution to this can be improved support after release, or even improved follow-up during prison-time to prepare him for meeting the outside world.lowing wrote:
well I already made my argument for life in prison, and it went ignored so I will tell you.Jenspm wrote:
I understand the argument, but I disagree with it.
Although the victim may have been a better asset to society, and of higher value in that sense, the molester's right to life isn't of any less value than anyone else's - it can't be, it is, in my opinion, infinite - and no-one has the right to take it.
If faced with the choice of saving Ghandi or a child molester from a burning building? Ghandi.
If given a gun and a bullet, I'd kill neither.
If life in prison means, life of routine, life of responsibility, life of complacency and comfort zone. That is not a punishment.. If you favor life in prison with anxiety, and turmoil, you have won me over for life in prison.
As I said before, ex cons commit crimes for the sole purpose of going back to prison and their comfort zones. When life in prison really does become worse than death for criminals, and they fight to be executed instead of fight to stay alive, I will support life in prison.
Someone committing a crime for the sole purpose of getting back into jail isn't mentally unaligned, viscious or a real threat to society. The person is just having massive struggles in coping/integrating with the "outside world" and needs help rather than punishment.
The judicial system does not punish these people for life, it just so happens they are being released into a society that, like the ex can, has freedom to choose. To choose who it hires, to choose who it decides to accept or reject. To choose who will be socially acceptable.
Don't be all shocked and surprised when society decides and chooses to conclude based on a criminals past, that he is not worth taking a chance on.
They breathe?13/f/taiwan wrote:
i think we should let them live. what's the worse that could happen?
What does 'punishment' alone achieve exactly?lowing wrote:
In my mind, if you are willing to take an innocent life for your gains, then you are not really rational enough to think about deterrence or consequences. Those are not factors in my opinion. Punishment is.
What is the point of the criminal justice system if it doesn't achieve deterrence?
Fuck Israel
Punishment provides closure and justice for the victims family. If you want to call it revenge so be it.Dilbert_X wrote:
What does 'punishment' alone achieve exactly?lowing wrote:
In my mind, if you are willing to take an innocent life for your gains, then you are not really rational enough to think about deterrence or consequences. Those are not factors in my opinion. Punishment is.
What is the point of the criminal justice system if it doesn't achieve deterrence?
rehab for some, flat out punishment for others. ( those that violently harm innocent people)
Generally the system comprises punishment, protection of the public and rehabilitation - if appropriate.
But what is the real point of the system? Punishment without deterrence doesn't really achieve very much.
But what is the real point of the system? Punishment without deterrence doesn't really achieve very much.
Fuck Israel
q: what is the best deterrence for murder?Dilbert_X wrote:
What is the point of the criminal justice system if it doesn't achieve deterrence?
a: the death penalty. consistently applied, just like murder.
you see, murderers are 100% in applying death to someone else, and know that their chances of paying the same price are < 100%.
pretty good odds, hell i'd take them to Vegas with me if i could.
So how is it countries with the death penalty have higher murder and violent crime rates than countries which don't?burnzz wrote:
q: what is the best deterrence for murder?Dilbert_X wrote:
What is the point of the criminal justice system if it doesn't achieve deterrence?
a: the death penalty. consistently applied, just like murder.
you see, murderers are 100% in applying death to someone else, and know that their chances of paying the same price are < 100%.
pretty good odds, hell i'd take them to Vegas with me if i could.
Fuck Israel
i didn't know they did. can you cite your sources?Dilbert_X wrote:
So how is it countries with the death penalty have higher murder and violent crime rates than countries which don't?burnzz wrote:
q: what is the best deterrence for murder?Dilbert_X wrote:
What is the point of the criminal justice system if it doesn't achieve deterrence?
a: the death penalty. consistently applied, just like murder.
you see, murderers are 100% in applying death to someone else, and know that their chances of paying the same price are < 100%.
pretty good odds, hell i'd take them to Vegas with me if i could.
Looking at a few comparable Western nations
Intentional homicide rates per 100,000 population
United States 5.0
Canada 1.81
Australia 1.3
United Kingdom 1.28
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … icide_rate
You'd think the US would have no murders at all if the death penalty were any kind of deterrent, 2-4 times that of comparable countries.
Intentional homicide rates per 100,000 population
United States 5.0
Canada 1.81
Australia 1.3
United Kingdom 1.28
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … icide_rate
You'd think the US would have no murders at all if the death penalty were any kind of deterrent, 2-4 times that of comparable countries.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-03-13 16:29:08)
Fuck Israel
why? because we do impose a death penalty, in some states, inconsistently?
you see, murderers are 100% in applying death to someone else, and know that their chances of paying the same price are < 100%.
you see, murderers are 100% in applying death to someone else, and know that their chances of paying the same price are < 100%.
death penalty does not deter murder.
btw, states with capital punishment have a higher murder rate then those without.
btw, states with capital punishment have a higher murder rate then those without.
Typically the average murderer doesn't see much real benefit from murdering someone, compared with being killed themselves its not a good bet.burnzz wrote:
you see, murderers are 100% in applying death to someone else, and know that their chances of paying the same price are < 100%.
Fuck Israel
how do you know that, are you a murderer? because your trolling is killing me . . .
Its not as if the average murderer gains an extra life they can use in the future, so risking death to gain, what, money, turf, vengeance, notoriety or whtever is not a smart bet however you look at it.burnzz wrote:
how do you know that, are you a murderer? because your trolling is killing me . . .
Fuck Israel
I am not looking to hand hold anyone through any process of the criminal justice system. You fuck up you pay, Your personal choices do not matter to me. If you choose criminal behavior what happens to your sorry ass while in the system, or after is of little concern to me, that is solely your burden to carry. Only thing I care about is that you pay heavily for fucking up someone else's life, and routine comfort zone with free food cable, gym library and college is not paying heavily for your crime. It is ME paying heavily for YOUR crime.Dilbert_X wrote:
Generally the system comprises punishment, protection of the public and rehabilitation - if appropriate.
But what is the real point of the system? Punishment without deterrence doesn't really achieve very much.
Last edited by lowing (2011-03-13 16:45:33)
I don't care about what happens to people once they enter the justice system.lowing wrote:
I am not looking to hand hold anyone through any process of the criminal justice system. You fuck up you pay, Your personal choices do not matter to me. If you choose criminal behavior what happens to your sorry ass while in the system, or after is of little concern to me, that is solely your burden to carry. Only thing I care about is that you pay heavily for fucking up someone else's life, and routine comfort zone with free food cable, gym library and college is not paying heavily for your crime. It is ME paying heavily for YOUR crime.Dilbert_X wrote:
Generally the system comprises punishment, protection of the public and rehabilitation - if appropriate.
But what is the real point of the system? Punishment without deterrence doesn't really achieve very much.
I'm more concerned about discouraging people from committing crimes in the first place.
Wouldn't you prefer to have no crimes against you and your family than have to deal with the aftermath?
Fuck Israel
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterre … rder-ratesDilbert_X wrote:
Looking at a few comparable Western nations
Intentional homicide rates per 100,000 population
United States 5.0
Canada 1.81
Australia 1.3
United Kingdom 1.28
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … icide_rate
You'd think the US would have no murders at all if the death penalty were any kind of deterrent, 2-4 times that of comparable countries.
see above. death penalty states versus non- only a slight difference so i don't see that as conclusive
I am not concerned about discouraging people from committing crimes. If you have no conscience over what you do to others or how you harm them, there is no deterrence in the world that will stop you.Thus it becomes what the fuck we will do to your sorry ass if you hurt someone else.Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't care about what happens to people once they enter the justice system.lowing wrote:
I am not looking to hand hold anyone through any process of the criminal justice system. You fuck up you pay, Your personal choices do not matter to me. If you choose criminal behavior what happens to your sorry ass while in the system, or after is of little concern to me, that is solely your burden to carry. Only thing I care about is that you pay heavily for fucking up someone else's life, and routine comfort zone with free food cable, gym library and college is not paying heavily for your crime. It is ME paying heavily for YOUR crime.Dilbert_X wrote:
Generally the system comprises punishment, protection of the public and rehabilitation - if appropriate.
But what is the real point of the system? Punishment without deterrence doesn't really achieve very much.
I'm more concerned about discouraging people from committing crimes in the first place.
Wouldn't you prefer to have no crimes against you and your family than have to deal with the aftermath?
Yes I would prefer to have no crimes against anyone, but simply isn't the world we live in, nor, as stated above is there a deterrence to change that.
Interesting to say the least.I am not concerned about discouraging people from committing crimes.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
take shit out of context much?Spark wrote:
Interesting to say the least.I am not concerned about discouraging people from committing crimes.
Exactly, lowing isn't really bothered about crime, just the satisfaction of getting to punish someone after the event.Spark wrote:
Interesting to say the least.I am not concerned about discouraging people from committing crimes.
Of course there is, if people had a conscience they wouldn't commit crime at all, those without conscience need to be deterred by other means - like threatening their venal self-interest.If you have no conscience over what you do to others or how you harm them, there is no deterrence in the world that will stop you.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-03-13 19:03:43)
Fuck Israel
I will give ya a big fat karma if for once in your forum posting life, you would address what is actually posted, and stop taking shit out of context, dismissing denying, or redirecting arguments. Deal?Dilbert_X wrote:
Exactly, lowing isn't really bothered about crime, just the satisfaction of getting to punish someone after the event.Spark wrote:
Interesting to say the least.I am not concerned about discouraging people from committing crimes.
Whatever, you wrote it, you explain it.lowing wrote:
I will give ya a big fat karma if for once in your forum posting life, you would address what is actually posted, and stop taking shit out of context, dismissing denying, or redirecting arguments. Deal?Dilbert_X wrote:
Exactly, lowing isn't really bothered about crime, just the satisfaction of getting to punish someone after the event.Spark wrote:
Interesting to say the least.
Fuck Israel
I did explain it, in the rest of the post Dilbert.Dilbert_X wrote:
Whatever, you wrote it, you explain it.lowing wrote:
I will give ya a big fat karma if for once in your forum posting life, you would address what is actually posted, and stop taking shit out of context, dismissing denying, or redirecting arguments. Deal?Dilbert_X wrote:
Exactly, lowing isn't really bothered about crime, just the satisfaction of getting to punish someone after the event.