Originally posted by Evil DeadWhere's the line?
honestly, I don't care. Either contribute to society or GTFO........they got out.that's just two less ciminals for us law abiding citizens to have to worry about. Prison, hospital, death........all the same to me. They're off the streets, that's what's important.
You want people who smoke Marijuana to get shot?
What about Speeding? Jaywalking? Littering?
Originally posted by Bardock42
Where's the line?You want people who smoke Marijuana to get shot?
What about Speeding? Jaywalking? Littering?
for me, the line is drawn where the criminal is comitting a crime against another person, those law abiding citizens I was speaking of.
speeding, jaywalking, littering .....all are nuisances, which is why they aren't felonies. They fall in line with having your stereo up to loud. They are annoying but aren't hurting anyone.
If somebody commits a real crime (felony).......to hell with them. They obviously have no care nor respect for their fellow citizens so why have any for them? I don't care how they are removed from society, so long as they ARE removed....be it prison or bullet to the skull.
If you want to take people who annoy others with nuisance crimes and have public floggings to embarrass them, that'd be perfectly fine with me. Maybe they'd get the idea that the rest of us don't like to be annoyed by them.
Originally posted by Evil Dead
for me, the line is drawn where the criminal is comitting a crime against another person, those law abiding citizens I was speaking of.speeding, jaywalking, littering .....all are nuisances, which is why they aren't felonies. They fall in line with having your stereo up to loud. They are annoying but aren't hurting anyone.
If somebody commits a real crime (felony).......to hell with them. They obviously have no care nor respect for their fellow citizens so why have any for them? I don't care how they are removed from society, so long as they ARE removed....be it prison or bullet to the skull.
If you want to take people who annoy others with nuisance crimes and have public floggings to embarrass them, that'd be perfectly fine with me. Maybe they'd get the idea that the rest of us don't like to be annoyed by them.
Hurray, what a great world, with everyone in Jail cause they annoyed me.
Then again, I probably annoy some people to, lets not do that.
I do agree that the harm to society has be extremely limited (though, even criminals are part of society), but executing a human for stealing a pencil from some guy....nah, don't think that's that good.
Originally posted by Evil Dead
for me, the line is drawn where the criminal is comitting a crime against another person, those law abiding citizens I was speaking of.speeding, jaywalking, littering .....all are nuisances, which is why they aren't felonies. They fall in line with having your stereo up to loud. They are annoying but aren't hurting anyone.
If somebody commits a real crime (felony).......to hell with them. They obviously have no care nor respect for their fellow citizens so why have any for them? I don't care how they are removed from society, so long as they ARE removed....be it prison or bullet to the skull.
If you want to take people who annoy others with nuisance crimes and have public floggings to embarrass them, that'd be perfectly fine with me. Maybe they'd get the idea that the rest of us don't like to be annoyed by them.
There has to be some link though, between crime and punishment. You can't just say "if they're harming other people, kill 'em" well, you can say it but you'd be an idiot to. The thinking behind it seems rather paranoid and also puts absolutely no faith in any sort of rehabilitation.
The fact is, there are success stories where ex cons have become great contributors to society, just as there are those that go out and re-offend. The point is that you can't presume that there is no chance of rehabilitation, as it can and does work.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
That, or to prove he indeed acted in self defense.
Thats the thing though, because of reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence, they have to assume the guy is innocent until there is enough evidence for him to be proven guilty (I'm no expert, so if a "self-defense" defense works differently, my bad).
Because of a lack of witnesses and likely no conclusive forensic evidence (my thoughts being that, without any access to the evidence myself, the lawn wouldn't be overly telling in this scenario), they can't say for sure he killed them without it being self defense.
Though, to open this up a bit more, if he had criminal intent when he left the house, does it matter if it was self-defense? For instance, if a guy with a gun comes into a convenience store and starts to rob it, and I rush him and get shot for my efforts, can he use the "self-defense" argument?
Originally posted by Evil Dead
honestly, I don't care. Either contribute to society or GTFO........they got out.that's just two less ciminals for us law abiding citizens to have to worry about. Prison, hospital, death........all the same to me. They're off the streets, that's what's important.
I really really like your sentiments. You "say" what I think.
I'm also pretty sure you believe in rehab...so your comments are not just pure disdain for human life.
Originally posted by inimalistTruth be told, alot could have happened from the time he loaded the shotgun and the time he told them to freeze.
Thats the thing though, because of reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence, they have to assume the guy is innocent until there is enough evidence for him to be proven guilty (I'm no expert, so if a "self-defense" defense works differently, my bad).Because of a lack of witnesses and likely no conclusive forensic evidence (my thoughts being that, without any access to the evidence myself, the lawn wouldn't be overly telling in this scenario), they can't say for sure he killed them without it being self defense.
Though, to open this up a bit more, if he had criminal intent when he left the house, does it matter if it was self-defense? For instance, if a guy with a gun comes into a convenience store and starts to rob it, and I rush him and get shot for my efforts, can he use the "self-defense" argument?
I actually don't believe in rehabilitation. I know it's possible....but I also know the statistics for repeat offenders is extremely high.
to me the point is moot. There should be no need for rehabilition. Everyone raised in our society knows what is and is not acceptable, what is or is not against the law, what hurts or does not hurt other people. They know this BEFORE they commit their crimes. They are making a concious decision, weighing their odds of being caught or not. If they are, why should we put the time and money into "rehabilitating" them when their crimes really boil down to decisions they have made? Sure...somebody might say, "I won't kill someone again" or "I won't rob a bank again"......we may sway the decisions they make in the future to avoid getting caught again but hell, they knew the consequences the first time and didn't care. They knew what they were doing and decided to commit the crime anyway.
The only offenses I believe deserve rehabilitation are drug offenses for using, not selling. When a person uses drugs, they form a biological dependency on them. This takes away from their decision making process. Their body needs drugs just as it needs food. They should be rehabilitated. Everybody else knew the crimes they were committing to be wrong, knew their crime would hurt someone, decided to do it anyway so f-ck 'em.
In my own little perfect world, there would be no prison. Every person is taught what is acceptable by society and what is not. Everybody would be taught what is against the law and what is not, just as they are now. For those people who choose to commit crimes against others, showing they have chosen not to live in society by society's standards, bannishment to a desserted island. No imput from our society at all. Let all these criminals create their own separate society and see how much they enjoy living in it with criminals as bad or worse than them all around. Failing that, execution.
For those who commit lesser crimes, nuisances, no prison.......just embarassment. Put 'em in stocks like the old days.....let everybody walk past them for a week or two, laughing and throwing things at them. Repeat offenders.......public floggings.
I don't know where all this compassion for criminals comes from around here. I'm 29 years old and have never committed a crime against another human being in my life. I know an appropriate way to conduct myself in this society. I don't steal from others, I don't harm others. Everybody in this society knows this is wrong.........so why get all heartfelt about people who make concious decisions, go out of their way of daily life to do these things?
Originally posted by Evil Dead
I actually don't believe in rehabilitation. I know it's possible....but I also know the statistics for repeat offenders is extremely high.I don't know where all this compassion for criminals comes from around here. I'm 29 years old and have never committed a crime against another human being in my life. I know an appropriate way to conduct myself in this society. I don't steal from others, I don't harm others. Everybody in this society knows this is wrong.........so why get all heartfelt about people who make concious decisions, go out of their way of daily life to do these things?
Here's what you are leaving out:
Repeat offenders are put into the same situation so it only makes sense that they "repeat" the mistake.
Drug dealer is released from prison and then put into the same neighborhood... it's more of a "duh" situation that anything.
Originally posted by Evil Dead
I actually don't believe in rehabilitation. I know it's possible....but I also know the statistics for repeat offenders is extremely high.to me the point is moot. There should be no need for rehabilition. Everyone raised in our society knows what is and is not acceptable, what is or is not against the law, what hurts or does not hurt other people. They know this BEFORE they commit their crimes. They are making a concious decision, weighing their odds of being caught or not. If they are, why should we put the time and money into "rehabilitating" them when their crimes really boil down to decisions they have made? Sure...somebody might say, "I won't kill someone again" or "I won't rob a bank again"......we may sway the decisions they make in the future to avoid getting caught again but hell, they knew the consequences the first time and didn't care. They knew what they were doing and decided to commit the crime anyway.
The only offenses I believe deserve rehabilitation are drug offenses for using, not selling. When a person uses drugs, they form a biological dependency on them. This takes away from their decision making process. Their body needs drugs just as it needs food. They should be rehabilitated. Everybody else knew the crimes they were committing to be wrong, knew their crime would hurt someone, decided to do it anyway so f-ck 'em.
In my own little perfect world, there would be no prison. Every person is taught what is acceptable by society and what is not. Everybody would be taught what is against the law and what is not, just as they are now. For those people who choose to commit crimes against others, showing they have chosen not to live in society by society's standards, bannishment to a desserted island. No imput from our society at all. Let all these criminals create their own separate society and see how much they enjoy living in it with criminals as bad or worse than them all around. Failing that, execution.
For those who commit lesser crimes, nuisances, no prison.......just embarassment. Put 'em in stocks like the old days.....let everybody walk past them for a week or two, laughing and throwing things at them. Repeat offenders.......public floggings.
I don't know where all this compassion for criminals comes from around here. I'm 29 years old and have never committed a crime against another human being in my life. I know an appropriate way to conduct myself in this society. I don't steal from others, I don't harm others. Everybody in this society knows this is wrong.........so why get all heartfelt about people who make concious decisions, go out of their way of daily life to do these things?
Oh...well, then we don't mirror sentiments.
I'm all for a person not falling for oppression and protecting their family as best as they can. I have a disdain for those who don't. I also don't give two shits about MOST criminals being killed in the act of committing their crimes. I say good riddance.
Stealing becomes a gray area...depending on the person stealing. A child that is homeless that is an orphan: I can understand them nabbing some food from a store, just to stay alive. Maybe nabbing a wallet from someone and using the credit cards and cash. You can probably think of many more scenarios.
There's always exceptions. Since we don't live in a perfect judicial system where all judgments are fair, a system like yours cannot exist. Sure, if we have things that record your memories like on "Final Cut", we could pass almost perfect judgements on people and it would be easier to have a system like yours, but even in that system, very subjective judgements would have to be passed in scenarios. A daughter molested and raped many years by her perverted uncle, finally kills him when he sleeps or something. Sure, she murdered someone, but is she legally wrong for it? Depends on the case, but sometimes, they'd be let off.
My point is, just because they committed a crime, doesn't mean that they are hardened criminals that are utterly useless to society. It is not black and white. Also, our justice system cannot be perfect. It is impossible. Certain judgements will always end up being subjective, judgements which are also subordinate to the moral norms of our society.
Maybe I'll become more cynical as I become older.......who knows.
My major problem with Evil Dead's idea is, that the laws we have today are not necessarily harming any other person. It also seems a bit "might makes right" . We (whoever "we" is...probably the person with the most guns) tell you what to do in a place that we decided is ours (since we have so many guns) and if you don't do it we ****ing kill you.
I don't really have a believe that whatever the person with the most power says I should do, even if I got brainwashed since I was born.
Originally posted by Bardock42
My major problem with Evil Dead's idea is, that the laws we have today are not necessarily harming any other person. It also seems a bit "might makes right" . We (whoever "we" is...probably the person with the most guns) tell you what to do in a place that we decided is ours (since we have so many guns) and if you don't do it we ****ing kill you.I don't really have a believe that whatever the person with the most power says I should do, even if I got brainwashed since I was born.
Ahhh, the refreshing perspective of an anarchist. I probably would have never thought about it that way.
Originally posted by chithappens
Here's what you are leaving out:Repeat offenders are put into the same situation so it only makes sense that they "repeat" the mistake.
Drug dealer is released from prison and then put into the same neighborhood... it's more of a "duh" situation that anything.
so you're saying situations are responsible for killing/stealing/raping? It doesn't matter what conditions a person lives in, they still know doing these things is bringing harm to others. I don't care if a man is homeless and must sort through garbage cans to find food, yes that's sad but it is not a reason to commit harm to others. If he does, it is of his own personal decision to do so. These decisions show no respect for other people in our society (those he chose to commit crimes against).
My major problem with Evil Dead's idea is, that the laws we have today are not necessarily harming any other person. It also seems a bit "might makes right" . We (whoever "we" is...probably the person with the most guns) tell you what to do in a place that we decided is ours (since we have so many guns) and if you don't do it we ****ing kill you.I don't really have a believe that whatever the person with the most power says I should do, even if I got brainwashed since I was born.
I understand your sentiment but just about all felonies in the united states revolve around bringing harm to others via stealing, physically hurting-killing or sexual attack. I cannot think of a felony in the United States of America that does not involve stealing, physically harming or committing a sexual offense against another person. The closest I can even think of is a drug dealer and even they are stealing from the federal government by not reporting their earnings for taxation, where the very money that pays for the society they choose to live in comes from.
I don't think a government is oppresive by making sure it's citizens are safe to live life to it's fullest. If it weren't for those people with power protecting you with their laws, you'd probably not be alive today to post on this forum. Any number of misfits could have raped you over and over before finally killing you without any fear of consequence for their actions.
Originally posted by Evil DeadNot to mention that they are responsible for their station in life.
so you're saying situations are responsible for killing/stealing/raping? It doesn't matter what conditions a person lives in, they still know doing these things is bringing harm to others. I don't care if a man is homeless and must sort through garbage cans to find food, yes that's sad but it is not a reason to commit harm to others. If he does, it is of his own personal decision to do so. These decisions show no respect for other people in our society (those he chose to commit crimes against).
Originally posted by Evil Dead
I understand your sentiment but just about all felonies in the united states revolve around bringing harm to others via stealing, physically hurting-killing or sexual attack. I cannot think of a felony in the United States of America that does not involve stealing, physically harming or committing a sexual offense against another person.
The problem I have is with stealing. Because I think we don't know the consequences and the person affected is not really physically harmed, I don't think that someone should be killed because they stole a stereo, to me, that is a bit out of order.
Originally posted by Evil Dead
The closest I can even think of is a drug dealer and even they are stealing from the federal government by not reporting their earnings for taxation, where the very money that pays for the society they choose to live in comes from.
I don't believe you can steal from the government. The government shouldn't have money, all the money they have they got by stealing from "their" citizens. Besides, as I said, choosing to live in a society is not that easy. The government just says "This is our land, here are our rules", but aren't you really just accidentally born in their imaginary territory? The get out, cause it is our land, argument, just seems really stupid to me.
Originally posted by Evil Dead
I don't think a government is oppresive by making sure it's citizens are safe to live life to it's fullest.
Meh, I can accept some slight oppression in order to ensure some safety's, but since living life to their fullest is certainly cut by taking money (often a shitload of money) from people, I don't see how the US government does that.
Originally posted by Evil Dead
If it weren't for those people with power protecting you with their laws, you'd probably not be alive today to post on this forum. Any number of misfits could have raped you over and over before finally killing you without any fear of consequence for their actions.
I don't really think we need to go into the theory of anarchy for this. But just because my government was able to do that, doesn't mean that a much weaker government, or none at all, couldn't have ensured that either.
Originally posted by Evil Dead
so you're saying situations are responsible for killing/stealing/raping? It doesn't matter what conditions a person lives in, they still know doing these things is bringing harm to others. I don't care if a man is homeless and must sort through garbage cans to find food, yes that's sad but it is not a reason to commit harm to others. If he does, it is of his own personal decision to do so. These decisions show no respect for other people in our society (those he chose to commit crimes against).
Geez what a dick.
Those decisions show no respect for other people in society, but if that person feels that society does not give a **** about them, it is simply a odd form of "quid pro quo."
I didn't say excuse crimes but putting someone in the exact same situation doesn't seem to alleviate the problems of before. You said rehabilitation is cool; what's the problem with trying to address the root of what causes people to reach a "don't give a ****" moment?