Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Norsefire, Dec 17, 2007.
No executions, but bring back hard labor. And take away parole for the most despicable crimes.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Absolutely disgusting, Syz
From a couple months ago: "What's so wrong with capital punishment? (#1570333/112)".
From 2003: "Green River ... I don't know where to start".
From the latter, it should be enough to reiterate:
And so we come to the central question: What is justice?
Having grown up with this spectre haunting the news daily for years during my childhood, I wholeheartedly support Maleng. If you can get the criminal behind bars forever and still hold hope for future confessions so that victims' families might have some sense of peace in knowledge, you just have to make the deal.
You'd see their pictures on the news, or in the papers. They looked like people you knew. Their mothers aren't so different from mine, and I would hope that she could know for sure in similar circumstances.
The beast is broken, the rest is about those who have to pick up the pieces of their own life. Crime and punishment makes for great headlines, and great issues during an electoral year, but our county prosecutors need to be able to deal when the occasion calls for it.
Norm Maleng brought us the freaking Green River Killer, on a silver platter, no less. The HJC needs to get off his back and stop jerking people around for the benefit of the cycle. (#509856/17)
We got forty-eight. There's a hundred more, at least. I want justice for them, too. Explicit justice. And we may not ever get it. But it's well worth it in the face of the alternative.
They matter to me. All of them. And we'll never know some of their names. To take from slim to none the chance of ever affirming the name of the man who destroyed them simply to satisfy some ignorant barbarism is a cruel proposition. To trade any chance of acknowledgment for a cheap thrill is greedy. To bury justice so that we might quench a thirst for blood is sick.
Should I be surprised that punishment is the only issue you're willing to consider? Your exploitative verdict of sadism has little value given the ignorance it is based on. The world is not as shallow as your either/or assignations would insist. One of the reasons you're having trouble understanding what other people are telling you is that you can only view their positions according to your own spiteful characterizations. Pay attention to what people are telling you, and might actually come up with something better than suggesting you're not paying attention.
There is far more at stake than punishment and torture. Perhaps justice has little value to you, but that's your problem, and you shouldn't make it everyone else's.
I see torture, and situations where it's application becomes "useful", coming up a lot more in certain entertainment genres.
Why is there a need to see this (an instrument of the Auto da Fe, for God's sake), as some beneficial practice, a "valid option", by some people? Some seem quite prepared to believe it has its uses, or that a terrorist will immediately cave in. It's kind of ludicrous to even suggest that it's a working option in the first place.
Could you just say a yes and no? In the future I won't bother reading your posts, because too much talking without meat... And you can spare your time linking and quoting, just answer briefly...
I would put you on Ignore, but I tink I can't because you are a moderaor, so unless your post is short, I will just skip it....
May Jeffrey Dahmer visit your loved ones! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Look up irony and sarcasm while on holiday....
Low-effort and intellect free: The argument in favor
On the one hand, I find rather ridiculous the suggestion that I should have to answer your questions according to your desired format.
I find absolutely hilarious, however, the idea that a post that says, in its entirety—
It's worth noting that we let Gary Ridgway live. Some folks are a little sore over that one. But it's worth it.
—is too much for you.
Furthermore, I thought it worth making the point that your two-bit exploitation of Gary Ridgway's crimes had been addressed before, and if you need a reason why society is better off with the Green River Killer in prison than a death chamber, you ought to do a little more research than simply referring to Wikipedia. The late Norm Maleng made clear why he made the deal he did, but apparently the prosecutor's reasons aren't important enough to warrant consideration in your emotionally-driven argument.
I have a better idea. Quit whining. Nobody's forcing you to take part in any discussions; nobody's forcing you to either read or respond to me; and nobody's forcing you to muck up this board with intellect-free excuses for arguments such as,
I don't mind the smilie suggesting you have a sense of humor. But all you're demonstrating is the paucity of your argument when the best you can come up with is to tell me how I'm supposed to respond to you and make sick jokes.
Get over yourself.
not only do you want to murder people, you want a little girl butchered and eaten by cannibals?
why do you desire this
i am shocked beyond belief
who are you?
how remiss of me
happy holidays, Syzygys
What did my statement have anything to do with irony or sarcasm? Plus, if you are resorting to that kind of immature comeback, I think I won the debate.
I think I just learned the definition of a "troll".
Since when justice is murder and what's wrong with murder anyway??? If it is applied correctly....
Good for you, at least you learnt something. I did too, that there is no good argument against CP. There is one actually, when it is against one's moral standards, but that is not a particulary logical argument, but emotional....
Everyone here is entitled to their opinion and it is immature of you to harass them about what they support or disprove of.
There is a difference between opinion and argument:
CP is wrong. -- opinion
CP is ineffective for controlling criminals. -- argument, either true or not
What you guys obviously didn't get was an analogy. Most anti-CP people are strong in their stands UNTIL it hits home, like a Dahmer kind of visit. THEN they suddenly become in favour of CP.
That was the point I made with that comment, not harassment... So is there any argument against CP I haven't addressed already??
Oh yes, let me tell you a story. In one of the East European countries, they outlawed CP as a prerequisit to enter the EU. People were divided on the issue, but it wasn't such a big deal since there weren't many atrocious crimes lately.
Then one day a couple of guys entered a small bank in a small town and MASSACRED all people inside, 8 of them. No chances, no hostages, just bullets into anyone moving. Then they took off with the money...(the huge amount of 50K dollars)
Guess what happened as a response to this crime? Most people suddenly became in favour of CP! No matter where they stood before, most people thought the criminals deserve to put to death.
Now when you guys are so forgiving and soft on hardened criminals, just think about how would you feel if your relatives had been in this bank opening an account, and then you tell me you are against CP....
Life is a game, if you break the rules, you are out of the game, we don't want to play with you...
Your reasoning is exactly why CP should be illegal. People, especially victims and relatives of victims of crimes, are usually enraged about what happened. They are the last ones able to administer justice fairly.
And they are the victims, are they not?
You know, I think I've come up with an ingenious idea. In crimes where there are victims, it is they (by a reasonable guideline) who should get to decide what the criminal must endure, or even death should they fancy it.
Of course, it must be reasonable. Stolen candy could be punished with extra work (if you steal from a store, they make you work for them for a while), not bad, eh?
Murder (in cold blood), and anything goes. The victim should have the right to do as they please to the filthy criminal.
Perhaps such a system could be implemented in a place where justice is already arbitrary. Syria, perhaps? Or maybe Israel? There are plenty of third-world backwaters, too, where arbitrary justice would be a step up.
In the United States, at least, people are guaranteed equal protection under the law. Similar notions exist in other first-world Western countries. I'm not about to throw that out in order to make "justice" a matter of personal satisfaction, a standard which we might consider is part of the cycles of violence wracking the Middle East, parts of Africa and Asia, and even complicating at least one labor dispute in South America.
Then, I would be an exception.
I guess I am an exception too. I live in Madison, Wisconsin. Guess how far away I live where Jeffery Dahmer was being kept in prison? About 10-15 mi away. In addition to that, Dahmer did most of his killings in Milwaukee, which is also 30 mi away from where I live.
There was another incident about 6 months ago where an armed robbers stole from a gas station and shot three people, killed two. This was another 5 short miles away from my residence. I believe that executing them is letting them down easy, they aren't going anywhere in my belief (I'm atheist) and so locking them up in solitary confinement for the rest of their lives is a much more gruesome punishment than just killing them. Remember, solitary confinement is 23.5 hours a day in a 8 X 5 ft room for as long as you live.
Separate names with a comma.