Discussion in 'Human Science' started by jmpet, Dec 16, 2010.
or her time *
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
I don't think you have understood a thing that I said.I don't want "revenge" on anyone,I have already stated that I am against violence for the purpose of revenge.I do not believe that 2 wrongs make a right.And I do think rape is a horrible crime.I just don't buy that by definition it's so horrible that it's the end of the world.And in most cases the trauma is a result of the underlying nature of violence involved,not the act of sex itself.Because of this,I regard rape to be as bad as serious violence-the degree of seriousness might vary with each case.Normally ,if person A loses an eye due to violence and person B is raped with low violence,the criminal of person B will get a harsher sentence and get more attention and this is what I don't agree with.When I said rape and all sex-crimes are over-rated what I meant was that these crimes are often judged on the basis of the words "sex" and "rape" ,rather than trying to understnd the actual situation.Don't misunderstand me ,don't think that I am saying rape is not horrible.I have read the words of rape victims in a variety of situations from many different countries across the globe,and the reactions do tend to vary greatly and many of these victims never talk about any psychological damage or trauma.In fact many times,when a victim says that she doesn't want too harsh a punishment for the rapist,the society tries to make her feel guilty or suspects that she might be falsely accusing.So yes,rape is horrible ,and unacceptable,and it comes in varying degrees of horridness,but it's not the end of everything.At least I am not convinced.
When I said I want to understand a rapist,what I meant was -perhaps these rapists have had a horrible past that we don't know about.You don't know how a criminal becomes such a person,so don't pretend like you do.Perhaps you will be shocked to find how much many of these criminals had to endure,if only you could put yourself in their shoes or see their past.And because these criminals themselves may be victims of circumstances,it's only fair that we reserve some empathy for them too.People are often like mirrors of how they have been treated.And most importantly,I am there 100% if I can help a rape victim.What I don't see is how being cruel to the rapist is going to help the victim,especially if there is a chance that the rapist will realise his mistake.My empathies are not one-sided.Just because I try to feel for the criminals doesn't mean I don't feel for the victim.What we do to criminals often exceed what they do us.For example pick-pockets often get killed if they are caught in public.I am only trying to be balanced ,rather than getting carried away by fear and hatred.
There are many problems with treating rape as bad as murder.Firstly,it is very hard to prove that an accusation is true and often the punishment is a result of accusation alone.And there are many false accusations.The FBI states that 10-15% of rape accusations are PROVABLY false.Most estimates of ACTUAL false accusations are close to 50%.Some extreme anti-feminist claim it to be around 90%,but let's discard that.Even if 1 out of 3 accusations are false,that will result in a massive number of innocents to suffer.The sentences that they get are at least as bad as the average rape and many get bullied/raped in prison anyway.
The other problem is that if murder is not punished more harshly than rapes,there is a chance that some will simply kill and destroy the bodies in order to be safe.
Re:I think I have already clarified my position on this topic.For the most part I agree with skeptical.I am all for humane treatment in prison.I just think there should be an upper limit to the sentences so that there is hope left for these criminals(to become better).And I think he more or less agreed to that.
Before my words are twisted further and misunderstood in nasty ways,I clarified myself one last time and I am out of here.
it's true that continuing to argue with stupidity is fruitless.
this kind of thinking is the reason why america does and will continue to have high rates of crime. they know which side their bread is buttered and they know the punishments are not harsh or they can play the judicial system for all the nonsensical loopholes and arbitrary laws that make zero humanistic sense.
severe punishment.. lol. but i do have to stress this, there are plenty of many different types of criminals walking around who never get caught (because they make sure it's hidden from outside view) and plenty of people in prison who are not necessarily the most evil people but they made a bad decision or flew off the handle in a moment of rage etc (in some single murder cases). being labeled a criminal takes no account of context which is more realistic partially because it really can't afford to be bogged down by those details. for instance a man that kills the man who raped his daughter (because the law couldn't prosecute for some reason and let him go) would still be a murderer but that doesn't mean he/she is actually a murderer who would do that out of sheer cold-bloodedness. another example would be a 18-19 year old labeled a rapist by the law for having mutual sex with a 16 or 17 year old because of the technicality in law which is extremely different than what the meaning of a true rapist is but they are all 'labeled' the same. for instance, a young person selling drugs for money etc can be out of ignorance or peer pressure or poor upbringing. this doesn't mean that the laws are all wrong or are not useful but sometimes there are people that have to be used as examples so that perpetual ignorance of the law can't be used as an excuse or that people will continue to push the inch to a mile, so to speak. of course, there are evil people in the prison system as well but it's misleading and unrealistic to think all the criminals and assholes are only on one side of the fence and all the good people and noncriminals are on the other side, which most tend to believe, especially the religious right. they are all about technicalities rather than the truth. they think abuse (which is the worst form of a criminal or criminal activity) is not as bad as say, homosexuality or not going to church or having the "proper" christian associates as well as all the myriad ways of putting on an act of civility in public. people like this have no sense of true right or wrong, they are playing with it as a ruse of power or social acceptance. the most evil and imo, true criminals in regard to heart/mind are those who are abusers/sociopaths as they are the most cruel and evil. but not surprisingly, they are not always caught because abuse can be done in so many insidious ways with such long-lasting effects. the victims just usually end up draining the social services of the society either by requiring extensive counseling, medication, social security etc. people don't realize that it's very lop-sided because perpetrators don't seek mental help as they don't think they have a problem or they justify what they do, even if society would not approve. that's not a problem for them because they can just hide it. in conclusion, you have a continual cycle of people who are usually victims who seek help for their emotional or mental problems/angst while the true assholes who created the problem never lose any sleep and go undetected and on with their lives and fit in perfectly with society. it's pretty damn unfair.
so i would still agree that some basic humanity still should be used in regard to incarcerated criminals because the judicial system is not altogether fair or without error anyways.
Let me remind you again, as I had to remind DNA.
This thread is about the worst criminals. It is not about a single statutory rape offense, or a poor person caught shoplifting. It is about repeat offenders, who show no sign of improving.
How we treat first time offenders, or minor offenders is an entirely different question. I have suggested humane quarantine for life (or until old age) for the worst offenders. I notice that most of those who disagree with me on this, do so because of essentially emotional reasons, related to their desire to see serious punishment and retribution.
Except for DNA, who seems to have more concern for the criminals than for the victims. Oh, well. We are all different, I guess.
Please provide your evidence that supports this startling assertion. In 67 years I have never seen a report that harsher or more certain punishment is a deterrent to major criminal behavior.
Most habitual perpetrators of serious crimes are risk-takers by temperament. People who commit a serious crime once are usually overcome with emotion (typically anger) and aren't thinking beyond five minutes into the future.
And we've already established that this thread is only about serious crimes.
i'm sorry. a study? maybe a study should be done. maybe the better question we need to ask is why does america have one of the highest homicide rates of a developed and civilized country, for instance? is it because americans are just risk-takers by nature or is it because it stresses freedom of the individual too much and has relatively nice prison systems where you can have cable, three hots and a cot, medical care, access to library, exercise, and education? also, of course we know that a criminal can appeal and appeal to the ends of the earth and utilize the judicial system for all it's worth. it's also interesting to note that even drug runners who get caught in foreign countries with much harsher prisons systems and stiffer penalties somehow magically are scared shitless, become sober and straighten up right away, usually for life. they are so desperate to get transferred to american penal system. hmm?
oh of course, those would play no part in any of these higher crime rates.
the point is, on the contrary, i don't believe that harsher punishments are not a deterrant in cases even for so-called rist-takers since they are taking risks not always out of true desperation (stealing food out of starvation would be an example) but i don't think that making sure criminals are comfortable is the answer either. i also think it has to do with the prospect of serious repercussions and when a society knows that there isn't, it is more apt to have more crime and that applies to any country or society where the laws or punishments that really hit home are nonexistant for a variety of offenses. it is also true that many criminals are used to a relatively harsh life so they may not mind some level of incarceration as well as white collar crimes utilize a lot of crafty lawyers where they think money talks. so a combination of a judicial system that is not serious enough or that can be used like a system of a game and who can win it.
i'm reminded of the extreme example of vlad tepes and his community where no one dared to steal the golden cup at the well since they knew how harsh the punishment was. what happened to all those risk-takers? i suppose the risk wasn't worth the punishment, eh? anywhere else someone would have dared to do it most likely.
i'm not saying that prisoners or criminals shouldn't be treated with some basic humanity but to say that incarceration is severe punishment for heinous crimes and especially for repeat offenders is unrealistic, imo.
on the opposite extreme, socialized countries do tend to have less crime because there is less dog eat dog philosophy etc. i guess that is also the price of a capitalistic system. there are several reasons people commit crimes, one is for actual physical gain as well as for ego-related (social class) and a competitive, ego driven capitalistic system would tie into that pretty well.
so it seems there are many different ways to handle the problem of potential criminals or criminals. either harsher punishment or a social system whereby taking advantage of others doesn't have to be the sole or easier means of gain or it wouldn't appeal to assholes as much.
bottomline is we know the judicial system is not perfect in any country. but i'm sure there are ways to improve on it as well as improve society so there is less crime. there are people in poor countries that are locked up for stealing food because they were starving and labeled a criminal along with people who have committed heinous crimes just out of greed or because they could. that's how fucked up the system is and the same in america but a misdemeanor as simple as a homeless person trespassing is technically still a criminal. people of true criminal heart love that because it tends to muddle the issue and make it seem that criminals are based on any technicality. this thread is stressing the worst criminals, they wouldn't deserve as much consideration for obvious reasons. they must be put away (of course with humane treatment though some may not even deserve it because they may not have treated their victims with any humanity but those are just details in the larger judicial system) or euthanized if they can't be rehabilitated or until when and if they can be in the future.
As a non American let me comment on the difference I see between Americans and other first world citizens, in relation to violent crime. A very big part of it is American gun culture. Not only are firearms, and especially handguns just too easily obtained inside the United States, but the man who uses a firearm to blow away his enemies is glorified. I refer to the urge to use a gun to kill burglars and other 'undesirables' as the "Dirty Harry Syndrome" - a special American disease.
Inside the USA, the homicide rate is over 5 per 100,000 people per year. In the UK, by comparison, it is 1. However, less than 10% of homicides in the UK are done by guns. In the USA, it is 67%. And of the 67%, two thirds are done by hand guns. It does not take much intelligence to work out that the love of guns and the availability of guns is a major cause of the high American homicide rate.
You seem to be hung up on punishment. You should think about that. The desire to punish criminals is purely emotional. It has no relationship to preventing crime. As Fraggle pointed out, increasing the severity of punishment has little or no impact on crime rates, or the likelihood of any specific criminal carrying out a crime. Your hang up on punishment says less than nice things about your own nature.
Preventing crime is best achieved by better policing. If more crimes are solved, then it does not matter whether the punishment is severe or not. It is the strong probability of getting caught that stops the criminal in the first place.
But this thread is about the worst offenders. How to deal with them.
if you took away from my posts that i'm hung up on punishment, it says a lot about YOU because that was not my point.
but i'm also sober enough to realize that punishment is a deterrant. you, however, view it immaturely as some form of rebellious and nonsensical backlash. it's cowardly. would you like to call it repercussions, responsibility for actions and discipline instead? does that scare you less? do you have a problem with punishments or repercussions in the form of fines, jail or prison time etc. would you just like to let everything happen without any repercussions? is that your level of sanity? lol
i absolutely laugh at your idea that it's only the strong probability of getting caught that stops the criminal because that cannot be implemented to catch criminals in the first place for the most part unless they are going to tell you ahead of time. unbelievable how idiotic that is. i bet you wrote that with a straight face too. it's also the consequences after or the potential consequences that matter too. btw, i don't believe that harsher punishments have no effect on crime. it's just that harsher penalties are not a good idea in society where an innocent person could be subject to them just due to the natural faults or imperfection of the judicial system. there is a DIFFERENCE. you are just spewing western jargon and rhetoric and there is a lot of it that's passed around and repeated as if it's wisdom. i've addressed some already. lol
which makes one wonder what kind of parent you are or would be that is so afraid of discipline.
even parents have to have guidelines, set limits as well as have repercussions or consequences ( a form of punishment) for actions. these are usually not that pleasant so as not to reinforce the behavior. that's what parents DO to teach children how to get along in the world to exhibit responsible behavior toward others and take responsiblity for themself. now stay with me, it also applies to ADULTS and that's why there are laws in place as well as consequences for actions. now, it's not perfect but we've already established that and it's already well known it isn't.
indeed, this thread is about the "worst" offenders yet you turn around and insinuate that i'm being too harsh on them or that somehow them being locked up is somehow too severe. i suppose we should give them spa treatments once a week too. the fact it's about the "worst" offenders says not so nice things about YOU. it's obvious i was addressing your statement that incarceration is severe punishment. you dishonestly turn that around and call me 'hung up' on punishment because i don't think it is.
i want to point this out, not necessarily to those responding on this thread but to those who may read it as well or are lurking. i have personally dealt with extreme sociopaths and it wasn't just one and the pattern with them is a very similar sentiment that's expressed on this thread that they deserve the most sensitive and humane consideration and treatment as if they did NOTHING at all wrong or harmful to others as if the others don't matter. their rights are the most important and how they feel. if they detect even the slightest bit of anger directed at them, they are quick to point a finger at them shaming them for feeling it meaning any form of natural backlash or desire for justice is something to be ashamed of. yes, the victim is made to feel ashamed and responsible and treat the perpetrator on some pedestal who deserves more consideration just like on this thread. he was so self-important like he was god and everyone else is just ants and anything that happens to us is inconsequential since we should be sacrificed for him. i experienced this with a man who raped me repeatedly and abused me by beating me as a child, even withholding food at times, using sick military type tortures like pouring water on my face, forcing food down my throat if i didn't want to eat something as well as humiliating me whenever he felt like it. a thirty five year old man beating or torturing a seven year old child? do any of you people actually consider what happens or who people are before you extend stupid sympathy to the worst criminals? is it just natural to just think the worst the criminal is, the more deserving of sympathy they are while ignoring the devastation they've wrought on others? does that shock people that some of the worst criminals are also that way because they were raised with some extreme form of entitlement and not necessarily with deprivation? if one doesn't realize that, this SOCIETY BETTER WAKE UP AND START REALIZING IT! he demanded i forgive him when he was found out first time but guess what? after the smoke cleared a bit he tried it again. of course they are not sorry, if they were really sorry about things like that, they would have never done that in the first place. those who are honest know what i'm talking about. the pretending they are sorry is just smoke and mirrors or when they are caught. does society know these people feed off the sympathy of society and use that sympathy to continue justifying hurting others? true sociopaths (and they exist) don't take sympathy and internalize it to tell themselves society cares and try to change. they internalize it as further maneuvering room or justification to continue because if they feel like doing something, others should understand them. this is because thier values is all about them and what they want and feel. it's pretty dangerous. unless one has lived and dealt with sociopaths, they don't have an inkling what monsters they really are and they really don't deserve sympathy. they are really selfish even when they have everything they need and then some.
i find it rather eerie that it's the same type of protective sentiment that's expressed on this thread. i'm out of that situation now but i find it telling that this society feels an inclination to treat it's worst with the most kindness or protection. i'm not the only victim and i will not be the last. it's your families and future children and children's children at risk and so on and so forth. oh yeah, good luck with that! *shrug*
did i explain that better for you now?? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
oh yeah. as the military was mentioned before. this is how the military is, or at least the american one. much to be proud of and really disciplined of course. just a marvel. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! what was that cliche again? the military would teach them discipline and straighten them up. i don't know who to roll my eyes about, the likes of these lowlifes on this vid or the idiots who believe those military ads/commercials. what a blinded country just barely getting by now on their deluded ego and self-image. lol
I just kinda of see it like when you are a little kid and you in trouble and sent to your room you get no t.v. no games and stuff to think about what you did wrong...that's how I feel about it but it's not just like not taking the trash out it is doing some so wrong iput you in the WORST category...they need time to think about what they did wrong now I am not saying no human contact at ALL I am a BIG believer in therapy witch I think all of them need it.
I really think we should be stricter with the death penalty. How many times do we pay 80k per year to keep a murderer alive for 50 years? What would society be like if we started to invest in our kids and not the people that are hurting them?
I also think the human society would be able to reduce the animal population if they spent 10 cents on a bullet to put down cats/dogs. Then they could sell them for much less because their operating expenses would be lower, and fix them too. The result - everyone buys from the pound because it is cheap, everyone has fixed animals, no one pays an arm and a leg for an animal. Viola! Major world problem solved. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I agree with you on the animal thing. It makes me sad to think of putting a puppy/dog down but sometime you just have too Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Have you heard of a false dichotomy? Probably not. I guess there was inadequate investment in your education when you were a kid. (While we are at it, have you heard of the rule about double posts?)
Wait a second,are we saying that we must kill healthy and innocent dogs and cats merely for the purpose of population control?!That sounds incredibly selfish and cruel.
This kind of attitude is precisely what I meant when I said people have become far too cruel and selfish.They are unable to empathize with any group might get affected,but which they themselves do not belong to.
I mean how can we even think of such a ridiculously cruel decision!
It is actually cruel to think you can keep them all alive...what people need to do is stop being selfish and fix there animals so we wouldn't have to put them down and have a outrageous number of homeless animals. I volunteer at a dog shelter and there is just not enough room to keep them all it is VERY sad but it would be sadder and unsanitary to put 12 dogs in ONE cage. We try very very hard to get all animals adopted but we can not force people to adopt them. what do you suggest we do RIGHT NOW let them run wild and get hit by a car ? and btw your speaking I really do hope your a vegetarian otherwise it would make you a huge hypocrite
I am sorry you were abused as a child. You have my sympathy.
That also explains why you are so hot on punishing criminals. Very understandable. However, I have to say that this is an excellent reason not to permit victims like yourself from getting anywhere near the decision of what to do with criminals. Dealing with criminals requires dispassionate thinking, and rationality with no contaminating emotion. Victims are not able to go into this decision making process without emotion tinging their thinking. Very understandable, but not good in determining sentences.
My own views on how to deal with criminals are totally aimed at the goal of reducing crime. I have no room in this process for emotions relating to retribution. Nor have I time for myths relating to penology.
Deterrence has been shown time and again to be of limited value in dealing with criminals. Even the death penalty does not stop people becoming murderers. Better policing does work, and has been shown to work by proper field studies.
Ever been to one of those countries where the majority of dogs live on the streets?These dogs treat in-home dogs like worthless prisoners.They choose their own mates,get food from multiple houses,mark their territories like kings.And only a few actually die because of accidents.I don't think they would want to get killed.
Suppose you suddenly become homeless will you just go and get killed?Let's ask the poor third world citizens if they would like 1st world citizens to kill them and end their misery?As long as there is hope for the future,life is never meaningless.We don't have to decide which dog lives and which dies.Give them the opportunity to live their lives.
What if those dog get sick or hurt ? Those people can't afford to take a homeless dog to the vet. People here in a 1st world country can barely take there animals to the vet. btw are you a vegetarian ?
heh. i don't need your useless fuking sympathy. just because one has gone through things does not mean they can't reason.
again, you twist my posts to mean i am aiming only for punishment. also, it's assinine of you to think that those who haven't gone through things would always understand. actually those who have been victims have more insight into perpetrators and how they work as well as how they think. so i reject your condescending, unaffected know-it-all bullshit.
i never stated that punishment is just for the sake of punishment or out of emotion but that incarceration is not severe punishment for heinous crimes. you continue to assert this repeatedly. you, however, made it clear that you think this is 'severe'. go back and read your post.
as a matter of fact, if you continue twisting what i say and being intellectually dishonest, i will report you. how about that?? does that wake you up?
ironicly, it's you who are not dispassionate as you try to come across. if you were, you would not be trying to read into or project your idea that one is 'hot' for punishment just because one's opinion is that incarceration for the worst criminals is not severe. yes, that is my opinion and i don't think that makes me 'hot' for "punishment." you seem to be very upset that the worst criminals feel any level of discomfort or construe that as punishment or that PUNISHMENT itself is wrong. bottomline is you seem to have a problem with the idea itself. you should just admit it instead of constantly viewing any ideas of repercussions for crimes as undue vengeance, revenge, etc. and extremely interesting as i've mentioned before is that is exactly how sociopaths view it as well. they are extremely self-protective of their feelings and rights and views even the remotest sign or inclination of backlash as evil vengeance, revenge etc to the point of moral self-righteousness. this is a cornerstone of tricks up their sleeve. very, very VERY interesting, indeed, i would say. i hope i've enlightened some readers on this subject, not necessarily you.
i reject your extremely sheltered notion that harsh punishment is not a deterrant so you can stop with that lack of common sense cliche.
it is but it just can't be implemented, as was mentioned before, due to the natural faults of human error and judgement. i can see what is wrong with the judicial system and it's too soft where it should be tougher and too tough where it should be more lax. it has problems. crime will never altogether be eradicated but there are ways to reduce it and probably very significantly. that is not done by releasing criminals who even psychiatrists know will probably be repeat offenders or giving slaps on the wrists for heinous crimes or letting death row inmates appeal for extensions constantly.
not everyone has their head in the clouds as you and criminals count on the lax system as well.
Separate names with a comma.