Crime and Punishment
Mod note: this thread starts with posts extracted from the mod and general discussion threads.
Not commenting on individual cases but trying children as adults is tantamount to child abuse imo. Not mitigated by legality
I agree but should such crimes within a specific context warrant an actual life sentence?. A single punch is a violent offence after all, yeah?
This woman was acquitted of the manslaughter of her abusive husband over my way several years ago and I fully agree with the acquittal.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/wi...
Again, courts view cases on their merits and that's no bad thing.
I agree but should such crimes within a specific context warrant an actual life sentence?. A single punch is a violent offence after all, yeah? Again, courts view cases on their merits and that's no bad thing.
I would be fine with the things you mention having lesser punishments. But universal life sentences for violent crimes with no exceptions would still be far better than what we have now.
I disagree, and hope our society never goes that route.
There sure are a lot of extreme positions in this thread as of late...
I would be fine with the things you mention having lesser punishments. But universal life sentences for violent crimes with no exceptions would still be far better than what we have now.
Seems reasonable. I mean, sure, the US has a far higher per capita prison population than any other western democracy, but that's worked out great, so a dramatic increase could only be a good thing, amirite?
Rush Limbaugh may have died, but his humor and spirit live on! Sick joke, bud. Classic humor.
Nobody to the left of ****in' Don Imus would have said such a thing. Just ****in' fulfill your destiny and go elect Republicans or Tories or whatever ghoul group exists in wherever you happen to live.
And it's very cool and funny to see the usual customers caping for literal Nazi-adjacent 57 on Red.
He doesn't directly criticize you lot like I do, certainly not in my kind of harsh terms, and that has sufficed to fool you all into thinking he's some friendly bloke with decent opinions who's just here to chop it up!
This guy is far to the right of Boris Johnson, or Donald Trump, or whatever other popular figure in the right-wing you may prefer. He's far to the right of Dunyain, metsandfinsfan, et. al. His ideology is strikingly similar to that of Richard Spencer. If Richard Spencer came in here being all faux-friendly, chatting about Monty Python or whatever, you all would be screaming at the mods to perma-ban this Nazi IMMEDIATELY. But 57 understands the game; he knows he can't fully outline his ideology in this forum, because then, you strictly literal thinkers may actually be able to grasp just how pernicious and reactionary this creep truly is and perma him where he belongs.
Seems reasonable. I mean, sure, the US has a far higher per capita prison population than any other western democracy, but that's worked out great, so a dramatic increase could only be a good thing, amirite?
The only problem we have with that now is what happens when we let them out. What problems do you think the people in prison are causing?
I hear a lot of mention about how the US has such a large prison population, but not what exactly is bad about that.
The only problem we have with that now is what happens when we let them out. What problems do you think the people in prison are causing?
I hear a lot of mention about how the US has such a large prison population, but not what exactly is bad about that.
To not agree with the arguments against a large prison population is one thing; to not even know what they are is...quite something.
I'd think the fact that other western democracies have crime rates similar to or lower than the US, with prison populations that are far, far lower should already give you pause for thought.
All other things being equal, IE if it had no impact on crime rate, would it be better to have more or less people in prison? I'd hope we could agree from both a moral and resource perspective, less is better.
To not agree with the arguments against a large prison population is one thing; to not even know what they are is...quite something.
I'd think the fact that other western democracies have crime rates similar to or lower than the US, with prison populations that are far, far lower should already give you pause for thought.
All other things being equal, IE if it had no impact on crime rate, would it be better to have more or less people in pri
I mentioned the argument I know, which is that prisons make people more firmly into criminals. And that wouldn't matter if they were never released.
I assume the other main reason is compassion. But I have no compassion for violent criminals only for their victims and potential future victims.
Obviously fewer people in prison is better than more if it would have no effect on the crime rate, but that supposition is obviously not true. Since no society has ever tried what I suggest, there is no mass statistical data for or against it, but I think anyone could easily understand that if violent criminals were never released, crime against people who are not violent criminals would be reduced.
Current data for the US and other western democracies is completely irrelevant, as neither follows my proposal.
thank you browser and welcome back, about time..
but RKF wants him out of prison, right? he doubts he is the perpertrator. so what newsome wants is nonsense. why doesnt he want to let him out?
you left out that he is palestinian, or did you leave that out on purpose?
or does this mean nothing here? idk
victor, did you know that sirhan sirhan is PALESTINIAN??
While RFK jr and one other son supported his parole, 6 other children opposed it.
I didnt mention he was a Palestinian because one, it had nothing to do with the point I was making, and two, being the age I am, I thought everyone who had heard of him would already know he was a Palestinian, and if someone is young enough to never have heard of him, and they were curious enough to look him up, they would see that.
As to why Newsome doesnt want him out, that's what the op ed piece he wrote was for--to explain that. Its the link I included.
Obviously fewer people in prison is better than more if it would have no effect on the crime rate, but that supposition is obviously not true.
Right, a lot of countries have less people in prison, and less crime. Hmm.
Since no society has ever tried what I suggest, there is no mass statistical data for or against it, but I think anyone could easily understand that if violent criminals were never released, crime against people who are not violent criminals would be reduced.
And no one will, because it's a ridiculous idea. We dont need statistical data to understand that life in prison for any and all violent crimes is bound to be unjust, would lead to all sorts of unintended consequences (since I'm going to jail for life if I get caught anyway, might as well go ahead and finish the guy off!), and a huge increase in the number of prisons. I feel silly even listing them off, as it seems like this has to be a troll, but chillrob is a purveyor of all sorts of...unique ideas.
Maybe we can take this to its logical conclusion and eliminate all violent crime by arresting people for pre-crime and putting them in jail for life as well! 🙄
I mentioned the argument I know, which is that prisons make people more firmly into criminals. And that wouldn't matter if they were never released.
I assume the other main reason is compassion. But I have no compassion for violent criminals only for their victims and potential future victims.
Obviously fewer people in prison is better than more if it would have no effect on the crime rate, but that supposition is obviously not true. Since
Keeping them locked up forever is just a band-aid solution - what needs to be addressed is determining why the U.S. has such a significant rate of crime for a developed nation in the first place. Why are we asking hundreds of thousands of tremendously underpaid corrections officers and prison employees to risk their lives on a daily basis to deal with an ever-growing number of violent offenders, instead of trying to deal with the problem closer to the root?
Right, a lot of countries have less people in prison, and less crime. Hmm.
And no one will, because it's a ridiculous idea. We dont need statistical data to understand that life in prison for any and all violent crimes is bound to be unjust, would lead to all sorts of unintended consequences (since I'm going to jail for life if I get caught anyway, might as well go ahead and finish the guy off!), and a huge increase in the number of prisons
I considered this as well. Could be solved with different prison conditions for worse offenses.
I don't think there would need to be a large increase in prisons, especially after we stop putting people in prison for not violent offenses, particularly drug-related ones.
I also believe it would work very well as a deterrent, leading to fewer people becoming violent criminals in the future. Meanwhile, I have no problem at all with overcrowded prisons for murderers. Squeeze in as many as possible. If they start killing each other, that's a positive - lower costs for society. If your want to show some mercy offer them the option of a suicide pill before or after entry.
Keeping them locked up forever is just a band-aid solution - what needs to be addressed is determining why the U.S. has such a significant rate of crime for a developed nation in the first place. Why are we asking hundreds of thousands of tremendously underpaid corrections officers and prison employees to risk their lives on a daily basis to deal with an ever-growing number of violent offenders, instead of trying to deal with the problem cl
Almost certainly the reason for the difference is the prevalence of so many guns in the US compared with other western nations. I'm definitely for stronger gun control, but it would be extremely difficult to get rid of so many guns, even if nearly everyone agreed it was a good idea (which sadly is not true).
I guess we shouldn't expect anything different from someone who believes everyone who has children is selfish, life is suffering, and that humans need to go extinct.
Yes, it is. Is that somehow relevant, or just a random observation?
I actually thought of that as I typed it l and almost rephrased, but I figured we all knew that chillrob bases that observation only on his own life and it doesn't provide him with any useful ideas.
Yes, it is. Is that somehow relevant, or just a random observation?
I actually thought of that as I typed it l and almost rephrased, but I figured we all knew that chillrob bases that observation only on his own life and it doesn't provide him with any useful ideas.
Obviously it's relevant. You said we shouldn't expect much from a person who believes it. Yet that idea spawned one of the world's major religions.
Yes, it is. Is that somehow relevant, or just a random observation?
I actually thought of that as I typed it l and almost rephrased, but I figured we all knew that chillrob bases that observation only on his own life and it doesn't provide him with any useful ideas.
That's just, like, your opinion, man.
I'm quite capable of observing the lives of others. Have you watched many videos provided by charities of wartorn and famine stricken countries recently? Or do you base your idea of life mainly from the point of view of a person of above average income in one of the wealthiest countries on earth?
What useful ideas has your philosophy of life offered recently?
I should look more into Buddhism I suppose, maybe it is a religion I wouldn't despise.
I do like their meditation practices.
D.T Suzuki provides some good introductions for western audiences.
I guess we shouldn't expect anything different from someone who believes everyone who has children is selfish, life is suffering, and that humans need to go extinct.
This over-mocked. It's a fairly respectable philosophical position where the utilitarian calculation comes out -ve. A 'classic' philosophical question is whetehr you should press a button that ended all human life painlessly with no suffering.
Not one I share but I know people who do and they wouldn't go anywhere near his position on prisons (or anything else politcally).
