The legality of vigilantism is fundamentally flawed

[Angushjalmur]

It is illegal to take the law into one's own hands with the intent of effecting justice based on one's own understanding of right and wrong or the law.

Are laws not set out by the people? Is this to say that the people who have created and endorsed the laws do not understand laws or were unqualified to set forth those laws in the first place?

There are many instances where the current loophole system fails and justice is miscarried. There are many instances when the justice system is muzzled simply because of previous precedent or because of some obscure technicality.

We need the right to take the law into our own hands as a way of balancing the inefficiency and neglect of the established legal system. We need to return to a time when a man could take up his musket and kill those within his community who needed to be killed. Crime rates have increased directly proportionally to the amount of legal sanctions slapped on citizens regarding defending themselves or doing what's right. The nanny state tells us to be helpless and to let the police and courts deal with it, but then fall severely short on their end of the bargain.

That is all.

[Sirban]

And not a single word was read

[AzzarTheGod]

It is illegal to take the law into one's own hands with the intent of effecting justice based on one's own understanding of right and wrong or the law.

Are laws not set out by the people? Is this to say that the people who have created and endorsed the laws do not understand laws or were unqualified to set forth those laws in the first place?

There are many instances where the current loophole system fails and justice is miscarried. There are many instances when the justice system is muzzled simply because of previous precedent or because of some obscure technicality.

We need the right to take the law into our own hands as a way of balancing the inefficiency and neglect of the established legal system. We need to return to a time when a man could take up his musket and kill those within his community who needed to be killed. Crime rates have increased directly proportionally to the amount of legal sanctions slapped on citizens regarding defending themselves or doing what's right. The nanny state tells us to be helpless and to let the police and courts deal with it, but then fall severely short on their end of the bargain.

That is all.


Agree but I am not going to share my own story at this time.

I'm with you though.

[skarlorn]

And what about those drugs too!

[JurisDictum]

When I was younger I had a theory like this:

We should go really soft on crime...especially vigilantism. That way people could rationally choose to break the law for revenge without it ruining their life.

Now that I'm bit older...seems like that is a good recipe for chaos.

[AzzarTheGod]

When I was younger I had a theory like this:

We should go really soft on crime...especially vigilantism. That way people could rationally choose to break the law for revenge without it ruining their life.

Now that I'm bit older...seems like that is a good recipe for chaos.

Not a true consideration imo, look at Islam and honour killings.

They go soft on them in many countries, and yet honour killing is incredibly rare. (Killing a man who raped your wife, etc.)

I think the risks of going soft on vigilantism are overstated on that basis.

[AzzarTheGod]

Its one reason I was always so strongly attracted and infatuated with Cosa Nostra and mafia-esque families and other family-oriented concepts similar to Cosa Nostra.

They were as close as you could get to being able to live a pure life, where your grievances could be addressed by the community leader.

Rather than be tyrannized by the system, you had someone to turn to, a resort, if you were a friend of the family.

Very powerful stuff, and it does wonders for the spirit I imagine.

[JurisDictum]

Basically, I don't believe the state should be in the business of exacting revenge on people for breaking the law. But sometimes it is hard to tell a family of a brutal crime that we are an enlightened society that doesn't do that.

So give them options.

But it just seems like we would eventually get situations like the Montagues vs Capulets in major cities.

And eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Edit: I'm not saying no prisons. I'm saying they should be reform-centered.

[AzzarTheGod]

I get it. Some people believe in Babylonian law, some believe in Mesopotamian law.

Some believe in Common Law.

[Ahldagor]

I get it. Some people believe in Babylonian law, some believe in Mesopotamian law.

Some believe in Common Law.

Allowance of vigilantism breaks down to subjective enforcements which is a chaotic spiral.

The familial, feudal system you mentioned has been tried, and doesn't work for large groups. Usually leads to tribal like alliances, fights, and infighting.

Governance ain't easy.

[Bones]

the real problem is that population is just too high.

too many people

[entruil]

http://i.imgur.com/zKSTiZo.png

[AzzarTheGod]

Allowance of vigilantism breaks down to subjective enforcements which is a chaotic spiral.

The familial, feudal system you mentioned has been tried, and doesn't work for large groups. Usually leads to tribal like alliances, fights, and infighting.

Governance ain't easy.

Hold up. I was careful to say soft, not allowed.

We are talking 5-8 year prison sentences for cases of vigilantism, in stay of the 20-40 year sentences we typically are seeing for the last few decades (and only seem to be increasing). You don't believe in that?

[Angushjalmur]

Why have any penalty for instances of vigilantism that are justified though?

Someone kills a member of your family, kill a member of theirs ect.

There's nothing to penalize there

[entruil]

Why have any penalty for instances of vigilantism that are justified though?

Someone kills a member of your family, kill a member of theirs ect.

There's nothing to penalize there

I like to think that a "No-Harm" policy is what we strive to live by.

It's kinda like an election... it can Never be "fair" unless everyone agrees on the rules.

Starting from a place of "Freedom of One's Own Body", there are certain parallels that are inherant.

We are able to decide for Ourselves how we wish to earn/accomplish/proceed.
I am not able to decide for Yourself how you can earn/accomplish/proceed.

therefore,

We both must come to an acceptable standard when mitigating disputes.

I will go in my corner and you can goto your's. We will not be able to hit each other, but just in case, we have an army of like-minds ready to enforce and live prosperously and in peace.


Now Sir, I ask Me!, how Drunk are You!

[Angushjalmur]

I like to think that a "No-Harm" policy is what we strive to live by.

It's kinda like an election... it can Never be "fair" unless everyone agrees on the rules.

Starting from a place of "Freedom of One's Own Body", there are certain parallels that are inherant.

We are able to decide for Ourselves how we wish to earn/accomplish/proceed.
I am not able to decide for Yourself how you can earn/accomplish/proceed.

therefore,

We both must come to an acceptable standard when mitigating disputes.

I will go in my corner and you can goto your's. We will not be able to hit each other, but just in case, we have an army of like-minds ready to enforce and live prosperously and in peace.


Now Sir, I ask Me!, how Drunk are You!

As widespread as war is, as violent as law enforcement are, the amount of violence that is allowed on TV ect i'd hardly say we strive to live by a no harm system.

But assuming we do, It hasnt worked out too well. When you can't kill those who need to be killed, you end up with people like Hillary Clinton running for president

[entruil]

As widespread as war is, as violent as law enforcement are, the amount of violence that is allowed on TV ect i'd hardly say we strive to live by a no harm system.

But assuming we do, It hasnt worked out too well. When you can't kill those who need to be killed, you end up with people like Hillary Clinton running for president

I can't say that we do and I am speaking from my Ideal(read; my interpretation of what's right and Spirit of the Rules(Bill of Rights) so to speak) yet i dug many holes.

hmm ... to much bait there... you are making me rethink thought and posting...

I will throw this in just so people will hate me. It will also have to suffice for my psyche to not have to create a 4-part novel and become a millionaire...

*---- Not Good Rap Loud Curse and anti-thetical(dont know what that means) ----*
Don't Click*Esham - Brick*Don't Click it's worst East Side Hoes and Money (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE01F6R_jSc)
*--Still Meant It , Except I Didn't--*






after preview i add...

Don't blame me for the Libertarian's Curse...



'I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.'
~ Woodrow Wilson (this was after he passed the federal reserve act of 1913)


*`-stands so far, but i just actually read your last post and realized this was an aggravated expansion of... hmm...

[Daywolf]

Well, I sorta like the 5th amendment and that it provides "due process of law".
You can always become a bounty hunter though, within the due process of the law of course.

[Angushjalmur]

Well, I sorta like the 5th amendment and that it provides "due process of law".
You can always become a bounty hunter though, within the due process of the law of course.

Catch and release (into custody) only perpetuates the issues we face as a society.

Let's use Detroit as an example.

They get double digit shootings and more crime than their police can even respond to every week. A good amount of it is being caused by the same people over and over. They get arrested for this or that, bail out, keep doing it, go to court and maybe get prison time. Then they get out and do the same shit again.

Why not let the people handle it? If someone is bringing crime to your neighborhood, it should be your duty to get rid of that person the same way being a citizen obligates you to defend your country from foreign invaders.

You shouldn't shit where you eat, and you shouldn't allow others to shit where you eat either.

[entruil]

Let's use Detroit as an example.

The City was/is still not able to provide basic services. Communities stricken with conflict elected to band together and police themselves, shift services, and prospered at a great rate.... it's more an example of strength through necessity as toward your OP than it is against it ... but that's just like, my opinion, man.

[Angushjalmur]

The City was/is still not able to provide basic services. Communities stricken with conflict elected to band together and police themselves, shift services, and prospered at a great rate.... it's more an example of strength through necessity as toward your OP than it is against it ... but that's just like, my opinion, man.

It got that way because of the criminals who the overly liberal government there lets roam free.

[entruil]

Snakes in every city, Kilpatrick... im crashin out... you might be right about liberal govt. if speaking in modern western terms... night...

*sleep typin -

the beginning is too far off for me to give a comprehensive answer in this thread...

[Daywolf]

Catch and release (into custody) only perpetuates the issues we face as a society.

Let's use Detroit as an example.

They get double digit shootings and more crime than their police can even respond to every week. A good amount of it is being caused by the same people over and over. They get arrested for this or that, bail out, keep doing it, go to court and maybe get prison time. Then they get out and do the same shit again.

Why not let the people handle it? If someone is bringing crime to your neighborhood, it should be your duty to get rid of that person the same way being a citizen obligates you to defend your country from foreign invaders.

You shouldn't shit where you eat, and you shouldn't allow others to shit where you eat either.
Well heck, that's why I moved out of LA 30 years ago, let it burn. I can't say I never looked back, I was visiting a friend for his birthday when the big riots broke out, was crazy stuff being in lock-down and all the radio buzz (I keep a scanner with me in my vehicle). But yeah, screw the cities, especially liberal controlled ones... which are most.

But where I live now, I appreciate due process of the law. Not much goes on around here, but when it does, it's taken care of. If there were no due process of the law, then that could be a problem here. To fix city problems by degrading the good of where I live is not my idea of a solid solution. Yeah ain't no mob coming out here, we does open a can o whipass and they knows it hehe.

[R Flair]

You can't do away with do process. What you can do is enforce the death penalty, and sentence habitual offenders to it. Also fuck all the expensive silly ways of executing criminals. Bullet to the back of the head should suffice.

Some will of course think thats extreme, but the penalty will deter crime and thus, less people will need to be imprisoned or executed. What most people don't understand about people living in poverty is that prison is a vacation for them. I've seen it first hand. Three meals a day and a warm bed is better than they ever had it in the real world. There has to be a stronger deterrent.

[BardPop]

There are many instances where the current loophole system fails and justice is miscarried. There are many instances when the justice system is muzzled simply because of previous precedent or because of some obscure technicality.
You can't legalize vigilantism unless you're targeting a specific group ala the Philliphines drug crackdown. Otherwise injustices could possibly be committed because someone who the community would agree didn't deserve to die could die, the most ethical death penalty-if there is one at all-is where the public votes on who should and shouldn't die. Which I can say would basically be the public hangings that America had in the 1700s and 1800s, the whole town or what not would basically collectively execute someone.

[AzzarTheGod]

Catch and release (into custody) only perpetuates the issues we face as a society.

Let's use Detroit as an example.

They get double digit shootings and more crime than their police can even respond to every week. A good amount of it is being caused by the same people over and over. They get arrested for this or that, bail out, keep doing it, go to court and maybe get prison time. Then they get out and do the same shit again.

Why not let the people handle it? If someone is bringing crime to your neighborhood, it should be your duty to get rid of that person the same way being a citizen obligates you to defend your country from foreign invaders.

You shouldn't shit where you eat, and you shouldn't allow others to shit where you eat either.

http://i.imgur.com/AwEWnxc.jpg

[AzzarTheGod]

Hold up. I was careful to say soft, not allowed.

We are talking 5-8 year prison sentences for cases of vigilantism, in stay of the 20-40 year sentences we typically are seeing for the last few decades (and only seem to be increasing). You don't believe in that?

I'm still waiting for a response.

Anyone can step up. Should there not be reduced sentences for acts of vigilantism?

[R Flair]

I'm still waiting for a response.

Anyone can step up. Should there not be reduced sentences for acts of vigilantism?

You can't leave interpretation of the law in the hands of vigilantes. Its one thing when its easy, a dude is killing someone or pointing a gun at someones head. When you have to judge anything in a gray area it will give rise to psychopaths with very loose interpretations of the law having a field day.

Do process must be protected.

[Patriam1066]

"do process must be protected"

America is fucked

[Ahldagor]

"do process must be protected"

America is fucked

Yes it is.

Also, Azzar, what The Natureboy said is why I didn't reply. It's basically stated in my quoted post.

[Daywolf]

http://i.imgur.com/AwEWnxc.jpg

Wow, almost like from the pages of a comic book...


http://i.imgur.com/0qpVzCX.jpg

Only in Finland :rolleyes: :D

[sOurDieSel]

You can't leave interpretation of the law in the hands of vigilantes. Its one thing when its easy, a dude is killing someone or pointing a gun at someones head. When you have to judge anything in a gray area it will give rise to psychopaths with very loose interpretations of the law having a field day.


I believe you are referring to what we call lawyers and politicians... We have just replaced so called vigilantes with hired gunman working for the government.

[maskedmelon]

We just need to kill people who commit crime. Eventually we will have no crime.

[entruil]

I'm still waiting for a response.

Anyone can step up. Should there not be reduced sentences for acts of vigilantism?

Isn't that precisely what Crime of Passion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_passion) is?

Now to the premeditated side of things;

It's too easy to be clouded by Delusions or other Neurosis.

Having an even playing field for everyone and an objective ?moderator? to determine "Harm" and also ensuring "Just Punishment" is paramount.

The problem with overbloated oppressive governments is the same as with vigilantism(?), crimes are still there except the ones enforcing the laws become the criminals.

Having the same "Judge,Jury, and Executioner" rarely ends well for anyone except the Powerful.

(Kinda ranted and repeated some stuff)...

So on premeditated side of things i would argue we need Tougher Sentences.


We just need to kill people who commit crime. Eventually we will have no crime.

hehehe i feel like i'm running in circles now

[aMindAmok]

Why have any penalty for instances of vigilantism that are justified though?

Someone kills a member of your family, kill a member of theirs ect.

There's nothing to penalize there

This is absurd. Let's say your cousin kills my brother. In retaliation, I choose you as my fair target for death. Would you die willingly? Would you defend youself? Should you kill me as I am trying to kill you does my family now get to kill two of your family indescriminantly? When does this cycle stop? This is why vigilantism is discouraged and punished. There is no way to determine equitable justice for any party outside of mediation. That is the roll the law plays. The rule of law makes civilized society possible. Meating out justice based on revenge will quickly devolve into anarchy. This is one of the ideals that keeps some third world countries from progressing to become a modern society. It's a backwards and regressive concept that best left to the history books.

[aMindAmok]

We just need to kill people who commit crime. Eventually we will have no crime.

... or people.

[entruil]

Not going to say i read it, but this looks like a good read that is at least relevant in the beginning.... web-site is shit so you can look it up yourself or listen to reading on youtube...

"Are Cops Constitutional?" By Roger Roots
Audio Reading - "Are Cops Constitutional?" By Roger Roots, Part 1 of 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKPp_DZM_Bk)



in trying to determine if this had been mentioned before i came across this;
http://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=249113
thought it was worth linking, but not for any real reason...


sorry if i missed it.

[maskedmelon]

... or people.

Nonsense ^^ We'll have the authority and those who abide in him.

Society has no need of criminals.

[R Flair]

Nonsense ^^ We'll have the authority and those who abide in him.

Society has no need of criminals.

Ya. I wouldn't say it so flippantly, but I basically suggested the same.

Most criminals are not scared of jail. If they were going to die they might. Even for simpler crimes, I think prison should be less hospitable. I mean you get fried chicken and pancakes. WTF is that. Serious crimes not worthy of death should eat gruel or bread and water.

[Ahldagor]

So the child that takes a pack of gum should be put to death? Display common sense por favor.

[maskedmelon]

So the child that takes a pack of gum should be put to death? Display common sense por favor.

Why would you criminalize that? ^^

[R Flair]

You know when red herrings get thrown around, your post was real talk.

[AzzarTheGod]

We just need to kill people who commit crime. Eventually we will have no crime.
http://i.imgur.com/AwEWnxc.jpg

Mine fits kind of snug. It hurts :( . Does Olaf take returns?

But It did make me a little bit taller girls notice me now.

[Pokesan]

criminals are the ones committing all the crimes

[Jarnauga]

lol

You guys are closer to sharia laws than you think, you just don't call it that way :D

[maskedmelon]

lol

You guys are closer to sharia laws than you think, you just don't call it that way :D

Right because killing criminals is the same as criminalizing trivial things like aldutery or homosexuality and maiming people for lesser crimes.

[entruil]

"Are Cops Constitutional?" By Roger Roots
Audio Reading - "Are Cops Constitutional?" By Roger Roots, Part 1 of 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKPp_DZM_Bk)

I enjoyed this and thought it highly relevant to this thread and to NC thread... (should of posted it there)

Recommend listening/reading more than once.

Dispelled a lot of my preconceived notions and made me realize I need to read, think, read, post instead of spouting off whatever on top of my head and then reading.

Peace.

[Ahldagor]

Right because killing criminals is the same as criminalizing trivial things like aldutery or homosexuality and maiming people for lesser crimes.

There's so much you're missing with this topic that I'm gonna sharpen your shovel so that you can dig better.

[Jarnauga]

Right because killing criminals is the same as criminalizing trivial things like aldutery or homosexuality and maiming people for lesser crimes.

give me a good reason why we shouldn't torture a pedophile :)

Cut the hand of a thief: hey at least after he won't steal again, win win win

homosexuality is a disease, let's send them to clinics where they'll be sent electroshocks. Even if it doesn't work, at least it will ake them learn

etc, etc, etc..

of course "vigilantism" is a politically correct way of advocating lynchings ;)

[maskedmelon]

There's so much you're missing with this topic that I'm gonna sharpen your shovel so that you can dig better.

Well, to be fair (fare? Don't feel like googling that) you are the one who suggested executing children for taking gum ^^

From the criminal's perspective though,

Would you rather live your life bearing the shame of your transgressions loudly declared by a maiming that has rendered you dependent on the society you have violated, or would you rather liberate society of your burden?

From society's perspective,

Would you rather subject someone to the forgoing, or rid them of their shame and the free the good peoples of that burden. Why should upstanding individuals be punished for the failures of others?

[maskedmelon]

give me a good reason why we shouldn't torture a pedophile :)

Waste of resources and destroying oneself for vengeance is folly.

Cut the hand of a thief: hey at least after he won't steal again, win win win

They may be more frightened to, but it renders them less capable of caring for themselves and introduces addition al burden on society.

homosexuality is a disease, let's send them to clinics where they'll be sent electroshocks. Even if it doesn't work, at least it will ake them learn

This is just stupid ^^

etc, etc, etc..

What else? ^^

of course "vigilantism" is a politically correct way of advocating lynchings ;)

I'm not advocating vigilantism ^^ I think government should do what I proposed in the interest of the people.

[Jarnauga]

I'm not advocating vigilantism ^^ I think government should do what I proposed in the interest of the people.

wasn't talking about you, sorry if i led you to think that.

See again that kind of debate is sterile, because crime in the US has been steadily going down for decades now. But no, let's keep the business of fear going on, it sells guns and votes. That's fucked up, and it happens in europe too (minus the guns part).

[entruil]

it sells guns and votes.

bullshit , Obama sells guns...

OoOooOohhh... shiny!.....

[Ahldagor]

Well, to be fair (fare? Don't feel like googling that) you are the one who suggested executing children for taking gum ^^

From the criminal's perspective though,

Would you rather live your life bearing the shame of your transgressions loudly declared by a maiming that has rendered you dependent on the society you have violated, or would you rather liberate society of your burden?

From society's perspective,

Would you rather subject someone to the forgoing, or rid them of their shame and the free the good peoples of that burden. Why should upstanding individuals be punished for the failures of others?

That's like assuming criminals won't be able to get guns.

[BardPop]

This is absurd. Let's say your cousin kills my brother. In retaliation, I choose you as my fair target for death. Would you die willingly? Would you defend youself? Should you kill me as I am trying to kill you does my family now get to kill two of your family indescriminantly? When does this cycle stop? This is why vigilantism is discouraged and punished. There is no way to determine equitable justice for any party outside of mediation. That is the roll the law plays. The rule of law makes civilized society possible. Meating out justice based on revenge will quickly devolve into anarchy. This is one of the ideals that keeps some third world countries from progressing to become a modern society. It's a backwards and regressive concept that best left to the history books.

/thread

Except for that-ahem-there is no such thing as a modern society. All of the societies are interconnected and the big ones that the rest depend on almost went down in flames several times,-think the bank bailout-, we might have been better if we had stayed a race of goat farmers. Instead we're hyper-industrialized and sucking up the planets oil/gas/coal faster then ever, navigating one disaster after the next, the only thing saving our asses from the burning heat of a complete carbon melt down is the ever increasing technology our scientists keep pulling out from behind the curtain. If not for that we would could have all been dead and gone, the Philippines will keep trucking along and that will be that, being some great "1st world" country isn't really all that much to aspire too, 1st worlders fuck up way more then the 3rd worlders ever could if only because their governments can fuck up more. Hope we'll pull it off but jesus, we've had a pretty rough ride dealing with all these economic, nuclear, and global warming challenges.

[maskedmelon]

That's like assuming criminals won't be able to get guns.

Not sure I follow you here :/ Are you suggesting criminals wouldn't willingly choose execution over a lost hand? You are probably right for most, but that is because they are depraved. I am simply laying the case that capital punishment is infinitely superior and in no way analogous (finally learned how to fucking spell that!) to the backwards barbarism of Sharia law.

Killing criminals is the rational thing to do
It is the just thing to do
It is the compassionate thing to do

How can it not be the right thing to do?

[Nihilist_santa]

Not sure I follow you here :/ Are you suggesting criminals wouldn't willingly choose execution over a lost hand? You are probably right for most, but that is because they are depraved. I am simply laying the case that capital punishment is infinitely superior and in no way analogous (finally learned how to fucking spell that!) to the backwards barbarism of Sharia law.

Killing criminals is the rational thing to do
It is the just thing to do
It is the compassionate thing to do

How can it not be the right thing to do?

No need for us to become barbarians and start maiming people. All we need is some prison reform. Watched a doc on Japanese prisons recently. They are kept segregated and forced to work. There is no ability to create gangs within the prison and they learn a skill and work off their debt. As it is now for the degenerates who are criminals jail becomes second nature where they know they will get 3 squares and TV with their pals and in some cases more drugs than on the street.

[maskedmelon]

No need for us to become barbarians and start maiming people. All we need is some prison reform. Watched a doc on Japanese prisons recently. They are kept segregated and forced to work. There is no ability to create gangs within the prison and they learn a skill and work off their debt. As it is now for the degenerates who are criminals jail becomes second nature where they know they will get 3 squares and TV with their pals and in some cases more drugs than on the street.

Glad to see more recognition of Japanese prisons. Japan does prisons (like many other things) right ^^ They focus on rehabilitation by teaching discipline. Inmates are not allowed to share food or even speak during meals to minimize conflict. That aside though, I'm not advocating maiming people in case that wasn't clear. It is inefficient and morally repugnant.

[Baler]

How do you know she is a witch?
She looks like one!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

[myriverse]

Individuals are far too ignorant to carry out their individual concept of justice. Too much of it just leads to anarchy, which is the ultimate tyranny.

[entruil]

Killing criminals is the rational thing to do
It is the just thing to do
It is the compassionate thing to do

How can it not be the right thing to do?

I really wish it was this simple.

How do you know she is a witch?
She looks like one!


yea, a lot of people would b murdered for Hillary's crimes.

---------

Technological advancements of DNA analysis show why government sanctioned murder is not a good idea.

Thought-Mapping-Precrime Big Data is what would be used to show it's the "right thing to do".

[Angushjalmur]

It really is as simple as killing criminals for the good of society

[Pokesan]

It really is as simple as killing criminals for the good of society

simple is the correct description for people with this opinion.

[Angushjalmur]

simple is the correct description for people with this opinion.

I guess you'd rather waste tax money to imprison them, then set em loose to do the same thing again while they live off government assistance and waste tax money.

I bet you liked Bernie, didn't you

[Daywolf]

It really is as simple as killing criminals for the good of societyWell what do other countries do with them? ...oh yeah they send them to the US as (((((((((((((((((((((((((refugees))))))))))))))))) ))))))))))) now.

[Angushjalmur]

Well what do other countries do with them? ...oh yeah they send them to the US as (((((((((((((((((((((((((refugees))))))))))))))))) ))))))))))) now.

We can -to be safe- assume that muslims are inherently criminal relative to western values and kill them, too

[Angushjalmur]

and some (((others))) as well.

theyre legitimately criminals though

[Daywolf]

We can -to be safe- assume that muslims are inherently criminal relative to western values and kill them, too
Well they really do, some of these guys are coming out of muslim prisons. Then they get right back to crimes. Like Europe, the refugees are filling prisons now. Some of these guys, they are not fleeing, they are being gotten rid of.

I agree though, I'm strong on the death penalty. Prison is for rehabilitation (or use to be), and then there are those not salvageable. If they are dead, they can't murder again. People are so concerned with the murderer, but what about his future victims let alone past ones?

If the heart bleeders want to keep them alive, maybe they should pay out of their own packets like a sponsorship program to pay all expenses. hah in other words, they still gonna die because now it gets personal.

[Angushjalmur]

If the heart bleeders want to keep them alive, maybe they should pay out of their own packets like a sponsorship program to pay all expenses.

Most of the people against the death penalty would realize their beliefs were strictly theoretical if this was mandated

[Daywolf]

Most of the people against the death penalty would realize their beliefs were strictly theoretical if this was mandated
Yep, it hits them in the pocketbook so becomes a real issue.

Then as they pay (if they did) they might pay attention for once and realize how pointless it is as their sponsor just curses them for living and threatens their family for when they bust out. Demands more payments, a new TV, internet, hookers, drug exchanges, intel on future potential targets outside of prison.

See, now it's the govt that pays for it, which means tax payers, us, and with our national debt means generations are still paying for some old murderer that died 50 years ago because it would be unfair if he couldn't live to see the next season of GoT from his 5 star prison accommodations.

[Jarnauga]

One day the us will ban the death penalty, and it will be a giant step towards civilisation

Mark my words ;)

[Nihilist_santa]

One day the us will ban the death penalty, and it will be a giant step towards civilisation

Mark my words ;)

Your post for some reason reminded me how much I loved the movie Papillon.

[Daywolf]

One day the us will ban the death penalty, and it will be a giant step towards civilisation

Mark my words ;)
ehehh once sharia law in france kicks in, I don't think it'll matter, you'll still be trying to climb the 100ft wall on our southern border to get in as your last hope.

[entruil]

ehehh once sharia law in france kicks in, I don't think it'll matter, you'll still be trying to climb the 100ft wall on our southern border to get in as your last hope.

"Not in My Backyaaahd!" - carlin

[Nihilist_santa]

ehehh once sharia law in france kicks in, I don't think it'll matter, you'll still be trying to climb the 100ft wall on our southern border to get in as your last hope.

I can see it now. (((Jarn))) scrambling over the wall at Calais only to be met on the other side by Swish all like....

http://i.imgur.com/URhUtgM.gif

[Jarnauga]

ehehh once sharia law in france kicks in, I don't think it'll matter, you'll still be trying to climb the 100ft wall on our southern border to get in as your last hope.

Do you think it's gonna happen before or after WW3 ? :D

[Nihilist_santa]

WW3 already started. Where you been?

[Daywolf]

Yep, sad but true. In fact there was nearly a first strike last year. We're in it, dude. How it goes, I can't say. But I'm pretty sure there will be an open/visible battle in the near future, not necessarily a first strike scenario. Still watching.

[maskedmelon]

One day the us will ban the death penalty, and it will be a giant step towards civilisation

Mark my words ;)

The death penalty has been a cornerstone of civilization. Societies didn't always have the excess resources to waste on deveneracy that we do now. People came together in common interest and ostracized those who chose not to participate and eliminated those who chose to disrupt.

What it comes down to is this, given the same circumstances some people (be they a minority) choose not to engage in criminality and rather do well for themselves. Society needs more of those people. The fact that they exist suggest behavior is not shaped solely by environment and in turn suggests there is something fundamentally wrong with people who do commit crime or do poorly.

It's not their fault, but it is their nature. Society does not need those people and it is an injustice to mankind to expend resources on them or allow them to proliferate. It is as much a disservice to them and their heirs as it is to society to allow them and their lineage to endure in a state of perpetual misery simply to placate one's own sense of moral fitness.

[Daywolf]

Sigmund Freud..
Didn't he like go crazy or something?
I'll stick to Carl Jung, ...well lesser of two crazy people :D

[entruil]

The death penalty has been a cornerstone of civilization. Societies didn't always have the excess resources to waste on deveneracy that we do now. People came together in common interest and ostracized those who chose not to participate and eliminated those who chose to disrupt.

What it comes down to is this, given the same circumstances some people (be they a minority) choose not to engage in criminality and rather do well for themselves. Society needs more of those people. The fact that they exist suggest behavior is not shaped solely by environment and in turn suggests there is something fundamentally wrong with people who do commit crime or do poorly.

It's not their fault, but it is their nature. Society does not need those people and it is an injustice to mankind to expend resources on them or allow them to proliferate. It is as much a disservice to them and their heirs as it is to society to allow them and their lineage to endure in a state of perpetual misery simply to placate one's own sense of moral fitness.

i can dig it... but i believe the test results are skewed...

too much of the lens is focused on the least able/willing while the upper caste lives with impunity... while you may be correct in an objective manner... the environment created to breed the nature out of people creates a subjective control...

if any of you can figure out what i just typed i would appreciate knowing what it means... pretty sure it might mean something... might be something about the paint chips i just consumed...

*just to clarify i am not trying to make fun... literally just me tryin to understand

[maskedmelon]

Sigmund Freud..
Didn't he like go crazy or something?
I'll stick to Carl Jung, ...well lesser of two crazy people :D

Is that in response to my post? You'll have to expand ^^ I'm not familiar either either except what has been cited here occasionally of their esoteric conjectures on the mind with regard to sex.

[Daywolf]

Is that in response to my post? You'll have to expand ^^ I'm not familiar either either except what has been cited here occasionally of their esoteric conjectures on the mind with regard to sex.
Yeah, though I thought you were aware. It's ok, lots aren't aware of the source from what they are told or pick up. Um Freud was more about as you put it, not their fault, just passed from the parents (good story if you like to electrocute it out of them hehehe). Jung was about upbringing, environment etc.
Me, I take Freud, turn it upside down, and slap a Jung bumpersticker on the rear end. Everyone can potentially be as bad as [insert worst person you can think of here], and then be cast onto the lord of the flies island and make it at least a few days before initiating scorched earth.

[maskedmelon]

Yeah, though I thought you were aware. It's ok, lots aren't aware of the source from what they are told or pick up. Um Freud was more about as you put it, not their fault, just passed from the parents (good story if you like to electrocute it out of them hehehe). Jung was about upbringing, environment etc.
Me, I take Freud, turn it upside down, and slap a Jung bumpersticker on the rear end. Everyone can potentially be as bad as [insert worst person you can think of here], and then be cast onto the lord of the flies island and make it at least a few days before initiating scorched earth.

Oh, that part. No, I wasn't told that, it's my own conclusion and I am happy to elaborate ^^ I say it's not their fault because disparate outcomes given similar environments suggest to me a genetic component. There are reasons we behave as we do beyond upbringing we are no more the same in personality than we are in mental or physical prowess. I don't fault criminals for being criminals anymore than I fault autists for their autism. Nature does not endow us all with the same gifts or shortcomings. Ultimately we all have choices to make, but some of us are prone to destructive behavior more than others. Society is better off without those.

[Ahldagor]

Not sure I follow you here :/ Are you suggesting criminals wouldn't willingly choose execution over a lost hand? You are probably right for most, but that is because they are depraved. I am simply laying the case that capital punishment is infinitely superior and in no way analogous (finally learned how to fucking spell that!) to the backwards barbarism of Sharia law.

Killing criminals is the rational thing to do
It is the just thing to do
It is the compassionate thing to do

How can it not be the right thing to do?

Sharia has nothing to do with it. Your basis was that there is an inherent sense of shame in the criminal and that they would rather be put to death due to their shame. If they don't have a sense of shame, which you shouldn't because it isn't 1500's puritanical law anymore, then how could they feel shame that they would need liberation from via death. Get modern with your thoughts on this, research behaviorism, research profitability within criminal justice, research criminal justice reform, and weigh Santa's reform argument while comparing it to how and why criminal justice is applied.

[Daywolf]

Oh, that part. No, I wasn't told that, it's my own conclusion and I am happy to elaborate ^^ I say it's not their fault because disparate outcomes given similar environments suggest to me a genetic component. There are reasons we behave as we do beyond upbringing we are no more the same in personality than we are in mental or physical prowess. I don't fault criminals for being criminals anymore than I fault autists for their autism. Nature does not endow us all with the same gifts or shortcomings. Ultimately we all have choices to make, but some of us are prone to destructive behavior more than others. Society is better off without those.
Yeah, that's Freud. It's what they teach in school from early on, in most everything as a shaped perspective from their lessons. Like taking history class, you are likely getting the lecture from a freudian perspective. All the teachers are taught Freud psychology in college as part of their child psychology courses. So you start on it early, to mold your reasoning and perspectives.

[Ahldagor]

Yeah, that's Freud. It's what they teach in school from early on, in most everything as a shaped perspective from their lessons. Like taking history class, you are likely getting the lecture from a freudian perspective. All the teachers are taught Freud psychology in college as part of their child psychology courses. So you start on it early, to mold your reasoning and perspectives.

Freud is only taught as a historical point. His psychology is vastly invalid and not practiced. There's also a literary criticism based on Freud, but it's just a method of analyzing a work and not valid in projecting onto a greater public debate.

[Daywolf]

Freud is only taught as a historical point. His psychology is vastly invalid and not practiced. There's also a literary criticism based on Freud, but it's just a method of analyzing a work and not valid in projecting onto a greater public debate.

No it's everywhere.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/weekinreview/25cohen.html?_r=0
You are only talking about the expensive liberal universities as of recent. Whatever the latest craze there is I guess. Back down on the ground it's everywhere.

You know, because this is about developing reasoning skills etc. As not everyone can afford to stay in college all their life, well teachers etc were traind decades ago and in charge of schools etc. Anywal, a lot of people are still effected by it, part of their thing. Maybe soon enough we'll get UN or FEMA re-education camps opened to teach us the latest pile of horse sh^t to make us even more crazy ;)

[maskedmelon]

Yeah, that's Freud. It's what they teach in school from early on, in most everything as a shaped perspective from their lessons. Like taking history class, you are likely getting the lecture from a freudian perspective. All the teachers are taught Freud psychology in college as part of their child psychology courses. So you start on it early, to mold your reasoning and perspectives.

No, I get where you are coming from Day and where you want to go with it, but my thoughts on this isn't a product of some Freudian indoctrination. I am very much a proponent of individual responsibility, but it is painfully evident (and has become more so as I have aged) that some people are simply more destructive than others even as infants. I don't see how you can attribute all of human behavior to environment most especially when you see different results given the same or similar circumstances :/

How do you account for different outcomes given the same or similar circumstances?

[maskedmelon]

Sharia has nothing to do with it. Your basis was that there is an inherent sense of shame in the criminal and that they would rather be put to death due to their shame. If they don't have a sense of shame, which you shouldn't because it isn't 1500's puritanical law anymore, then how could they feel shame that they would need liberation from via death. Get modern with your thoughts on this, research behaviorism, research profitability within criminal justice, research criminal justice reform, and weigh Santa's reform argument while comparing it to how and why criminal justice is applied.

Jarn suggested some of us were closer to Sharia shortly after my post, so that is how it ties in ^^ As for feeling ashamed of crime, they very much should feel ashamed of wrongdoing and I find it amusing for you to suggest otherwise ^^ If they do not there is something wrong with them. We have enough people as it is and don't need to waste resources correcting deficient ones.

[Daywolf]

No, I get where you are coming from Day and where you want to go with it, but my thoughts on this isn't a product of some Freudian indoctrination. I am very much a proponent of individual responsibility, but it is painfully evident (and has become more so as I have aged) that some people are simply more destructive than others even as infants. I don't see how you can attribute all of human behavior to environment most especially when you see different results given the same or similar circumstances :/

How do you account for different outcomes given the same or similar circumstances?Because like I mentioned, everybody is born bad. One baby is just as screwed up as the next. Thats closer to Jung, but taking the bad people of Frued that were just born that way, applying it to everyone. Still Jung, but just at the lowest point I guess.

So then yeah, upbringing makes 100% the final product. Not 50%, or some starting at 10% while others 80%, but everyone starting at -100% :D If we are diligent, maybe we can make it to 0. But the odds of that is maybe 1 in 15 billion.

So yeah, Frued. If you can say one is born good and another not so good or bad, well thats just what it comes from :) ...in the West.

[Jarnauga]

Jarn suggested some of us were closer to Sharia shortly after my post, so that is how it ties in ^^ As for feeling ashamed of crime, they very much should feel ashamed of wrongdoing and I find it amusing for you to suggest otherwise ^^ If they do not there is something wrong with them. We have enough people as it is and don't need to waste resources correcting deficient ones.

My point was that saying "let's kill all criminals so they don't do it again" is not that different than saying "let's cut his and, he won't steal again"

or saying that women and men together are the reason for rapes (https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/331907383771148288). i can find lots of muslim assholes that agree with that, trust me.

[maskedmelon]

Because like I mentioned, everybody is born bad. One baby is just as screwed up as the next. Thats closer to Jung, but taking the bad people of Frued that were just born that way, applying it to everyone. Still Jung, but just at the lowest point I guess.

So then yeah, upbringing makes 100% the final product. Not 50%, or some starting at 10% while others 80%, but everyone starting at -100% :D If we are diligent, maybe we can make it to 0. But the odds of that is maybe 1 in 15 billion.

So yeah, Frued. If you can say one is born good and another not so good or bad, well thats just what it comes from :) ...in the West.


So you believe that all people with shitty upbringing will always be shitty adults and become criminals?

[maskedmelon]

My point was that saying "let's kill all criminals so they don't do it again" is not that different than saying "let's cut his and, he won't steal again"

or saying that women and men together are the reason for rapes (https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/331907383771148288). i can find lots of muslim assholes that agree with that, trust me.

I understood what you were saying and that is why I made the case for the moral superiority of capital punishment ^^

[Jarnauga]

there's no moral superiority, lol.

I honestly wouldn't mind death penalty in a perfect system where we would have mind reading psychers or something. (i guess the reasons why you'd deserve death are open to debate too, but let's not go there)

The fact is the judicial system, be it in the US or in Europe or anywhere else is not perfect. There's mistakes being made. And that's fine, no system is perfect. But at least with lifelong emprisonment, you can fix the mistake and free the guy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Dils). Not with death penaly.

I'd add that death penalty cost actually more than lifelong jail (http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2014/05/01/considering-the-death-penalty-your-tax-dollars-at-work/#46c478bb17f0) (can't remember who said that, but you're wrong).

In 1981, most of the french public opinion was for the death penalty. And still, presidential candidate Miterrand said he would abolish it if he was elected. That was some kind of balls that he had. We definitely left barbary behind us when we did that.

“Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”

[Angushjalmur]

there's no moral superiority, lol.

I honestly wouldn't mind death penalty in a perfect system where we would have mind reading psychers or something. (i guess the reasons why you'd deserve death are open to debate too, but let's not go there)

The fact is the judicial system, be it in the US or in Europe or anywhere else is not perfect. There's mistakes being made. And that's fine, no system is perfect. But at least with lifelong emprisonment, you can fix the mistake and free the guy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Dils). Not with death penaly.

I'd add that death penalty cost actually more than lifelong jail (http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2014/05/01/considering-the-death-penalty-your-tax-dollars-at-work/#46c478bb17f0) (can't remember who said that, but you're wrong).

In 1981, most of the french public opinion was for the death penalty. And still, presidential candidate Miterrand said he would abolish it if he was elected. That was some kind of balls that he had. We definitely left barbary behind us when we did that.

Spending 15 years in prison effectively ends your life. That's a huge gap in what takes constant commitment to develop. That would have debilitating consequences psychologically as well.

The more humane (and financially sound) solution would be to just execute death row inmates/ lifer inmates. If you end up executing an innocent person here or there, who gives a shit? Imagine having over 7 billion dollars and misplacing a dollar.

[entruil]

if any of you can figure out what i just typed i would appreciate knowing what it means... pretty sure it might mean something... might be something about the paint chips i just consumed...

well ent, you know pretty damn well that you dont make any sense... maybe you should leave the paint chips alone.

Here, read this:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Feinberg

..................Bernie got me on tilt... i was alluding to and looking for that before but i just found it...


*about the only thing any of this has in common is paint chips...
http://i.imgur.com/OqZdN6D.jpg
nothing to see here just coolin' myself off...

[Ahldagor]

Jarn suggested some of us were closer to Sharia shortly after my post, so that is how it ties in ^^ As for feeling ashamed of crime, they very much should feel ashamed of wrongdoing and I find it amusing for you to suggest otherwise ^^ If they do not there is something wrong with them. We have enough people as it is and don't need to waste resources correcting deficient ones.

Why should they feel ashamed? What they do they're reaponsible for which has no bearing on feeling or not feeling shame.

[maskedmelon]

Why should they feel ashamed? What they do they're reaponsible for which has no bearing on feeling or not feeling shame.

Shame is an integral component of functional society. Without it we might all behave indiscriminately in each our own self interest with no regard for our fellow humans. It is a mechanism of encouraging compliance with societal standards. It is a natural response to evaluation of oneself relative to standards and is a motivator for improvement. It is one of the bonds by which society is forged. It's absence suggests apathy.

[Jarnauga]

The more humane (and financially sound) solution would be to just execute death row inmates/ lifer inmates. If you end up executing an innocent person here or there, who gives a shit?


http://i.imgur.com/uH7Lp.gif

[Angushjalmur]

Sometimes the truth makes you upset, huh?

[Angushjalmur]

Would it sweeten the deal if we used them as lab rats before we killed them?

[Ahldagor]

Shame is an integral component of functional society. Without it we might all behave indiscriminately in each our own self interest with no regard for our fellow humans. It is a mechanism of encouraging compliance with societal standards. It is a natural response to evaluation of oneself relative to standards and is a motivator for improvement. It is one of the bonds by which society is forged. It's absence suggests apathy.

Were you raised in a Catholic orphanage? Shame is not integral to anything but personal morality if ascribed to by the individual.

[maskedmelon]

Were you raised in a Catholic orphanage? Shame is not integral to anything but personal morality if ascribed to by the individual.

Noooo, you cane be ashamed of all kinds of things that have may or may not have something to do with morality, like being stupid or poor or fat or clumsy or dependent or dishonest. It's about evaluating oneself relative to standards, often societal, but they can also be communal like those of a team or class, or familial, or even personal. Shame is essentially a feeling of remorse or regret inadequacy at one's own shortcomings whatever they may be, not necessarily moral, they can be practical or even superficial.

[Ahldagor]

Noooo, you cane be ashamed of all kinds of things that have may or may not have something to do with morality, like being stupid or poor or fat or clumsy or dependent or dishonest. It's about evaluating oneself relative to standards, often societal, but they can also be communal like those of a team or class, or familial, or even personal. Shame is essentially a feeling of remorse or regret inadequacy at one's own shortcomings whatever they may be, not necessarily moral, they can be practical or even superficial.

So it's invalid subjectivity. You do realize you're harping on one specific definition of shame with that while the others deal primarily in morality, right? Still doesn't counter my original analogy. Should you feel the need to respond then you should trace the logic of your stance as you should through an ethic that should be ascribed to being outside of should which should surmise in should being the key indicator of invalid subjectivity.

[Daywolf]

So you believe that all people with shitty upbringing will always be shitty adults and become criminals?
Look at the inner-cities that are burning. Family structure has been destroyed. I know it's not the entirety of the problem, but it's the starting point. Fatherless children growing up, no real guidance, no mentoring. In the case of blacks, it's even worse since if the fatherless children do find a mentor; it's government sponsored, black liberation theology churches or inner-city gangs (or all of the above).

And I believe they are actually targeted to be that way, by local, state and federal government. Like one of my fav Reagan quotes "government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the problem" (but not that there should be no govt). They use psychology to manipulate the various groups, it's literally in everything now, even f2p mmo's.

When babies are born, they are born completely sociopathic. It takes us a while to realize that the universe in fact doesn't revolve around us. And it's not just automatic, it takes a good deal of basic wisdom and usually within the first 12 years of development. Wisdom often comes by fire and trial, unless you are fortunate to have someone teach you as best they can. Nothing too complicated that a low IQ cant learn, while high IQ no great advantage.

But not saying that the totality of humanity is pure evil, there is some evil that just must be learned before doing, even of the unthinkable as it were. Just that we are all void, but not soulless. We even have emotional responses by nature, but those responses can eventually be nullified if such acts are committed over and over. Even to the point of a negative response becoming a good response and a desire for it.

I think of humans as like a base code, all the needed code to operate, layers of code (not getting too technical here). just like a program works, but very advanced as in sentient AI (no emphasis on the Artificial, but just to provide the familiar). Everyone is imprinted the same in the beginning much like a template including all the code to basically function. Including firmware to interact with the body, it's a complete system. The brain is basically a CPU and data storage unit, very mechanical. But what we are, at our core, we're data, and everything else in our system (body etc) is there as an environment to develop our data, and much of it programmed from the external throughout our lives.

Now, introduce a virus. Introduce various anti-virus programs. And finally when the system fails (the cpu, the power supply etc), the totality of the data can be transferred. After all, everything in our environment is very possibly digital. A sort of computer running a simulation of sorts.

Now, for um crime and punishment, there just comes a point that they are so corrupt, there is no coming back. I don't think we are born as total psychopaths, but that is simply the cascade effect of an introduced virus to the system. If dealt with early, it can be anti-virused out before damage to the system is done, but at some point it does damage the base code and overwrites ethical reasoning subroutines. Not that a sociopath is ethical, but whatever could have been developed over that becomes fundamentally broken, like a hard drive making "click of death" noises and begins behaving erratic. Either the system is allowed to corrupt and destroy other systems, or it is shut down.


tl;dr we're living in a digital simulation, full of consequences to our own actions.

[Jarnauga]

Sometimes the truth makes you upset, huh?

If for you Justice is "who gives a shit if there's innocent people convicted", i'm baffled, and im not gonna keep talking to an obvious moron, yep.

[Daywolf]

If for you Justice is "who gives a shit if there's innocent people convicted", i'm baffled, and im not gonna keep talking to an obvious moron, yep.why...? france celebrates the french revolution every year. You think the (((guilty))) were having their heads chopped off? Men, women and children, whole families. pffff go throw a party.

[Jarnauga]

why...? france celebrates the french revolution every year. You think the (((guilty))) were having their heads chopped off? Men, women and children, whole families. pffff go throw a party.

We're not celebrating chopping heads off, we're celebrating the start of the republic.

4th of july is about the indpendance of the usa, not killing british. Nowutimean ?

[Daywolf]

4th of july is about the indpendance of the usa, not killing british. Nowutimean ?
You don't know the difference between an army and the families consisting of men, women and children? Did the Continental Army even make it a common practice of capturing soldiers in the revolutionary war and beheading them all in public squares? At the conclusion of the war, did we round them all up and chop off heads? That's savagery. There were issues on both sides, but in the end, we didn't decimate them. And they were soldiers even.

[sOurDieSel]

We're not celebrating chopping heads off, we're celebrating the start of the republic.

4th of july is about the indpendance of the usa, not killing british. Nowutimean ?

Speak for yourself Frenchie. You're not even American. Them filthy Red Coats deserve a lot worse than what they got. You also make a compelling argument for banning Muslim immigration because you know... chopping off heads and all.

[Daywolf]

Well I'd trade our leftists for their Brexiter's any day of the week. Then everyone would be happy. GB is good in my book, at least half of them. france is doomed, they did it to themselves. They have been doing it to themselves for a very long time. Sad...

[maskedmelon]

Look at the inner-cities that are burning. Family structure has been destroyed. I know it's not the entirety of the problem, but it's the starting point. Fatherless children growing up, no real guidance, no mentoring. In the case of blacks, it's even worse since if the fatherless children do find a mentor; it's government sponsored, black liberation theology churches or inner-city gangs (or all of the above).

And I believe they are actually targeted to be that way, by local, state and federal government. Like one of my fav Reagan quotes "government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the problem" (but not that there should be no govt). They use psychology to manipulate the various groups, it's literally in everything now, even f2p mmo's.

When babies are born, they are born completely sociopathic. It takes us a while to realize that the universe in fact doesn't revolve around us. And it's not just automatic, it takes a good deal of basic wisdom and usually within the first 12 years of development. Wisdom often comes by fire and trial, unless you are fortunate to have someone teach you as best they can. Nothing too complicated that a low IQ cant learn, while high IQ no great advantage.

But not saying that the totality of humanity is pure evil, there is some evil that just must be learned before doing, even of the unthinkable as it were. Just that we are all void, but not soulless. We even have emotional responses by nature, but those responses can eventually be nullified if such acts are committed over and over. Even to the point of a negative response becoming a good response and a desire for it.

I think of humans as like a base code, all the needed code to operate, layers of code (not getting too technical here). just like a program works, but very advanced as in sentient AI (no emphasis on the Artificial, but just to provide the familiar). Everyone is imprinted the same in the beginning much like a template including all the code to basically function. Including firmware to interact with the body, it's a complete system. The brain is basically a CPU and data storage unit, very mechanical. But what we are, at our core, we're data, and everything else in our system (body etc) is there as an environment to develop our data, and much of it programmed from the external throughout our lives.

Now, introduce a virus. Introduce various anti-virus programs. And finally when the system fails (the cpu, the power supply etc), the totality of the data can be transferred. After all, everything in our environment is very possibly digital. A sort of computer running a simulation of sorts.

Now, for um crime and punishment, there just comes a point that they are so corrupt, there is no coming back. I don't think we are born as total psychopaths, but that is simply the cascade effect of an introduced virus to the system. If dealt with early, it can be anti-virused out before damage to the system is done, but at some point it does damage the base code and overwrites ethical reasoning subroutines. Not that a sociopath is ethical, but whatever could have been developed over that becomes fundamentally broken, like a hard drive making "click of death" noises and begins behaving erratic. Either the system is allowed to corrupt and destroy other systems, or it is shut down.


tl;dr we're living in a digital simulation, full of consequences to our own actions.

You never answered my question ^^ If you believe all babies are born with identical disposition and that behavior/personality is 100% environment driven, then you believe that all children with terrible upbringing will necessarily develop terrible tendencies, which we both know to be inaccurate ^^

Unfortunately there is no way to test your premise that all people begin equally destructive directly, but we can indirectly by studying the outcomes of people in different environments and what we see is that while most may appear to conform to your assertion, all do not. I do not dispute he emportance of environment, but the fact that we see different outcomes given he same environment very clearly demands other influences ^^

Also, placing such a great emphasis on the importance of environment does no more for the argument of individual responsibility. You can blame the environment just as easily as you can blame genetics and if you consider all people equally deplorable to begin with individual responsibility becomes entirely unreasonable because you are demanding people. Shave contrary to their nature ^^

[maskedmelon]

So it's invalid subjectivity. You do realize you're harping on one specific definition of shame with that while the others deal primarily in morality, right?

No, I did't know that, but I'll take you at your word ^^ I am not religious and am still ashamed when I do things wrong, most especially if it reflects poorly on those around me.

Still doesn't counter my original analogy.

About executing children for taking a pack of gum? If that is what you are talking about, again, why would you do that? That plays into the next step of deciding what should be criminalized. If the penalty for crime is death, it behooves one to responsibly define crime and there are unlimited ways to do that ^^

Should you feel the need to respond then you should trace the logic of your stance as you should through an ethic that should be ascribed to being outside of should which should surmise in should being the key indicator of invalid subjectivity.

From society's perspective, what one should do is that which benefits society ^^

[Ahldagor]

No, I did't know that, but I'll take you at your word ^^ I am not religious and am still ashamed when I do things wrong, most especially if it reflects poorly on those around me.



About executing children for taking a pack of gum? If that is what you are talking about, again, why would you do that? That plays into the next step of deciding what should be criminalized. If the penalty for crime is death, it behooves one to responsibly define crime and there are unlimited ways to do that ^^



From society's perspective, what one should do is that which benefits society ^^

The children thing was a slippery slope statement made in rebuttal to the generalisation of all criminals should be executed. The analogy was "that's like saying criminals won't get guns." Gotta keep up yo.

[AzzarTheGod]

You don't know the difference between an army and the families consisting of men, women and children? Did the Continental Army even make it a common practice of capturing soldiers in the revolutionary war and beheading them all in public squares? At the conclusion of the war, did we round them all up and chop off heads? That's savagery. There were issues on both sides, but in the end, we didn't decimate them. And they were soldiers even.

The dunks. (((Jarnauga))) has a lot to be sorry for. I have a much better understanding of him now and why he is an apologist for absolutely everything under the sun.

[Angushjalmur]

If for you Justice is "who gives a shit if there's innocent people convicted", i'm baffled, and im not gonna keep talking to an obvious moron, yep.

if a handful out of 7+ billion are wrongfully executed, it's not a travesty or anything. I'd be willing to bet BLM has killed more people than the number of innocents we've executed

[Daywolf]

The dunks. (((Jarnauga))) has a lot to be sorry for. I have a much better understanding of him now and why he is an apologist for absolutely everything under the sun. Well I only dunk because of his short-sighted world view, I don't hold him responsible for what happened during the french revolution personally. Just like I don't hold my fellow countrymen alive today accountable for slavery and reparations. But what (((Jarnauga))) does in the future, I don't know, because he refuses to learn from history thus will likely be there when it's repeated.

[Daywolf]

So you believe that all people with shitty upbringing will always be shitty adults and become criminals?

You never answered my question ^^ If you believe all babies are born with identical disposition and that behavior/personality is 100% environment driven, then you believe that all children with terrible upbringing will necessarily develop terrible tendencies, which we both know to be inaccurate ^^

Unfortunately there is no way to test your premise that all people begin equally destructive directly, but we can indirectly by studying the outcomes of people in different environments and what we see is that while most may appear to conform to your assertion, all do not. I do not dispute he emportance of environment, but the fact that we see different outcomes given he same environment very clearly demands other influences ^^

Also, placing such a great emphasis on the importance of environment does no more for the argument of individual responsibility. You can blame the environment just as easily as you can blame genetics and if you consider all people equally deplorable to begin with individual responsibility becomes entirely unreasonable because you are demanding people. Shave contrary to their nature ^^
I did answer it, it just depends what your view of a sociopath is I guess. I mean being good, bad or neutral (apart from yin and yang). It's a bad and broken state to be born into, and all babies are born that way. From then on it's environment, upbringing. And I'm excluding disorders, but talking about the average and what we call healthy or normal baby.

But there can be traits, but in general it's all the same, I mean the margin of difference isn't that great. We are all one race, and we all share basically the same miserable problems from birth. Upbringing if done properly just gives us the knowledge and wisdom to choose for ourselves better, bringing us out of that original state of being a total sociopath.

But no, just because a person is born into a bad environment doesn't mean they will become bad. The likelihood is much higher though to become a psychopath or something, especially having been born bad as everyone is, and not rising above being a sociopath due to that environment and especially upbringing.

So it's not just shitty upbringing = shitty adults, we are basically born criminal, or a great great tendency to become criminal. We basically spend the beginning of our lives under the watchful eyes of the prison warden: our parents :D

[AzzarTheGod]

Well I only dunk because of his short-sighted world view, I don't hold him responsible for what happened during the french revolution personally. Just like I don't hold my fellow countrymen alive today accountable for slavery and reparations. But what (((Jarnauga))) does in the future, I don't know, because he refuses to learn from history thus will likely be there when it's repeated.

Supplemental dunks on (((Jarnauga))) in this post.

[maskedmelon]

I need to say that while it is rational, dismissal of the death of innocents as a trivial matter is morally depraved. However, damning the rest of mankind to stagnation or worse simply to avoid the responsibility for that most repugnant of decisions is infinitely more vile and speaks boldly of the insidious worship of self that plagues mankind.

[AzzarTheGod]

Fired upboats on account of Daywolf's strike on the (((French Connection))). Underrated.

melon is highly overrated, in a good way-- so no honourable mentions necessary.