Punishments

[TA1LGUNN3R]

I voted:

• pro capital punishment: I wouldn't mind if a captured terrorist, serial killer/rapist, a warcriminal(only for high ranks), etc. gets executed.
• against corporal punishment: doesn't help much
• pro life sentences: For slightly lesser murders than capital punishment, like mere singular murders.
• pro forced labor: if and only if the inmates get a small compensation(below market wages of course)
• oppose public humiliation: it's contraproctive to rehabilitation
• oppose psychological punishments: this could possibly deteriorate the inmates behavior

About how I see it as well. For the worst criminals, like the ones you mentioned, no point in keeping them around. They are a threat to society, and as they are generally psycopaths, they can't be reformed. They can put on a show, saying that they are "changed", but they lie like how regular people breath.

Life sentences (with parole a possibility, depending on the case) I can see for serious crimes, but mainly for the ones who are not serial killers/rapists/war criminals.

Forced labor, yeah. And some sort of compensation. Put those guys to work doing something useful. It may even give them a chance when their sentence is up to find a place to work and become a productive member of society.

Public humiliation? No. Counter productive at best.
Psychological punishments? No, as it can end up making things worse. Psychopaths it wouldn't affect and only make the person(s) doing it a potential target. Others, well, it could do irreparable damage to them.

Re: capital punishment.

Except, as a gov't by the people and not one derived by supernatural authority, how can that gov't have the authority to kill when the individual hasn't?

When is it acceptable for the collective do that which the individual cannot? If you believe that the gov't has the authority to kill, you must acknowledge that mobs supersede the individual. Or that individuals also possess the right to kill as punishment.

-TG

[Metsfanmax]

I voted:

• pro capital punishment: I wouldn't mind if a captured terrorist, serial killer/rapist, a warcriminal(only for high ranks), etc. gets executed.
• against corporal punishment: doesn't help much
• pro life sentences: For slightly lesser murders than capital punishment, like mere singular murders.
• pro forced labor: if and only if the inmates get a small compensation(below market wages of course)
• oppose public humiliation: it's contraproctive to rehabilitation
• oppose psychological punishments: this could possibly deteriorate the inmates behavior

About how I see it as well. For the worst criminals, like the ones you mentioned, no point in keeping them around. They are a threat to society, and as they are generally psycopaths, they can't be reformed. They can put on a show, saying that they are "changed", but they lie like how regular people breath.

Life sentences (with parole a possibility, depending on the case) I can see for serious crimes, but mainly for the ones who are not serial killers/rapists/war criminals.

Forced labor, yeah. And some sort of compensation. Put those guys to work doing something useful. It may even give them a chance when their sentence is up to find a place to work and become a productive member of society.

Public humiliation? No. Counter productive at best.
Psychological punishments? No, as it can end up making things worse. Psychopaths it wouldn't affect and only make the person(s) doing it a potential target. Others, well, it could do irreparable damage to them.

Re: capital punishment.

Except, as a gov't by the people and not one derived by supernatural authority, how can that gov't have the authority to kill when the individual hasn't?

When is it acceptable for the collective do that which the individual cannot? If you believe that the gov't has the authority to kill, you must acknowledge that mobs supersede the individual. Or that individuals also possess the right to kill as punishment.

-TG

Eh. We could make the same argument about any form of bodily intrusion. Individuals have no right to forcibly detain other individuals in small locked rooms for extended periods of time, but the government does.

[muy_thaiguy]

I voted:

• pro capital punishment: I wouldn't mind if a captured terrorist, serial killer/rapist, a warcriminal(only for high ranks), etc. gets executed.
• against corporal punishment: doesn't help much
• pro life sentences: For slightly lesser murders than capital punishment, like mere singular murders.
• pro forced labor: if and only if the inmates get a small compensation(below market wages of course)
• oppose public humiliation: it's contraproctive to rehabilitation
• oppose psychological punishments: this could possibly deteriorate the inmates behavior

About how I see it as well. For the worst criminals, like the ones you mentioned, no point in keeping them around. They are a threat to society, and as they are generally psycopaths, they can't be reformed. They can put on a show, saying that they are "changed", but they lie like how regular people breath.

Life sentences (with parole a possibility, depending on the case) I can see for serious crimes, but mainly for the ones who are not serial killers/rapists/war criminals.

Forced labor, yeah. And some sort of compensation. Put those guys to work doing something useful. It may even give them a chance when their sentence is up to find a place to work and become a productive member of society.

Public humiliation? No. Counter productive at best.
Psychological punishments? No, as it can end up making things worse. Psychopaths it wouldn't affect and only make the person(s) doing it a potential target. Others, well, it could do irreparable damage to them.

Re: capital punishment.

Except, as a gov't by the people and not one derived by supernatural authority, how can that gov't have the authority to kill when the individual hasn't?

When is it acceptable for the collective do that which the individual cannot? If you believe that the gov't has the authority to kill, you must acknowledge that mobs supersede the individual. Or that individuals also possess the right to kill as punishment.

-TG

Outside of serial rapists (by rape itself), the other criminals have killed, and on more than one occasion. Though serial rapists and serial killers are not exactly mutually exclusive, and can often be crimes associated to war criminals as well. These individuals cause long lasting, and often do irreparable harm (if they let their victims live, or even to the families, friends, and/or communities) to their victims. And that's the best case scenarios. What's worse, even if they know it was wrong to do, they don't care. They do it anyway. And since this falls under the discussion, do you disagree with the numerous death sentences given to the Nazi hierarchy during the Nuremberg Trials? That those men, who facilitated, planned, and ordered the deaths of millions of Jews, Romanis, Slavs, gays, lesbians, and many others simply because those people were Jews, Romani, Slavs, etc? Or do you believe that they should have been put in prison, allowed to live, and live on the taxes of the very people they had terrorized for years?

[nietzsche]

Feel free to explain how I'm wrong. If I screw someone in a business deal, and they turn up at my house with thugs, then next time I screw someone I'll just hire my own thugs to pre-empt their retaliation. Violence and retribution don't teach anyone anything.

But that's not what you said mrs wdk.

Same thing. Violent punishment teaches you not to get caught out again, not to stop behaving that way.

Dear Mrs WDK,

I'm sorry to inform you I will not participate in this discussion. It's a rich topic with many possibilities but I'm afraid I have a limited amount of time, and I have to choose wisely how to use it. These days, I will be using my time watching TV, reading and trolling.

I hope you understand.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

I voted:

• pro capital punishment: I wouldn't mind if a captured terrorist, serial killer/rapist, a warcriminal(only for high ranks), etc. gets executed.
• against corporal punishment: doesn't help much
• pro life sentences: For slightly lesser murders than capital punishment, like mere singular murders.
• pro forced labor: if and only if the inmates get a small compensation(below market wages of course)
• oppose public humiliation: it's contraproctive to rehabilitation
• oppose psychological punishments: this could possibly deteriorate the inmates behavior

About how I see it as well. For the worst criminals, like the ones you mentioned, no point in keeping them around. They are a threat to society, and as they are generally psycopaths, they can't be reformed. They can put on a show, saying that they are "changed", but they lie like how regular people breath.

Life sentences (with parole a possibility, depending on the case) I can see for serious crimes, but mainly for the ones who are not serial killers/rapists/war criminals.

Forced labor, yeah. And some sort of compensation. Put those guys to work doing something useful. It may even give them a chance when their sentence is up to find a place to work and become a productive member of society.

Public humiliation? No. Counter productive at best.
Psychological punishments? No, as it can end up making things worse. Psychopaths it wouldn't affect and only make the person(s) doing it a potential target. Others, well, it could do irreparable damage to them.

Re: capital punishment.

Except, as a gov't by the people and not one derived by supernatural authority, how can that gov't have the authority to kill when the individual hasn't?

When is it acceptable for the collective do that which the individual cannot? If you believe that the gov't has the authority to kill, you must acknowledge that mobs supersede the individual. Or that individuals also possess the right to kill as punishment.

-TG

Eh. We could make the same argument about any form of bodily intrusion. Individuals have no right to forcibly detain other individuals in small locked rooms for extended periods of time, but the government does.

That is a corollary.

Outside of serial rapists (by rape itself), the other criminals have killed, and on more than one occasion. Though serial rapists and serial killers are not exactly mutually exclusive, and can often be crimes associated to war criminals as well. These individuals cause long lasting, and often do irreparable harm (if they let their victims live, or even to the families, friends, and/or communities) to their victims. And that's the best case scenarios. What's worse, even if they know it was wrong to do, they don't care. They do it anyway. And since this falls under the discussion, do you disagree with the numerous death sentences given to the Nazi hierarchy during the Nuremberg Trials? That those men, who facilitated, planned, and ordered the deaths of millions of Jews, Romanis, Slavs, gays, lesbians, and many others simply because those people were Jews, Romani, Slavs, etc? Or do you believe that they should have been put in prison, allowed to live, and live on the taxes of the very people they had terrorized for years?

I'm merely pointing out the discrepancy that exists. Do they deserve to die? Yes, absolutely. Does a gov't have that authority to do so? I don't believe so. Once you endow the gov't with the power to kill, it can extend that power to any citizen.

-TG

[mrswdk]

Feel free to explain how I'm wrong. If I screw someone in a business deal, and they turn up at my house with thugs, then next time I screw someone I'll just hire my own thugs to pre-empt their retaliation. Violence and retribution don't teach anyone anything.

But that's not what you said mrs wdk.

Same thing. Violent punishment teaches you not to get caught out again, not to stop behaving that way.

Dear Mrs WDK,

I'm sorry to inform you I will not participate in this discussion. It's a rich topic with many possibilities but I'm afraid I have a limited amount of time, and I have to choose wisely how to use it. These days, I will be using my time watching TV, reading and trolling.

I hope you understand.

Vales verga.

[nietzsche]

Feel free to explain how I'm wrong. If I screw someone in a business deal, and they turn up at my house with thugs, then next time I screw someone I'll just hire my own thugs to pre-empt their retaliation. Violence and retribution don't teach anyone anything.

But that's not what you said mrs wdk.

Same thing. Violent punishment teaches you not to get caught out again, not to stop behaving that way.

Dear Mrs WDK,

I'm sorry to inform you I will not participate in this discussion. It's a rich topic with many possibilities but I'm afraid I have a limited amount of time, and I have to choose wisely how to use it. These days, I will be using my time watching TV, reading and trolling.

I hope you understand.

Vales verga.