The PokéCommunity Forums  

Go Back   The PokéCommunity Forums > Off-Topic Discussions > Discussions & Debates
Sign Up Rules/FAQ Live Battle Blogs Mark Forums Read

Notices

Discussions & Debates The place to go for slightly more in-depth topics. Discussions and debates about the world, current events, ideas, news, and more.


Reply
Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.  
Thread Tools
  #26    
Old November 7th, 2013, 10:07 AM
Esper's Avatar
Esper
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezilia View Post
As per homosexuality in the UAE, it being a crime IS based somewhat in religion, but in the most popular Emirates - namely Dubai and Abu Dhabi - it has more of an impact. The United Arab Emirates in general, but especially those two, seek to become as important or atleast as popular as the U.S. Due to this, they are growing nations.

Many men came over from tons of other nations throughout the world to the UAE in order to send home money to their families. Their societies, for the most part, relied mainly on men working and women staying at home, which caused an overhaul in the male population.

While the UAE generally believes that male-female couples is the holy option, it also needs a major rise in population - even if that means it becomes a melting pot. So, male-female couples are needed most of all. The more gay couples there are, supposedly, the less chance there is for a growing population in the UAE.

However, this creates a contradiction:

1) Same-sex couples exist mainly because there aren't enough women for every man. So, in order to increase the population, each woman needs to be with and use multiple men.

2) The above is not only unholy but may change society into one that the UAE's natives won't be okay with.

So, because of this, the best they can do is outlaw gay couples and bring in more females by creating a rise in positions that females normally use - like with my mother and her teaching career. These two are meant to deter male-male couples while creating a better chance for population increase.

--

So, it isn't just a cultural thing - it's also political.
I don't know if you're trying to justify criminalizing being gay or not, but gay people don't exist because of a gender imbalance. Gay people just exist. There's really nothing just about imprisoning or killing someone simply for existing. To do so really is political and killing for political reasons is one of the biggest flaws of capital punishment as an idea because it's arbitrary, hard to avoid since it's hard to untangle government and politics, and unjust.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuke View Post
Against. While I understand the arguments for capital punishment especially the monetary one, I think they're outweighed by the fact that we are talking about large amounts of human life being wasted here.

I don't agree that it should be in place simply for the threat of deterring criminals either. Few murderers are going to see the difference between life imprisonment (an already strict sentence) and the death sentence as they simply won't plan to be caught in the first place. Many will also be in a position were death is worth the risk due to the financial desperation they find themselves in or the importance of the murder to them personally.

Apart from saving money, we don't tend to achieve much by murdering them and, as a result, I don't think it's possible to justify the death sentence.
I've always read that capital punishment is more expensive than imprisonment because of all the costs with courts and lawyers. I don't have any sources to cite on me at the moment though.
__________________

deviantart blog pair
Reply With Quote
  #27    
Old November 7th, 2013, 10:16 AM
Nuke's Avatar
Nuke
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Middlesbrough, England.
Age: 18
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Well I'm not sure about that, but in the case that it did cost more to kill them it just makes me even more against the idea of it. It seems selfish in my opinion that people would see other people put to death for the benefit of a slight reduction on their taxes.
__________________

X + Y - 4914-3466-1264
Reply With Quote
  #28    
Old November 7th, 2013, 10:17 AM
Kanzler
スペースディスコ ��82.
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Age: 20
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
No, it's not "political" at all, it's religious. The UAE doesn't need a growing population, they get more undocumented migrant workers than they need and they always will as long as there is economic growth. "Population growth" is just a red herring.

People who would see others put to death aren't primarily concerned about their taxes, they just don't value the life of a criminal they deem deserving of capital punishment enough to keep them around. I mean, those who are against capital punishment don't want anything to do with the criminal either, we're hearing people talk about "keeping them away from society". The most salient difference is whether you accomplish that by death, or not.
__________________
Cadance.
Reply With Quote
  #29    
Old November 7th, 2013, 10:20 AM
Pilkie's Avatar
Pilkie
Pokémon Breeder
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Jersey, United States
Age: 19
Gender: Male
Nature: Quirky
I am completely against Capital Punishment and, alongside that, am against life-term jail sentences. The prison system wasn't supposed to be a dungeon where bad people go, it's supposed to be a place where people can serve time for their crime and then be rehabilitated so they can return to society without being a risk to themselves or others. I don't think anyone in this world has the right/privilege to decide whether someone should live or die, and that goes the same for people who are imprisoned for life.
__________________
Currently Breeding: 5 IV Tyrunts
~My Dream Team~


~---------------------------------------------------------------------------~
3DS Friend Code: 4399-0158-9260
(Note: Please PM me if you add me so I know it's a PC member and not a random)
Friend Safari: Ghost Type: Phantump, Lampent, and Golurk
Reply With Quote
  #30    
Old November 7th, 2013, 10:37 AM
Rezilia's Avatar
Rezilia
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Gender: Female
Nature: Sassy
Actually, in the UAE, you idea, Scarf, is wrong.

It's BECAUSE these men have had little to no women to choose from that many straight men became gay - seeking some sort of companionship. This isn't to say that, by putting more females in the population, there won't be any more gay men - but many men would prefer being straight that were only gay before due to a NEED for companionship, which means the amount of male-male couples WILL decrease.
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #31    
Old November 7th, 2013, 10:45 AM
Kanzler
スペースディスコ ��82.
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Age: 20
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
That sounds very implausible. From where do you get these ideas?
__________________
Cadance.
Reply With Quote
  #32    
Old November 7th, 2013, 10:46 AM
Pilkie's Avatar
Pilkie
Pokémon Breeder
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Jersey, United States
Age: 19
Gender: Male
Nature: Quirky
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rezilia View Post
Actually, in the UAE, you idea, Scarf, is wrong.

It's BECAUSE these men have had little to no women to choose from that many straight men became gay - seeking some sort of companionship. This isn't to say that, by putting more females in the population, there won't be any more gay men - but many men would prefer being straight that were only gay before due to a NEED for companionship, which means the amount of male-male couples WILL decrease.
Gay people don't exist because of gender imbalance, they exist because that is their Sexual orientation as defined by biological conditions. Men can choose to be in a relationship with a man, but they can't choose to be a gay man. This probably sounds contradictory, but the point I am trying to drive here is that people don't choose their sexual orientation. The gender imbalance isn't making these men gay, they are choosing to be gay because that is what they want, they are attracted to Men, not women.
__________________
Currently Breeding: 5 IV Tyrunts
~My Dream Team~


~---------------------------------------------------------------------------~
3DS Friend Code: 4399-0158-9260
(Note: Please PM me if you add me so I know it's a PC member and not a random)
Friend Safari: Ghost Type: Phantump, Lampent, and Golurk
Reply With Quote
  #33    
Old November 7th, 2013, 10:57 AM
Nuke's Avatar
Nuke
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Middlesbrough, England.
Age: 18
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlahISuck View Post
People who would see others put to death aren't primarily concerned about their taxes, they just don't value the life of a criminal they deem deserving of capital punishment enough to keep them around. I mean, those who are against capital punishment don't want anything to do with the criminal either, we're hearing people talk about "keeping them away from society". The most salient difference is whether you accomplish that by death, or not.
I know it might not be many people's primary concern (although it seems to be for CoffeeDrink), but the fact that it's even a contributor to people's arguments worries me.
__________________

X + Y - 4914-3466-1264
Reply With Quote
  #34    
Old November 7th, 2013, 12:26 PM
CoffeeDrink's Avatar
CoffeeDrink
Koffi~
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Near the Coffee Pot
Gender: Male
Nature: Bold
Let me tell you a story, koff~

I murdered your family and your closest relatives because you ran over my dog. I raped your women and defiled your children. I am evil; or just really upset that you ran over Fifi. I killed your people with a weapon that costs me $60 (nice combat knife). So, out of grief and berievement you want me put to death. I bring up the argument that it is cheaper to keep me alive than it is to kill me.

What a joke. People still cling to this fantasy? The idea that it is more expensive (or just as) to kill an inmate than keep one alive is laughable. You know, I have a dental issue with my jaw. It keeps locking up on me. It'd cost a couple thousand to fix this issue. If I was a prisoner, my dental work is free. My medicine is free. My food is free, my bed is free, I get to watch TV and workout in the yard, read books at the library. . . you see where I'm going with this? The things that prisoners receive come out of our pocket. I don't believe I should have to pay thousands of dollars to fix my health problem when it costs an inmate nothing because he murdered some highschool girl and is in prison for life; and I help pay for it with my money I earned at an honest job.

Death is cheap. Don't say otherwise. The inmates laugh at idiots who go around saying that it's so expensive to kill them. Really? How so? Endless appeals? We still get some from Manson, even though he's a lifer and not on DR. Euthanasia? Are those drugs worth $500,000? Really? Get over yourself and get back in line, you're not fooling anyone but yourself. Criminals kill people with weapons that are cheaper than your Gamboys, and you tell me it's expensive? Bullets are extremely cheap. Bringing back the firing squads will reduce crime guys, criminals fear death as well, that's why the endless appeals. Criminals shouldn't get it easy, koffi~

also, I am concerned about my taxes as well as millions of others like me. Don't write us off the board. Maybe if I drew a smiley face I'd appear less menacing?
__________________
IRON WITHIN - IRON WITHOUT
Reply With Quote
  #35    
Old November 7th, 2013, 01:13 PM
Nuke's Avatar
Nuke
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Middlesbrough, England.
Age: 18
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
That's not important to me, the cost of keeping the accused alive is irrelevant as I simply wouldn't want him/her put to death in the first place. My grief and bereavement wouldn't be solved by the ending of his/her life. As far as I'm concerned, a life sentence is justice enough, (s)he cannot commit the crime again until (s)he can satisfy a parole board that it will not occur again and (s)he serves a large sentence confined for the crime.

Life over money is quite simple to me in this case.
__________________

X + Y - 4914-3466-1264
Reply With Quote
  #36    
Old November 8th, 2013, 03:38 PM
幕之内 一歩's Avatar
幕之内 一歩
All Day Baby! All Day!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: In the Ring
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
100% for.

It should be easier to obtain for first degree murderers, multiple (2+) offense rapists and child molesters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuke View Post
That's not important to me, the cost of keeping the accused alive is irrelevant as I simply wouldn't want him/her put to death in the first place. My grief and bereavement wouldn't be solved by the ending of his/her life. As far as I'm concerned, a life sentence is justice enough, (s)he cannot commit the crime again until (s)he can satisfy a parole board that it will not occur again and (s)he serves a large sentence confined for the crime.

Life over money is quite simple to me in this case.
Also, most of the time the serious offenders WILL commit their crime again while in prison. Rape and murder in prison is a common occurrence. The cost of money it takes to keep pieces of sh*t alive is not worth it at all. They should be buried and forgotten.
__________________

Laugh, and world laughs with you.
Weep, and you weep alone.
Reply With Quote
  #37    
Old November 8th, 2013, 05:29 PM
AngelicSpirit's Avatar
AngelicSpirit
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Gender: Male
It completely depends on the situation in question.

If somebody breaks into your house, kills your baby, and rapes your wife, all the while getting her pregnant, then no, death is not what they deserve. As disagreeable as my opinion is, what they need is at least 50 years in a maximum security prison, and constant monitoring when and if they serve long enough of a sentence to be eligible for parole. Not the death penalty.

If an individual promises to exterminate an entire race, religion, country, or the world, of its people, however, they deserve to be executed. We as a nation cannot let people who have made those very such threats live, because they are a danger to society.

That's my two cents. I hope I don't sound stupid about this. :/
__________________

Last edited by AngelicSpirit; November 8th, 2013 at 06:14 PM. Reason: typo. -_-
Reply With Quote
  #38    
Old November 8th, 2013, 05:58 PM
Nuke's Avatar
Nuke
 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Middlesbrough, England.
Age: 18
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Quote:
Originally Posted by 幕之内 一歩 View Post
100% for.

It should be easier to obtain for first degree murderers, multiple (2+) offense rapists and child molesters.



Also, most of the time the serious offenders WILL commit their crime again while in prison. Rape and murder in prison is a common occurrence. The cost of money it takes to keep pieces of sh*t alive is not worth it at all. They should be buried and forgotten.
And if they do commit a further crime inside they can get sent down for longer and can be separated from other inmates which is fine by me, but I respect your opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelicSpirit View Post
It completely depends on the situation in question.

If somebody breaks into your house, kills your baby, and rapes your wife, all the while getting her pregnant, then no, death is not what they deserve. As disagreeable my as opinion is, what they need is at least 50 years in a maximum security prison, and constant monitoring when and if they serve long enough of a sentence to be eligible for parole. Not the death penalty.

If an individual promises to exterminate an entire race, religion, country, or the world, of its people, however, they deserve to be executed. We as a nation cannot let people who have made those very such threats live, because they are a danger to society.

That's my two cents. I hope I don't sound stupid about this. :/
Not at all, it was a well made point and (I think) one of the popular opinions surrounding this issue.
__________________

X + Y - 4914-3466-1264
Reply With Quote
  #39    
Old November 8th, 2013, 07:19 PM
twocows's Avatar
twocows
Pretentious Intellectual Jerk
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Nature: Lax
The role of the criminal justice system should be to rehabilitate first and to punish second. Capital punishment should only be on the table if a panel of expert psychologists deems the offender unfit for rehabilitation (for example, a sociopath).
__________________
Doctors Without Borders: one of the few charity groups you can rely on to actually do real good in the world.

PM me if you have computer troubles. I work in IT for a living and can probably solve your problems. My rate is $expensive/hr, but I'm still cheaper than Creep Squad and, unlike them, will actually get the job done or let you know if I can't.

Quote:
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
- H. L. Mencken, unsourced

Quote:
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."
- Isaac Asimov, Column in Newsweek (21 January 1980) [source]

NEW 40K MMOFPS YESSSSS
Reply With Quote
  #40    
Old November 10th, 2013, 02:02 AM
CoffeeDrink's Avatar
CoffeeDrink
Koffi~
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Near the Coffee Pot
Gender: Male
Nature: Bold
Hate to break it to ya, koff~

Rehabilitation doesn't work the way most people think. Turns out lesser criminals come out of jail hardened and upset at the system for treating them badly. Lucky they ain't in Russia but they still complain.

Also, Sociopaths can fool several people, including doctors. Being able to trick another person into believing you're sane isn't very hard to do unless you legitimately have mental issues. These doctors will cost an unbelievable amount to send them all in there and go door to door peddling their are-you-sane wares. It's a fantasy to believe that they'd be able to do this for every inmate on death row. You'd almost have to gather together an army of the top psychologists to get the work done. And even then. . . you know we incarcerate more people per-capita than any other place on the planet right? Also, you need money to keep the guards happy, then the inmates, and everything else.

People: Gotta make room for more people. That guy who murdered and raped his way to jail made his choice. No one made him pick up a knife or forced him to force down that woman/man/kid/dead thing/ use your imagination. Growing up I was always told about my consequences, so why is it that I don't get free health care or dental? Do you get it? It's a joke. These people run all over you and me and get their rewards. Eye for an eye makes the whole world blind? Grow up. These people are a waste of space. They drain our resources on an already limping economy and you want to keep them all locked up, fed, happy and safe for the next 20XX years? There is always going to be a steady stream of lifers, ergo there will always be a drain on rooms in the prisons. You could fill entire prisons of lifers and DRs on their own. You want prisons in your back yards? They made their beds and now you're not letting them fall asleep like they should, koffi~
__________________
IRON WITHIN - IRON WITHOUT
Reply With Quote
  #41    
Old November 10th, 2013, 02:06 AM
Shamol's Avatar
Shamol
Omelette du fromage
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Dhaka
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
Send a message via Skype™ to Shamol
Quote:
Originally Posted by twocows View Post
The role of the criminal justice system should be to rehabilitate first and to punish second. Capital punishment should only be on the table if a panel of expert psychologists deems the offender unfit for rehabilitation (for example, a sociopath).
I like this response, not because I agree with it, but you choose to actually lay down the philosophical underpinnings of the criminal justice system. In this thread, there has been three such views methinks:

1. Psychological rehabilitation for the murderer
2. As a deterrent for other possible murderers
3. As retribution, where retribution is an irreducible virtue.

So I think when debating principles of capital punishment, one should specify which of the above she adopts, and why in her opinion the other views are incorrect. I am a proponent of (2), and while I don't think the other views are incorrect, I think (2) is better than them, in terms of the social values brought about.

So, I have to say I'm somewhat of a consequentialist on the matter.

EDIT: Sorry, apparently there's another view about minimizing future threats posed by the same offender. I think this is relevant, if not reducible, to (1) above.
__________________
Check out my blog
Reply With Quote
  #42    
Old November 10th, 2013, 02:59 PM
CarcharOdin's Avatar
CarcharOdin
Master of The Universe
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Monterey, California, USA
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Nature: Naughty
One of the big problems with capital punishment that I'm not seeing a lot of people talk about is that it opens up the opportunity for corrupt governments to use it for something other than to rid the world of the vilest, unrepentant criminals. It can also be used as a means of political oppression and indeed has been and in some places still is. Essentially, overly statist governments can employ it as an "obey or die" threat to the populace. This could extend to being used as a punishment for breaking laws where capital punishment is a punishment that far outweighs the crime.

The United States doesn't completely do this, at least not to my knowledge, but the possibility of it happening is still there. For that reason and the fact that rehabilitation is something that should be considered more in the prison system of the U.S., I find the idea of capital punishment to be one that is too flawed to be relied on in the administration of justice.
__________________
CarcharOdin gets high on life to forget about drugs.
Reply With Quote
  #43    
Old November 10th, 2013, 03:32 PM
Kanzler
スペースディスコ ��82.
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Toronto
Age: 20
Gender: Male
Nature: Relaxed
I think it's easier to lock up political prisoners than kill them, however. I don't know if the apartheid government of South Africa could have gotten away with killing Nelson Mandela - even though they did give him life imprisonment and kept him there for almost thirty years. If a government needs to get rid of someone, they can do it quietly and with reasonable doubt through assassination. Capital punishment, on the other hand, needs a trial and a sentence. If you kill someone in your custody, that's just drawing way too much attention. If you really do need to kill someone important, you don't have to make it official.
__________________
Cadance.
Reply With Quote
  #44    
Old November 11th, 2013, 12:12 AM
CoffeeDrink's Avatar
CoffeeDrink
Koffi~
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Near the Coffee Pot
Gender: Male
Nature: Bold
Nice, koff~

The US has all sorts of nasty little bugs that can slice your skin open and lay their nasty little bugs in your wound; and from this wound they grow, and consume you. Question: Would you rather die, or be put in a hole for the rest of your life? No sunlight. No human contact. Nothing but your own mind to keep you company. Is this more humane than just taking the needle. To emphasize this little quiz, here is a fun fact: The United States Government operates at least twenty secret prisons within the US (I'll have to find my source, as I lost the paper. Don't worry, once I find it I'll update it for you.)? This means that they can throw you in a hole forever and never give you the time of day. Just because they can. Don't be fooled, the death penalty as it is can be considered a mercy. A lot of pain and sorrow can pour through a man's mind in a tiny little box with no one to talk to. He'll most likely drive himself insane in the many years he has left. What's that? Sixty, seventy years? Ever wonder where "You'll never take me alive!" comes from? Depending on who you talk to, the death penalty can be considered a mercy granted to those who won't ever get to be outside ever again. Never see their family, be all alone. Think about that, koffi~
__________________
IRON WITHIN - IRON WITHOUT
Reply With Quote
  #45    
Old November 13th, 2013, 04:19 PM
twocows's Avatar
twocows
Pretentious Intellectual Jerk
Community Supporter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Michigan
Age: 23
Gender: Male
Nature: Lax
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shamol View Post
I like this response, not because I agree with it, but you choose to actually lay down the philosophical underpinnings of the criminal justice system. In this thread, there has been three such views methinks:

1. Psychological rehabilitation for the murderer
2. As a deterrent for other possible murderers
3. As retribution, where retribution is an irreducible virtue.

So I think when debating principles of capital punishment, one should specify which of the above she adopts, and why in her opinion the other views are incorrect. I am a proponent of (2), and while I don't think the other views are incorrect, I think (2) is better than them, in terms of the social values brought about.

So, I have to say I'm somewhat of a consequentialist on the matter.

EDIT: Sorry, apparently there's another view about minimizing future threats posed by the same offender. I think this is relevant, if not reducible, to (1) above.
There's some quibble over whether more extreme punishment even serves as a deterrent at all. The rationale is that a good share of crimes (especially more violent crimes) are committed out of perceived necessity; people feel that they have no other choice. No amount of deterrence is going to stop that.

Also, past a certain point, I think people already figure "my life is over if I get caught doing this." Getting 20 years in prison, for example, is a quarter of an average life (a third for someone who is already 20). If I get 20 years in prison, the world's going to be a vastly different place when I get out and I probably won't have the necessary skills to make it. At the very least, it would have a significant and irreversible impact on the remainder of my life.

That said, I do understand that there is a need for at least some level of deterrence, and I'm not opposed to punishment being a part of the criminal justice system. It should, however, be fair. And I think that it should be secondary to the goal of rehabilitating offenders.
__________________
Doctors Without Borders: one of the few charity groups you can rely on to actually do real good in the world.

PM me if you have computer troubles. I work in IT for a living and can probably solve your problems. My rate is $expensive/hr, but I'm still cheaper than Creep Squad and, unlike them, will actually get the job done or let you know if I can't.

Quote:
The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
- H. L. Mencken, unsourced

Quote:
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."
- Isaac Asimov, Column in Newsweek (21 January 1980) [source]

NEW 40K MMOFPS YESSSSS
Reply With Quote
  #46    
Old November 13th, 2013, 11:55 PM
KittenKoder's Avatar
KittenKoder
I Am No One Else
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Seattle
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Nature: Calm
Quote:
Originally Posted by twocows View Post
There's some quibble over whether more extreme punishment even serves as a deterrent at all. The rationale is that a good share of crimes (especially more violent crimes) are committed out of perceived necessity; people feel that they have no other choice. No amount of deterrence is going to stop that.

Also, past a certain point, I think people already figure "my life is over if I get caught doing this." Getting 20 years in prison, for example, is a quarter of an average life (a third for someone who is already 20). If I get 20 years in prison, the world's going to be a vastly different place when I get out and I probably won't have the necessary skills to make it. At the very least, it would have a significant and irreversible impact on the remainder of my life.

That said, I do understand that there is a need for at least some level of deterrence, and I'm not opposed to punishment being a part of the criminal justice system. It should, however, be fair. And I think that it should be secondary to the goal of rehabilitating offenders.
You touched on a very important issue that people often ignore, deterrents don't work, generally. Look at a kid, you tell them not to go into the spooky forest, where do you find them the next day? In that spooky forest. As we grow up we tend to lose the rebellious edge, but the deterrent still fails to do much more than keep people in line who are already willing to obey the law.

However, that all being said, I do feel capital punishment is still a necessity. Sometimes the person is simply unable to function in society without being a threat to that same society, in which case it's more a matter of mercy than punishment. The flaw is that many people abuse such an option, using it in the same manner they did during the witch hunts and other various dark times. So I am against the current method of judgment for such matters.

If we had a perfect justice system then I would support the method of removing people who are truly dangerous to the species, but that's not the case at this time. I also agree with twocows, most people who break the law do so because they don't see another way to survive, not because they are inherently or willingly endangering other people. They have done experiments in the past on what a living organism, even humans, is willing to do in a moment of desperation, and most humans will be monsters if the situation is desperate enough.

We have to make accommodations for every contingency before deciding that the only method of improving the situation is to remove them from existence completely.
__________________
If you add me, please message me so I can reciprocate. No, garbage does not make a cute Pokemon, and it smells funny.

Join me on IRC, synirc.net #PokemonTactics, for friendly discussions on tactics and strategies.
Reply With Quote
  #47    
Old November 21st, 2013, 01:11 PM
General Bravo's Avatar
General Bravo
Imperial Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: On a Star Destroyer
Age: 19
Gender: Male
Nature: Adamant
For serial killers, a definite yes. They've proven by being serial killers that they will just keep killing if they are allowed to be free. Give them a life sentence? What good does that do? All they end up doing is sitting in a cell waiting to die for a few decades. That almost seems more inhumane than just killing them.

For murderers, I'm not as set in a yes, unless of course they're getting a life sentence.

Honestly, anyone who gets a life sentence with no parole option should be executed because, really, what purpose is served by keeping them alive?
__________________
Packing up for Hoenn


Reply With Quote
Reply
Quick Reply

Sponsored Links
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Minimum Characters Per Post: 25



All times are UTC -8. The time now is 11:17 PM.


Style by Nymphadora, artwork by Sa-Dui.
Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2014 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2014 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.