Welcome Guest ( Log In · Register · Change Skins )
Global PokedeX Plus
Lab · Shelter · Main · Dex · PC · Shop · Stats · Help · Rules · Users Online · IRC Chat
GPX+ GPXPlus Forums Member Options
X   Site Message
(Message will auto close in 2 seconds)
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Death Penalty (Lethal Injection) OVER Life Sentence, What's your opinion? Should we have LI or LS?
MoogleSam
post Feb 23 2011, 06:36 PM
Post #41


A Defensive, Protective, Fair, Happy and Playful Lion~
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2 972
Joined: 13-April 09
From: Scotland, UK
Member No.: 11 034

Roster in Diamond



QUOTE(Mercenary Raven @ Feb 23 2011, 03:14 PM) *
that's cruel, inmates are people too...


Agreed. They are people too and though they may not be nice people, that doesn't mean they should be treated horribly. I mean, seriously, you are taking away their freedom and putting them somewhere that they are likely to be treated horribly by the other people there, the 'nice' people don't have to be horrible to them too because then they are no better than the people in jail.


--------------------
If any of my old friends want to contact me, please email me!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Lord Raven
post Feb 23 2011, 11:23 PM
Post #42


i need something to put here
Group Icon

Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 3 900
Joined: 2-July 07
From: Ellicott City, Maryland
Member No.: 34

Active Squad



Furthermore, regret isn't attained through pain. In fact, pain and misery have the off-chance of magnifying horrible tendencies and it actually makes them even more distant than the ideal social prototype. The only instance in which any sort of capital punishment should be given is through any STRONG argument in favor of public safety.

Prison is more for rehabilitation and not punishment these days due to the interest of not only upholding the constitution but also due to trying to keep the public safe AND give inmates another chance. People fuck up, and unless they're completely irredeemable, they should be given a second shot.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

roygbiv
post Feb 24 2011, 05:24 PM
Post #43


Gym Leader
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 178
Joined: 31-December 10
From: somewhere
Member No.: 125 915

hg team



QUOTE(Annakyoyama358 @ Jul 8 2009, 02:17 PM) *
First off, there are 3 injections. The first one PUTS THEM TO SLEEP so they can't feel the burning. Therefore, it's not cruel, we numb the pain.

Second off, it actually costs LESS to put an inmate in prison for life then to sentence them to death, because of the number of appeals involved.

Now, if they change the fucking appeals court, I'd be ecstatic. I want these loser to fucking DIE. Not live in a comfy prison with 3 meals a day, and a paycheck, and sometimes even computers and ipods and tvs!
Fuck that.

yes however injections are often admonistered inncorrectly so many times it can feel like fire,i perfer old sparky less pain
but im for the life scentence because it is even cruler i think they should make the life scentence more tortures though


--------------------
pokemon white friend code 3096 0916 2525
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Lord Raven
post Feb 24 2011, 08:43 PM
Post #44


i need something to put here
Group Icon

Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 3 900
Joined: 2-July 07
From: Ellicott City, Maryland
Member No.: 34

Active Squad



"Torture?" The Constitution of the United States does not like this. You award punishments based upon cruelty? Criminals aren't all bad people and crazy arsonists...


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

MoogleSam
post Feb 27 2011, 02:15 AM
Post #45


A Defensive, Protective, Fair, Happy and Playful Lion~
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2 972
Joined: 13-April 09
From: Scotland, UK
Member No.: 11 034

Roster in Diamond



QUOTE(Mercenary Raven @ Feb 25 2011, 01:43 AM) *
"Torture?" The Constitution of the United States does not like this. You award punishments based upon cruelty? Criminals aren't all bad people and crazy arsonists...


To continue your point, thieves are criminals for example, but thieves are often desperate and steal to support their families. It doesn't make them bad people, it makes them people that are desperate and doing whatever they can to look after their family. Though there are some that do it just because they can, most don't from my knowledge, they usually have a financial problem of some kind or live in a poor country.


--------------------
If any of my old friends want to contact me, please email me!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

swuff
post Feb 27 2011, 08:45 PM
Post #46


swuff★
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 28-April 10
From: Pennsylvania
Member No.: 94 697

Sheer



I honestly like Life Sentence.

It'd be totally unfair to cut someone's life short with Lethal Injection.
Life Sentence isn't painful, though.

Plus, it isn't "wasting" money.
Wasting money would be more like burning it.

But, spending it meaning it'd still be there later.

So I think Life Sentence is a better situation, unless dealing with a serial killer.


--------------------
"Find something to believe in, and find it for yourself. When you do, pass it on to the future."
-Solid Snake, Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Lord Raven
post Feb 27 2011, 10:25 PM
Post #47


i need something to put here
Group Icon

Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 3 900
Joined: 2-July 07
From: Ellicott City, Maryland
Member No.: 34

Active Squad



wasting money is what like 70% of inmates are there for :|


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Aeschylus
post Feb 27 2011, 11:52 PM
Post #48


Pokémon Trainer
Group Icon

Group: +Donors
Posts: 29
Joined: 2-November 09
Member No.: 70 913

Active Squad



QUOTE
To continue your point, thieves are criminals for example, but thieves are often desperate and steal to support their families. It doesn't make them bad people, it makes them people that are desperate and doing whatever they can to look after their family.


Firstly, a thief is not likely to get the death penalty. Secondly, what about the store owner? He is trying just as hard to provide for his own family, and doing so legally. Why should we cater to those who can not respect the laws set in place? Prison is meant as punishment; rehabilitation is useless on a thief. What does he need rehabilitation for? He/she isn't suffering from some mental issues. (kleptomania excluded)

Seriously, this "pity for the criminals" is disgusting. They chose to break the law, and, in doing so, left them open to the consequences.

Death penalty, because some people don't deserve to live the lives the took away.



--------------------



Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

MoogleSam
post Mar 3 2011, 08:19 PM
Post #49


A Defensive, Protective, Fair, Happy and Playful Lion~
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 2 972
Joined: 13-April 09
From: Scotland, UK
Member No.: 11 034

Roster in Diamond



QUOTE(Obsidian Judge @ Feb 28 2011, 04:52 AM) *
QUOTE
To continue your point, thieves are criminals for example, but thieves are often desperate and steal to support their families. It doesn't make them bad people, it makes them people that are desperate and doing whatever they can to look after their family.


Firstly, a thief is not likely to get the death penalty. Secondly, what about the store owner? He is trying just as hard to provide for his own family, and doing so legally. Why should we cater to those who can not respect the laws set in place? Prison is meant as punishment; rehabilitation is useless on a thief. What does he need rehabilitation for? He/she isn't suffering from some mental issues. (kleptomania excluded)

Seriously, this "pity for the criminals" is disgusting. They chose to break the law, and, in doing so, left them open to the consequences.

Death penalty, because some people don't deserve to live the lives the took away.


The point I was continuing was that not all criminals are bad people or crazy arsonists, nothing to do with the death penalty but more of a reason why life sentences don't need to be cruel as hell.

Yes, the store owner is trying to provide for his/her family too but the store owner is likely to have money saved up which if necessary, could be used for food meaning his/her family isn't likely to starve to death. The thief is more likely to be poor and unable to afford food for his/her family which is you know, necessary for living. You are basically saying you'd rather condemn a poor thief's family to death because the way the person is trying to keep them alive is through crime, which I find horrible.

I say crimes like theft when necessary to keep your family fed, are completely excusable. What else are you going to do if you can't get a job, have lost your house, can't gain benefits from the government, have no homeless shelter in your town/city, have no living relatives that will give you money, have no friends that will take you in or give you money and have no way to gain money and food except through stealing? Let your family slowly and painfully starve to death? I doubt it.

I find it shocking that you don't see it from their point of view, you only seem to see it from the point of view of people that haven't broken the law. Yes, they chose to break the law but the reasons behind it are important too. The intention and reasoning behind what they did are what decide if they are a good person, a bad person, or someone with a mental condition, not the actual crime itself.

This post has been edited by MoogleSam: Mar 4 2011, 02:49 AM


--------------------
If any of my old friends want to contact me, please email me!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Knight of Cydoni...
post Mar 6 2011, 12:03 AM
Post #50


..
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 227
Joined: 13-February 11
Member No.: 131 433

Gen 5, please? :3



I would prefer life sentence, where you could live a life of misery but at least, well, live...
Over death because of a lethal injection, because if you die as a criminal, you are forever indeed one...


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Iconox
post Mar 6 2011, 07:23 PM
Post #51


Romantic Misanthropist
Group Icon

Group: +Donors
Posts: 129
Joined: 14-June 09
From: Florida, USA.
Member No.: 34 260

Legend League



I personally don't like the death penalty (Cesare Beccaria ftw!). I see life in prison as a better alternative. For me, it's still taking a life in a way to execute a criminal. The death penalty functions on the assumption that a serious crime makes one inhuman and therefore allowed to be killed. That just doesn't sit right with me on a philosophical level. Now if I were a father and someone murdered my son/daughter, I would likely feel different out of anger/sadness/shock; however, I still don't think that most if any crimes warrant taking someone's life.


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Ladida
post Mar 8 2011, 05:20 PM
Post #52


Pokémon Trainer
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 16-May 09
From: Minnesota
Member No.: 23 715

Favorite Legends~!



@Verinia
You serve a life sentence in prison as a criminal. Let alone a murderer, you still are one...dieing for it doesn't change any fact. It more so stops people from talkin about you or worrying what you would do if you we're ever out again in the real world.

Personally I am for the Death Penalty. I think having it split between that and Life in prison should be judged upon their mentality and actions. Sometimes the legal system just doesn't cut it.

Around where I live, we had a guy who was an obvious rapist a few years ago. Must have went to prison for like 10-15 years prior, got out and about a year later. He kidnapped a young woman and killed her. Now how is that fair to let someone like him get out and do that? It was pretty much expected out of him...He gets to live in prison in a cozy cell now and not have to work for any of his food. He has no family to worry about and noone worries about him, noone cares. Basically gets to live his entire life as if he was rich, just under house arrest.

That family has to live with that pain for the rest of their lives because the legal system let him out to end her life. He gets to live his with no real grief because he's pretty much unstable and he is fine with that. Obviously even ending his life through the death penalty never heals the families wounds.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Aeschylus
post Mar 16 2011, 12:56 AM
Post #53


Pokémon Trainer
Group Icon

Group: +Donors
Posts: 29
Joined: 2-November 09
Member No.: 70 913

Active Squad



QUOTE(MoogleSam @ Mar 3 2011, 08:19 PM) *
The point I was continuing was that not all criminals are bad people or crazy arsonists, nothing to do with the death penalty but more of a reason why life sentences don't need to be cruel as hell.


I never said all criminals were bad people. You don't need to be a bad person to break the law, nor do you need to break the the law to be a bad person. Punishment has nothing to do with someone's moral standing.

QUOTE(MoogleSam @ Mar 3 2011, 08:19 PM) *
Yes, the store owner is trying to provide for his/her family too but the store owner is likely to have money saved up which if necessary, could be used for food meaning his/her family isn't likely to starve to death.


So, I should dig into my savings because someone can not provide for themselves? I'm sorry, but I already pay taxes to deal with things like that.

QUOTE(MoogleSam @ Mar 3 2011, 08:19 PM) *
The thief is more likely to be poor and unable to afford food for his/her family which is you know, necessary for living.


Well if we are going to be dealing with speculations: The thief is likely to be a drug addict who can not pay for his addiction. You shouldn't illogically generalize, it doesn't help your argument.

QUOTE(MoogleSam @ Mar 3 2011, 08:19 PM) *
You are basically saying you'd rather condemn a poor thief's family to death because the way the person is trying to keep them alive is through crime, which I find horrible.


Firstly, you are illogically generalizing.
Secondly, your forgetting that there are programs to deal with poverty, and not taking advantage of them does not excuse crime.
Thirdly, who is now responsible for all the stolen possessions?

QUOTE(MoogleSam @ Mar 3 2011, 08:19 PM) *
I say crimes like theft when necessary to keep your family fed, are completely excusable.


I say differently, as does the Judicial System.

QUOTE(MoogleSam @ Mar 3 2011, 08:19 PM) *
What else are you going to do if you can't get a job, have lost your house, can't gain benefits from the government, have no homeless shelter in your town/city, have no living relatives that will give you money, have no friends that will take you in or give you money and have no way to gain money and food except through stealing? Let your family slowly and painfully starve to death? I doubt it.


Oh yeah, and how many times does this situation come up? I can tell you it isn't enough to change the way theft cases are handle.

QUOTE(MoogleSam @ Mar 3 2011, 08:19 PM) *
I find it shocking that you don't see it from their point of view, you only seem to see it from the point of view of people that haven't broken the law.


So we should give all criminals the benefit of the doubt? OH WAIT, we already do that.

QUOTE(MoogleSam @ Mar 3 2011, 08:19 PM) *
Yes, they chose to break the law but the reasons behind it are important too. The intention and reasoning behind what they did are what decide if they are a good person, a bad person, or someone with a mental condition, not the actual crime itself.


Again, punishment isn't determined on if the person is good or bad.


--------------------



Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Lord Raven
post Mar 16 2011, 09:28 AM
Post #54


i need something to put here
Group Icon

Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 3 900
Joined: 2-July 07
From: Ellicott City, Maryland
Member No.: 34

Active Squad



QUOTE
I never said all criminals were bad people. You don't need to be a bad person to break the law, nor do you need to break the the law to be a bad person. Punishment has nothing to do with someone's moral standing.
Punishment does nothing in terms of public welfare. The purpose of incarceration these days is a more noble one than punishment; it's rehabilitation which is actually much less likely to fuck people up than actually punish them. They don't deserve to suffer for their crimes; they're human beings, wouldn't it just be better to just have them learn from their mistakes?

QUOTE
So, I should dig into my savings because someone can not provide for themselves? I'm sorry, but I already pay taxes to deal with things like that.
Clearly they aren't going anywhere useful. Charity doesn't even do nearly the best job of taking care of things like that. It's just showing the store owner is greedier for letting a couple bucks slide as opposed to the thief being greedy for stealing it.

Your taxpayer money goes even more to waste with the death penalty. In fact, more of it probably goes to the death penalty than what you're saying it goes it.

QUOTE
Well if we are going to be dealing with speculations: The thief is likely to be a drug addict who can not pay for his addiction. You shouldn't illogically generalize, it doesn't help your argument.
It's not an illogical generalization, it's just a generalization. In which case, I'm not sure if you were just using the first half of your statement as a counterargument, but that's just wrong to assume about everyone who doesn't have money. Considering the unemployment rate, his idea is actually very far-fetched from the actual scenario; it just so happens that the media sucks and doesnt like covering news like that.

QUOTE
Secondly, your forgetting that there are programs to deal with poverty, and not taking advantage of them does not excuse crime.
The government run shit is crappy. The only "poverty"-like thing you get from the government is a $200/week unemployment check and medicare. The only good one is the latter, considering $200/week to pay for your housing and food on top of savings is absolutely nothing unless you have A LOT saved up... in which case, why would you be robbing a bank?

QUOTE
Seriously, this "pity for the criminals" is disgusting. They chose to break the law, and, in doing so, left them open to the consequences.
The way a criminal is defined is one who broke the laws. Given the amount of stupid laws, the term "criminal" holds very little substance to me, and I'm sure 85% of the United States (or this forum population) is considered a "criminal" by those laws that you have so much faith in. If you find disgust in finding pity for criminals, then you are pretty much talking down on most of your fellow countrymen, or even your fellow human beings in the world.

Now, to my real point; laws are not the determination of what garners pity. They are merely words. It's humanity that determines pity. The least pitiful of criminals are the ones that I would support the death penalty over if only in the interest of public safety and nothing more, because not all "criminals" are mass rapists/arsonists/murders. In which case, seeing as they are human, they are still likely to change; giving them at least another chance after years of rehabilitation isn't too much to ask for.

We feel pity because we are human beings not used to seeing death, and frankly when I think of death sometimes (like SERIOUSLY think of death) it just freaks me out. You should try hard to think about the concept of death yourself before freely and blindly supporting the death penalty as you do.


I'm ignoring the shit dealing with the thief scenario. That has absolutely nothing to do with the death penalty. Petty theft doesn't even really land you in jail.

QUOTE
Around where I live, we had a guy who was an obvious rapist a few years ago. Must have went to prison for like 10-15 years prior, got out and about a year later. He kidnapped a young woman and killed her. Now how is that fair to let someone like him get out and do that? It was pretty much expected out of him...He gets to live in prison in a cozy cell now and not have to work for any of his food. He has no family to worry about and noone worries about him, noone cares. Basically gets to live his entire life as if he was rich, just under house arrest.

That family has to live with that pain for the rest of their lives because the legal system let him out to end her life. He gets to live his with no real grief because he's pretty much unstable and he is fine with that. Obviously even ending his life through the death penalty never heals the families wounds.
My opinion, cruel as it may be, is that they probably wanted to figure out the most cost-efficient way to keep him out of the way in terms of public safety. If he's on house arrest, he can't really do anything. It'll prevent him from doing anything else though, which is the thing you should be thankful for; having him tortured or punished simply in the name of revenge is no more human than the crimes he committed.

Besides, the death penalty is fucking expensive. Think of how many kids can be put through college with that money.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Aeschylus
post Mar 16 2011, 05:08 PM
Post #55


Pokémon Trainer
Group Icon

Group: +Donors
Posts: 29
Joined: 2-November 09
Member No.: 70 913

Active Squad



QUOTE
Punishment does nothing in terms of public welfare.

Really? I was under the assumption that punishment was used to deter crime. So as not to promote anarchy.

QUOTE
They don't deserve to suffer for their crimes; they're human beings, wouldn't it just be better to just have them learn from their mistakes?

What about the people who suffered because of said crimes? Should we just right off rape victims, the families of murder victims, and the people who were stolen from? I guess they deserved it didn't they?

QUOTE
It's just showing the store owner is greedier for letting a couple bucks slide as opposed to the thief being greedy for stealing it.

Wait, the store owner is greedy because he doesn't want to pay for what a thief stole? Really?! Not to burst your bubble, but that isn't how society works.

QUOTE
In fact, more of it probably goes to the death penalty than what you're saying it goes it.

Not sure about our facts now, are we?

QUOTE
It's not an illogical generalization, it's just a generalization.

Unless most people who are charged with theft (51%) then yes, it is a illogical generalization.

QUOTE
In which case, I'm not sure if you were just using the first half of your statement as a counterargument, but that's just wrong to assume about everyone who doesn't have money

Uh, no. It was another illogical generalization, to point out that the previous generalization was illogical. It was not serious.

QUOTE
The government run shit is crappy. The only "poverty"-like thing you get from the government is a $200/week unemployment check and medicare. The only good one is the latter, considering $200/week to pay for your housing and food on top of savings is absolutely nothing unless you have A LOT saved up... in which case, why would you be robbing a bank?

So stealing other people's money is excusable? And may I point out; there are many people who get by on $200 week. Being unemployed doesn't mean you're living in a hovel.

QUOTE
The way a criminal is defined is one who broke the laws. Given the amount of stupid laws, the term "criminal" holds very little substance to me,

Problem found. See, subjective reasoning.

QUOTE
and I'm sure 85% of the United States (or this forum population) is considered a "criminal" by those laws that you have so much faith in.

[CITATION NEEDED]

QUOTE
Now, to my real point; laws are not the determination of what garners pity

I never said they were.

QUOTE
They are merely words.

No, the are not "merely words." Laws are rules, to which you agreed to as part of the inherent social contact that comes with citizenship.

QUOTE
because not all "criminals" are mass rapists/arsonists/murders.

I think that is pretty obvious.

QUOTE
In which case, seeing as they are human, they are still likely to change; giving them at least another chance after years of rehabilitation isn't too much to ask for.

Not all people are insane enough to need rehabilitation. Sociopaths and psychotic killers can go for the insanity plea. There are people who understand what they are doing and still do it.

QUOTE
You should try hard to think about the concept of death yourself before freely and blindly supporting the death penalty as you do.

See ad hominem.



--------------------



Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Lord Raven
post Mar 16 2011, 06:00 PM
Post #56


i need something to put here
Group Icon

Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 3 900
Joined: 2-July 07
From: Ellicott City, Maryland
Member No.: 34

Active Squad



QUOTE
Really? I was under the assumption that punishment was used to deter crime. So as not to promote anarchy.
Deterrent from crime is basic human instinct. Notice how very few humans even commit major crimes to begin with. In terms of public welfare... jail is what keeps prisoners off the streets, proper education helps it moreso, etc, not punishment.

QUOTE
What about the people who suffered because of said crimes? Should we just right off rape victims, the families of murder victims, and the people who were stolen from? I guess they deserved it didn't they?
So you place the condemned in jail, where they suffer to some extent (not entirely, because that would be inhuman), while they repent and go through what is essentially rehabilitation. You're not writing off anyone by allowing the accused criminal to be rehabilitated.

QUOTE
Wait, the store owner is greedy because he doesn't want to pay for what a thief stole? Really?! Not to burst your bubble, but that isn't how society works.
Store owner's greedy if he doesn't let a couple bucks slide. There's a difference between a thief and a criminal; a petty thief steals a couple items of food, whereas the criminal empties the register and threatens the guy at gunpoint. Massive difference.

QUOTE
Not sure about our facts now, are we?
Semantics. If you don't have a real counter for it, then don't counter it at all. Furthermore, I posted a source later, which should make it damn apparent that I know the facts.

QUOTE
Unless most people who are charged with theft (51%) then yes, it is a illogical generalization.

QUOTE
Uh, no. It was another illogical generalization, to point out that the previous generalization was illogical. It was not serious.
51% is a majority but only a slight majority; not enough to even say "most". It is by no means illogical; logical generalizations can easily be made given the circumstances and what you know, regardless of the real world statistics. But once again, this is just semantics, and has nothing to do with the content of debate.

QUOTE
So stealing other people's money is excusable? And may I point out; there are many people who get by on $200 week. Being unemployed doesn't mean you're living in a hovel.
Apartment costs are roughly 1000 at least per month. 4 weeks in a month is ~800 dollars. Yeah, ok. Government welfare woo-hoo. My parents are running on unemployment and we only get by due to savings. Even that is drying up. After that, we'll have an extremely difficult time getting by.

When did I say something about stealing other people's money? If it was the bank comment, I apologize, I have no clue what I was trying to say there (i wrote that post up when I just woke up).

QUOTE
Problem found. See, subjective reasoning.
This is what someone says when they can't counter a point properly. You used the term criminal, I have shown proof why it holds very little substance, and then stated that I do not deem it a good term to use to refer to people

QUOTE
[CITATION NEEDED]
It was a rough, logical generalization based on the fact that many, MANY people torrent, download ROMs, download music, etc. You're essentially calling me and many of my friends on this site a criminal and you're saying it's disgusting that people can feel pity for criminals.

QUOTE
I never said they were.

QUOTE
Seriously, this "pity for the criminals" is disgusting. They chose to break the law, and, in doing so, left them open to the consequences.


A criminal is someone who breaks the law. You say that the action of pity towards a criminal is disgusting.

QUOTE
No, the are not "merely words." Laws are rules, to which you agreed to as part of the inherent social contact that comes with citizenship.
In terms of what you can and cannot pity? Yes, laws are merely words, and breaking the law has nothing to do with the pity you get.

QUOTE
I think that is pretty obvious.
Uh-huh.

QUOTE
Not all people are insane enough to need rehabilitation. Sociopaths and psychotic killers can go for the insanity plea. There are people who understand what they are doing and still do it.
Yep because that's what every single criminal is. I think it's sad that I have to tell you that the statement was sarcasm, seeing as you seem incapable of reading the point rather than the wording.

Rehabilitation isn't for just the insane, you know.

QUOTE
See ad hominem.
Ad hominem doesn't apply because I'm not making a counterpoint. I'm making a statement that you don't grasp the concept of death as well as you should, and I'm trying to make you get a little perspective before spewing crap like you are. A logically fallacy applies to logic, not a non-logical statement that's essentially a plea for you to think closely about what you're saying before you say it.



And clearly you don't respect me enough to not only acknowledge all my points, but counter specific portions for my wording and not my content. I abhor this play-to-win mentality behind debates that you are expressing right now.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Aeschylus
post Mar 17 2011, 12:06 AM
Post #57


Pokémon Trainer
Group Icon

Group: +Donors
Posts: 29
Joined: 2-November 09
Member No.: 70 913

Active Squad



QUOTE
Deterrent from crime is basic human instinct.

What?

QUOTE
So you place the condemned in jail, where they suffer to some extent (not entirely, because that would be inhuman), while they repent and go through what is essentially rehabilitation. You're not writing off anyone by allowing the accused criminal to be rehabilitated.

Exactly how do you rehabilitate a thief? They already know stealing is bad, yet they still chose do do it. Most rapists, murders, extortionists, and con-artists understand what they are doing is wrong, that's why they go to such lengths to cover up what they did. How do you rehabilitate someone who already understands what they are doing is wrong, and still does it?

QUOTE
Store owner's greedy if he doesn't let a couple bucks slide.

See subjective reasoning. Greed can be expressed many ways, even by giving money away. You can't simply categorize someone as greedy because they want to protect what is theirs.

QUOTE
There's a difference between a thief and a criminal; a petty thief steals a couple items of food, whereas the criminal empties the register and threatens the guy at gunpoint. Massive difference.

You might as well say there is a difference between a square and a polygon. A thief is a criminal, just as a square is a polygon.

QUOTE
When did I say something about stealing other people's money? If it was the bank comment, I apologize, I have no clue what I was trying to say there (i wrote that post up when I just woke up).

I'm not sure. I think I was reading more than one comment at the time, and got confused. I can guarantee it isn't the first or last time it'll happen.

QUOTE
Semantics. If you don't have a real counter for it, then don't counter it at all.

Perhaps if you worded your points with more confidence? If you stat a fact then it is a fact. You shouldn't twiddle with the strength of facts.

QUOTE
Furthermore, I posted a source later, which should make it damn apparent that I know the facts.

....?

QUOTE
A criminal is someone who breaks the law. You say that the action of pity towards a criminal is disgusting.

In terms of what you can and cannot pity? Yes, laws are merely words, and breaking the law has nothing to do with the pity you get.

I was not saying that everyone should feel disgust towards criminals. It was subjective reasoning; I might as well have said, "I find pity for criminals disgusting." It is my opinion, and, as such, holds no power.

QUOTE
This is what someone says when they can't counter a point properly.

Well, you were using subjective reasoning, an opinion.

QUOTE
You used the term criminal, I have shown proof why it holds very little substance, and then stated that I do not deem it a good term to use to refer to people.

You're essentially calling me and many of my friends on this site a criminal and you're saying it's disgusting that people can feel pity for criminals.

Actually, a criminal is someone who has been found guilty. You are innocent until proven guilty. All your friends are not criminals; at least until they go to court. You should only refer to people that have been convicted or are guilty of a crime as criminals.

QUOTE
Yep because that's what every single criminal is. I think it's sad that I have to tell you that the statement was sarcasm, seeing as you seem incapable of reading the point rather than the wording.
QUOTE
In which case, seeing as they are human, they are still likely to change; giving them at least another chance after years of rehabilitation isn't too much to ask for.

I don't think you know what sarcasm is.

Sarcasm n
-harsh or bitter derision or irony
-a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark

How is your previous comment sarcastic?

QUOTE
Rehabilitation isn't for just the insane, you know.

Fine, what type of rehabilitation would you assign a thief, or con-artist? We already know that a psychopath, or sociopath would be assigned Psychiatric rehabilitation. This wouldn't help someone who does not have a mental disability, or has become mentally unstable. How do you rehabilitate someone who's only problem is breaking the law?

QUOTE
I'm making a statement that you don't grasp the concept of death as well as you should, and I'm trying to make you get a little perspective before spewing crap like you are.

You still have yet to prove what I'm saying is crap. You may not agree with it, but not agreeing with something doesn't make it crap.

As to the concept of death, what would you have me think? Baww people are dying, bawwwww. Yeah people have been dying for far longer than recorded history. They've died for a plethora of reasons, and will continue to die.

I don't see anything wrong with a jury condemning someone to death for the crimes they committed. I don't see anything wrong with a person dying for the crimes they've committed. I don't see any reason to change this either.

QUOTE
And clearly you don't respect me enough to not only acknowledge all my points, but counter specific portions for my wording and not my content.

No, I don't respect you. I don't know you or care to know you.

Wording is a critically important part of any argument. I'm not going to ignore poor wording, as neither should you.

QUOTE
I abhor this play-to-win mentality behind debates that you are expressing right now.

I don't really care :3
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Lord Raven
post Mar 17 2011, 01:10 AM
Post #58


i need something to put here
Group Icon

Group: Global Moderators
Posts: 3 900
Joined: 2-July 07
From: Ellicott City, Maryland
Member No.: 34

Active Squad



QUOTE
What?
Yes, humans have a natural tendency to obey the laws that are set forth. Either that, or they have a natural tendency to mind their own business as well as not kill others/rape others/etc unless they've got something wrong in the head or truly needed to.

QUOTE
Exactly how do you rehabilitate a thief? They already know stealing is bad, yet they still chose do do it. Most rapists, murders, extortionists, and con-artists understand what they are doing is wrong, that's why they go to such lengths to cover up what they did. How do you rehabilitate someone who already understands what they are doing is wrong, and still does it?
Of course they know what they're doing is wrong. Rehabilitation isn't teaching them that something is wrong; it's essentially re-wiring the way they work so while they know what they're doing is wrong, they resist the urge to do that again.

QUOTE
See subjective reasoning. Greed can be expressed many ways, even by giving money away. You can't simply categorize someone as greedy because they want to protect what is theirs.
Yes, you can if they want to protect what's theirs. It depends on their reaction to losing something compared to how much they lose. If they react enough to call the police when a little bit is taken, then yes that can easily be considered greed.

How can greed be expressed in giving money away? Unless it's unwillful -- even that is situational -- then there's no possible way it's an emblem of greediness.

QUOTE
You might as well say there is a difference between a square and a polygon. A thief is a criminal, just as a square is a polygon.
A criminal in your definition is quite a large bit different than a criminal in my definition. I don't see a criminal as one who breaks the law, I see a criminal as one who breaks the law but noticeably disturbs the peace. That is consistent with the negative connotations of the word as you describe it. A petty thief is not a criminal, in that sense.

QUOTE
Perhaps if you worded your points with more confidence? If you stat a fact then it is a fact. You shouldn't twiddle with the strength of facts.
You know damn well what I meant. I said it with plenty of confidence, and you're just messing around with semantics to make yourself seem smarter when it makes your debating tactics comparable to that of a tool or a troll.

And my source. That is a lot more that goes to simply "charity."

QUOTE
I was not saying that everyone should feel disgust towards criminals. It was subjective reasoning; I might as well have said, "I find pity for criminals disgusting." It is my opinion, and, as such, holds no power.
I'm pointing out how absolutely disgusting I find your opinion with my own opinion. And frankly, I'm appalled by your attitude towards criminals, even if they did commit terrible acts.

QUOTE
Well, you were using subjective reasoning, an opinion.
A debate is held between opposing opinions and each opinion is backed up by fact. I stated an opinion, you use fact to fight it. It's simple. Subjective reasoning my ass, if you can't counter it without stating the name of a logical fallacy, then you simply cannot counter it. Certainly, if it were fallible as you said, you'd be able to counter it in your own words as opposed to bringing up some random debate fallacies you found on wikipedia?

QUOTE
Actually, a criminal is someone who has been found guilty. You are innocent until proven guilty. All your friends are not criminals; at least until they go to court. You should only refer to people that have been convicted or are guilty of a crime as criminals.
There are more definitions than that of the word criminal, in which case there is an extremely negative connotation attached to it; something that is more important than words.

Also, even in consistency with your definition, I am still a criminal, I've been caught speeding.

QUOTE
I don't think you know what sarcasm is.

Sarcasm n
-harsh or bitter derision or irony
-a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark

How is your previous comment sarcastic?


QUOTE
Not all people are insane enough to need rehabilitation. Sociopaths and psychotic killers can go for the insanity plea. There are people who understand what they are doing and still do it.


Still irrelevant to my full argument, but not every criminal is as you describe. My comment was sarcastic because I said "Yep because that's what every single criminal is!" which is completely false.

QUOTE
Fine, what type of rehabilitation would you assign a thief, or con-artist? We already know that a psychopath, or sociopath would be assigned Psychiatric rehabilitation. This wouldn't help someone who does not have a mental disability, or has become mentally unstable. How do you rehabilitate someone who's only problem is breaking the law?
The first two do not get incarcerated. Psychopaths/Sociopaths are those that deserve a life punishment and maybe even the death penalty. Bearing in mind, I do not argue in favor or against the death penalty -- just in special cases where letting a man live is indeed far worse for us than letting them stay alive and in jail -- I am mainly arguing against your point of view where a criminal is trash that does not deserve any sort of human emotion.

QUOTE
You still have yet to prove what I'm saying is crap. You may not agree with it, but not agreeing with something doesn't make it crap.
Not necessarily. Opinion is sometimes bullshit, sometimes not. People go around stuff like "I'm anti gay marriage and that's MY opinion so stfu" but the train of thought they have is foolish for many reasons. With opinions, in certain cases there is a wrong way out, and your equating criminals to crap is clearly ignorant.

QUOTE
As to the concept of death, what would you have me think? Baww people are dying, bawwwww. Yeah people have been dying for far longer than recorded history. They've died for a plethora of reasons, and will continue to die.

I don't see anything wrong with a jury condemning someone to death for the crimes they committed. I don't see anything wrong with a person dying for the crimes they've committed. I don't see any reason to change this either.
And this doesn't frighten you in any way? I think about death far more deeply than that, especially if my loved ones were the ones dying. It's the cessation of life, the fact that you'll never get that person back again, and the hopelessness behind it. And just thinking of their body not being able to move by themselves ever again... doesn't make you the least bit sad?

It's especially frightened me because my dad's almost died through sickness many times throughout both his own life and my own life. My grandmother even died (and my mom's scream after finding out still lingers in my mind from time to time) that causes this emotion to occur. And frankly, this is what results from a premature death, where it was not natural. Natural deaths I can live with, because the person died peacefully; but disease and hell, this lethal injection and just a human being -- no matter who -- forcing someone else to just stop living? That's just sick in my opinion, especially considering the human being killed most likely has a great deal of human attachment to this world.

If they were a sociopath or psychopath then I'd have no reason to care, because they're dead inside. But every other criminal, even those on death row, have an attachment to this world and even though they fucked up a couple times, it seems extremely inhumane to end someone's life when they can just live the rest of their lives somehow. Even if it is in jail, where they at least have some luxury available to them.

"Baww people die" is a gross simplification, and using your own words an "illogical generalization," and just a terrible thing to say. Spouting memes does not good, or even witty, conversation make; a fact that many people should actually learn.

I may not believe in a God or a higher deity, nor do I actually care, but it's still up to me that a human is not in the right to determine the fate of another human that can feel emotions much like their own unless it's the only way to protect themselves. For most criminals on death row, most of them would not even have any means to break out of jail and take their stuff one step further. Hell, some of them might even prefer prison; they're not hurting anyone, it's more cost efficient, and they're isolated from the rest of the world as a near-perfect failsafe. Jailbreaks don't even happen very often.

Don't go lightly swinging the godforsaken fucking death penalty when you're only using your stance as a way to win this debate and when people's lives are on the line, and then turn my argument into a fucking semantics war just to boost your own ego. This issue has far more magnitude than you think, and you truly are ignorant given the way you're arguing in favor of it.

QUOTE
No, I don't respect you. I don't know you or care to know you.
That's nice, I guess I don't have to hold back much either.

QUOTE
Wording is a critically important part of any argument. I'm not going to ignore poor wording, as neither should you.
No, when you don't debate like a complete tool, wording means jack shit. It's the actual point that matters, especially considering this is far from a formal debate.

QUOTE
I don't really care cat.gif
So you only debate to flaunt your e-penis? Almost nobody in this board except you debate for sport. That's a pretty terrible reason to vocally condemn all criminals as you have, at any rate.



I still enjoy the fact that you skip crucial points. It really makes you look worse.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Some Person
post Apr 10 2011, 08:00 AM
Post #59


Don't let me detain you...
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 368
Joined: 11-January 11
From: Good Ol' England
Member No.: 127 207

Vetinari's Terriers



To sum up my opinion on this, I'd have to quote Gandalf:

QUOTE
"He deserves death."
"Deserves it! I daresay he does. 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. For even the very wise cannot see all ends. I have not much hope that Gollum can be cured before he dies, but there is a chance of it. And he is bound up with the fate of the Ring. My heart tells me that he has some part to play yet, or good or Ill, before the end; and when that comes, the pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many - yours not least."

- Frodo and Gandalf discuss the traitor and murderer Gollum.


--------------------
"The world spins on pain. I realised that if there is a supreme power, then it is our duty to become it's moral superior." -Lord Havelock Vetinari, Patrician of Ankh-Morpork

"The sentient may perceive and love the universe, but the universe may not perceive and love the sentient. The universe sees no distinction between the multitude of creatures and elements which comprise it. All are equal. None is favored. The universe, equipped with nothing but the materials and the power of creation, continues to create: something of this, something of that. It cannot control what it creates and it cannot, it seems, be controlled by its creations (though a few might deceive themselves otherwise). Those who curse the workings of the universe curse that which is deaf. Those who strike out at those workings fight that which is inviolate. Those who shake their fists, shake their fists at blind stars."- Michael Moorcock, author.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Skins T
post Apr 13 2011, 07:07 AM
Post #60


Feel the Fire, Break your Vision
Group Icon

Group: +Donors
Posts: 61
Joined: 12-October 09
From: Australia
Member No.: 68 079

Favourite Pokemon



I'll never agree with the death penalty. While I do wish ill for murderers/rapists/molesters and wish they WOULD die, I don't think they actually should. They'll have it far worse in prison among other disgusting humans.


--------------------


Click above for party~
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post


4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd October 2019 - 02:14 PM
All content and images ©2007-2015 GPX.Plus and Shiny New Software, LLC. Powered By IPB 2.3.1 © 2019 IPS, Inc.
Optimal viewing in the latest version of Safari, Chrome, or Firefox, 1024x768+.