| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1376
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:09 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| zixnub wrote: | | BonezTheGoon wrote: | | zixnub wrote: | | I'm thinking amputation/mutilation/isolation... |
I classify all of those things as "strange and unusual punishment."
Everyone has to die. Everyone deserves a reasonable death.
I don't believe anyone should have to endure the three alternatives you listed. They disgust me. |
Why do they disgust you? |
Because I classify those acts as inhumane torture that no living thing should be objected to. The only exception is the amputation when medically necessary and only when and if the patient agrees to the procedure willingly. I personally have a moral dilemma when talking about amputations for animals who obviously cannot give consent, personally I've seen cases that I believe where on both sides of that issue (some wrong, some right.) I'm glad I haven't had to make the decision myself for any animal yet, and I do not look forward to such a heavy decision.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
patrix_neo
Guru
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 342
Location: Svedala
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We need to curb this down into a minimum of suffering, we got it.
edit - what is more important is how I feel! ( $emoticon, $feel, *pusher, random_in_time(d100) )
Last edited by patrix_neo on Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:13 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wildhorse
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 148
Location: Estados Unidos De América
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| No civilised country wants to be named in one sentence with the few remaining barbaric countries like China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the USA. It is just disgusting to find our partner in that group. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patrix_neo
Guru
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 342
Location: Svedala
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wildhorse wrote: | | No civilised country wants to be named in one sentence with the few remaining barbaric countries like China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the USA. It is just disgusting to find our partner in that group. |
What do you know what a whole county wants? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zixnub
n00b
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 64
Location: Brasschaat, Belgium
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BonezTheGoon wrote: | | zixnub wrote: | | BonezTheGoon wrote: | | No need for caution or risk management. Just don't make mistakes when judging (not) guilty + alternating question and exclamation marks |
Is that what I understand you are saying? |
No, your edited quote of me does not reflect my thinking. |
Then correct me.
_________________
http://trinity.netcat.be
http://code.google.com/p/ewm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1376
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| patrix_neo wrote: | | wildhorse wrote: | | No civilised country wants to be named in one sentence with the few remaining barbaric countries like China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the USA. It is just disgusting to find our partner in that group. |
What do you know what a whole county wants? |
Thank you! Do you like chocolates, or beer? I want to send you both!
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patrix_neo
Guru
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 342
Location: Svedala
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BonezTheGoon wrote: | | patrix_neo wrote: | | wildhorse wrote: | | No civilised country wants to be named in one sentence with the few remaining barbaric countries like China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the USA. It is just disgusting to find our partner in that group. |
What do you know what a whole county wants? |
Thank you! Do you like chocolates, or beer? I want to send you both! |
I am pleased with solitude and tranquility in my sparetime. Heh.
Edit - I DO like chocolates... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1376
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zixnub wrote: | | BonezTheGoon wrote: | | zixnub wrote: | | BonezTheGoon wrote: | | No need for caution or risk management. Just don't make mistakes when judging (not) guilty + alternating question and exclamation marks |
Is that what I understand you are saying? |
No, your edited quote of me does not reflect my thinking. |
Then correct me. |
No thanks, I think I'll just let you re-read what I already thoughtfully wrote.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1376
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK fine, here is a very simple version for you zixnub:
Make good decisions instead of relying on the undo button.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patrix_neo
Guru
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 342
Location: Svedala
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dang it I have to say it...I think I have to. Chocolate has nothing to do with sex. I am just not that kind of person to persue that subject....whith that said, I do like pandora.
I was only after the bean and some suggar...dang it I did it again! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zixnub
n00b
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 64
Location: Brasschaat, Belgium
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BonezTheGoon wrote: | | No thanks, I think I'll just let you re-read what I already thoughtfully wrote. |
I did. That's what I understood from what looks and sounds like a rant.
I'm trying to understand what the arguments are for not objecting death penalty. The only one I heard so far was "to not commit any crime again".
_________________
http://trinity.netcat.be
http://code.google.com/p/ewm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1376
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| patrix_neo wrote: | Dang it I have to say it...I think I have to. Chocolate has nothing to do with sex. I am just not that kind of person to persue that subject....whith that said, I do like pandora.
I was only after the bean and some suggar...dang it I did it again! |
Laughing out loud . . .
Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, good buddy?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zixnub
n00b
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 64
Location: Brasschaat, Belgium
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BonezTheGoon wrote: | OK fine, here is a very simple version for you zixnub:
Make good decisions instead of relying on the undo button. |
Risk management is relying on an undo button. Saying "fuck risk management" is not relying on an undo button. A good decision is one that is not a mistake. As I understand it my interpretation was correct (?)
_________________
http://trinity.netcat.be
http://code.google.com/p/ewm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patrix_neo
Guru
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 342
Location: Svedala
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BonezTheGoon wrote: | | patrix_neo wrote: | Dang it I have to say it...I think I have to. Chocolate has nothing to do with sex. I am just not that kind of person to persue that subject....whith that said, I do like pandora.
I was only after the bean and some suggar...dang it I did it again! |
Laughing out loud . . .
Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, good buddy? |
Some in that line, yes 
Sorry for my disturbance of the force....thesithwillrise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1376
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
zixnub, you're in Belgium according to your location, right? Send patrix_neo some chocolate and some beer, yours is better than anything I can send him. Also, if prostitution is legal there it seems like maybe you should send one of those ladies along as well, just in case.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1376
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zixnub wrote: | | Risk management is relying on an undo button. Saying "fuck risk management" is not relying on an undo button. A good decision is one that is not a mistake. As I understand it my interpretation was correct (?) |
No. I say that anything and everything that should be considered "Risk Management" is part of the "GOOD DECISION" process I am talking about.
So, make good decisions, use proper risk management in THAT step. Once you have a good decision, stand by it. The end.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patrix_neo
Guru
Joined: 08 Jan 2004
Posts: 342
Location: Svedala
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hahahaha! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
juniper
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 756
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: |
To various degrees, when you violate the rights of others, your rights are in turn violated in recompense. If you steal, you will be forced to compensate to the extent possible and you will be punished with incarceration. This principle of retributive justice and the principle of culpae poena par esto (let the punishment fit the crime) are the cornerstones of our legal system, which is the foundation of our social architecture. This is what makes society work, and when you bastardize, taint, and dilute it with irrational exceptions based on inexplicable, unjustifiable religious beliefs, you weaken the fabric of society.
You people who believe killing is so wrong that killers shouldn't be killed have your heads buried in religious dogma. When some off-the-charts criminal, such as serial torturer and killer and innocent women and children, is merely sent to prison, they have not payed to the extent possible for their wrong, and the punishment does not at all fit the crime.
|
the problem is that it is very difficult to judge who has precisely been wronged by the crime, so it is very difficult to precisely have retributive justice. For example, let's suppose a guy with a child kills someone else's child. What precisely is the crime and who is the victim? Clearly the murdered child is the primary victim, but a close second are the parents of the murdered child. I can think of the nothing more horrible than having your child die at all, forget a terrible way like murder, or worse (that includes being killed myself). So, what is the correct punishment here? capital punishment? meh. should his child be killed? If i was the parent of the murdered child I certainly would feel that that was the only equivalent punishment, having his child ripped from him as well. clearly this is not right though.
you still are making a silly grandiose claim that religious dogma is the basis for an anti death penalty stance. where did you read that tripe, or did you come up with it yourself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BonezTheGoon
Bodhisattva
Joined: 14 Jun 2002
Posts: 1376
Location: Albuquerque, NM -- birthplace of Microsoft and Gentoo
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2012 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hypothetically, having just lost a child myself I would never dream of killing an innocent child. To me it has nothing to do with retribution. It is all about damage control. Hell in the hypothetical situation you brought up I feel like I am protecting the surviving child of the murderer FROM the murderer by ensuring that he never murders anyone again. It's about minimizing damages, not equalizing damages.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1486
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pitcrawler wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | You people who believe killing is so wrong that killers shouldn't be killed have your heads buried in religious dogma. |
How do you figure that? The facts show almost the complete opposite. Just look at some of the countries that have capital punishment. Blah blah blah....
Basically, you couldn't have typed a more incorrect statement. |
China (which accounts for about 90% of the population of those countries you listed) is religious? Excuse me?
Just because there are religious idiots (e.g., Iran) executing people for violating their religion, along with the pseudo-religious idiots (e.g., people of European ancestry) objecting to executions because it violates their "morals" (i.e. their hidden religious brainwashing), does not mean that everybody who executes people does it for religious reasons. China is all but absolutely atheistic, and you could fit about six Europes inside their population.
Basically, you couldn't have typed a more incorrect statement.
| Quote: | The point is that rights don't come from nature, God, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. There is no such thing as an irrevocable right. Such rights are granted only by agreement of men, and they can be taken away by agreement of men. Rights are a system of mutual give and take, like a contract. They don't come from the magic rights fairy.
To various degrees, when you violate the rights of others, your rights are in turn violated in recompense. If you steal, you will be forced to compensate to the extent possible and you will be punished with incarceration. This principle of retributive justice and the principle of culpae poena par esto (let the punishment fit the crime) are the cornerstones of our legal system, which is the foundation of our social architecture. This is what makes society work, and when you bastardize, taint, and dilute it with irrational exceptions based on inexplicable, unjustifiable religious beliefs, you weaken the fabric of society.
You people who believe killing is so wrong that killers shouldn't be killed have your heads buried in religious dogma. When some off-the-charts criminal, such as serial torturer and killer and innocent women and children, is merely sent to prison, they have not payed to the extent possible for their wrong, and the punishment does not at all fit the crime.
If the law doesn't enforce contracts, people stop believing in contracts and commerce suffers. If a society doesn't enforce its collective social contracts pertaining to mutual respect of rights, then society suffers and respect of rights is eroded. Why should I believe in, obey, and conform to the restrictions of a society that allows some serial killer to torture and kill children and then does next to nothing about it, even allowing him to continue to live, even putting three meals a day in his belly and providing him medical care, while the chunks of the children that remain rot in the ground?
There is nothing wrong with society judging that a man has by his own violation of the rights of others sacrificed his own right to live. The reason you think there is something wrong with it is because you have been brainwashed by the hand-me-down left-overs of religion to be categorically opposed to killing. It's not logical, it's not rational, and it's not even consistent with your acquiescent tolerance of violence committed in self-defense. In the larger sense, the routine and merciless elimination of such people is in fact self-defense, at the societal level.
In short, you're acting like irrational, primitive ooga-booga men scratching religious symbols in the dirt with antlers and examining the entrails of birds to decide what you should do. There is no logic, no sense, behind such thinking -- there is only obsolete mysticism and primitive superstition.
Again, this leaves the argument that capital punishment sometimes kills innocent people, which is a separate argument, to the side. |
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 655
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| zixnub wrote: | | The Earth wrote: | | zixnub wrote: | | The innocent won't care once dead + why is murdering a guilty ok and murdering an innocent not? |
Because technically it isn't murder when killing the guilty. It's still homicide, but it isn't murder. Murder is a legal term. |
What to do if it turns out an innocent was killed? Is it an acceptable risk? |
I'm not sure.
_________________
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for the problems caused by government, I'd be a fat filmmaker with a baseball cap |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1486
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| juniper wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: |
To various degrees, when you violate the rights of others, your rights are in turn violated in recompense. If you steal, you will be forced to compensate to the extent possible and you will be punished with incarceration. This principle of retributive justice and the principle of culpae poena par esto (let the punishment fit the crime) are the cornerstones of our legal system, which is the foundation of our social architecture. This is what makes society work, and when you bastardize, taint, and dilute it with irrational exceptions based on inexplicable, unjustifiable religious beliefs, you weaken the fabric of society.
You people who believe killing is so wrong that killers shouldn't be killed have your heads buried in religious dogma. When some off-the-charts criminal, such as serial torturer and killer and innocent women and children, is merely sent to prison, they have not payed to the extent possible for their wrong, and the punishment does not at all fit the crime.
|
the problem is that it is very difficult to judge who has precisely been wronged by the crime, so it is very difficult to precisely have retributive justice. For example, let's suppose a guy with a child kills someone else's child. What precisely is the crime and who is the victim? Clearly the murdered child is the primary victim, but a close second are the parents of the murdered child. I can think of the nothing more horrible than having your child die at all, forget a terrible way like murder, or worse (that includes being killed myself). So, what is the correct punishment here? capital punishment? meh. should his child be killed? If i was the parent of the murdered child I certainly would feel that that was the only equivalent punishment, having his child ripped from him as well. clearly this is not right though. |
Here you have shown that you are confused. That doesn't qualify as a rational argument.
| juniper wrote: | | you still are making a silly grandiose claim that religious dogma is the basis for an anti death penalty stance. where did you read that tripe, or did you come up with it yourself. |
No, I've made a cohesive, rational, logical argument based on history and statements you guys have made in the past. To wit: "It's just wrong", or "I don't need to have reasons for it, I just know inside that's what's right", and "Everybody knows it". None of you are able to offer a compelling, logically sound argument why capital punishment should not exist. You offer a small collection of logically flawed arguments (e.g., "everybody knows... teh hole civilized world knows"), very weak arguments (e.g., "what if an innocent guy gets executed", which is meaningless because the same thing can be said about any punishment), and feces-throwing (such as what you just did above).
But, if you want to live a life as a brainwashing victim, unable to even justify or explain your own positions on important subjects like this, go right on ahead. Just don't growl or chuck a spear at me.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sugar
Guru
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: |
No, I've made a cohesive, rational, logical argument based on history and statements you guys have made in the past. To wit: "It's just wrong", or "I don't need to have reasons for it, I just know inside that's what's right", and "Everybody knows it". None of you are able to offer a compelling, logically sound argument why capital punishment should not exist. You offer a small collection of logically flawed arguments (e.g., "everybody knows... teh hole civilized world knows"), very weak arguments (e.g., "what if an innocent guy gets executed", which is meaningless because the same thing can be said about any punishment), and feces-throwing (such as what you just did above).
But, if you want to live a life as a brainwashing victim, unable to even justify or explain your own positions on important subjects like this, go right on ahead. Just don't growl or chuck a spear at me. |
Why should we adopt a criminals principle of action, rather than follow our own principles?
That is, why execute someone for murder? If society has decided that killing is wrong, then why should society adopt the murder's ethical principles and kill to correct this wrong? Isn't it more moral for society to follow its own internal ethical principles?
_________________
Jesus Could Be Their Candidate and the Republicans Would Still Lose |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
juniper
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 756
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | juniper wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: |
To various degrees, when you violate the rights of others, your rights are in turn violated in recompense. If you steal, you will be forced to compensate to the extent possible and you will be punished with incarceration. This principle of retributive justice and the principle of culpae poena par esto (let the punishment fit the crime) are the cornerstones of our legal system, which is the foundation of our social architecture. This is what makes society work, and when you bastardize, taint, and dilute it with irrational exceptions based on inexplicable, unjustifiable religious beliefs, you weaken the fabric of society.
You people who believe killing is so wrong that killers shouldn't be killed have your heads buried in religious dogma. When some off-the-charts criminal, such as serial torturer and killer and innocent women and children, is merely sent to prison, they have not payed to the extent possible for their wrong, and the punishment does not at all fit the crime.
|
the problem is that it is very difficult to judge who has precisely been wronged by the crime, so it is very difficult to precisely have retributive justice. For example, let's suppose a guy with a child kills someone else's child. What precisely is the crime and who is the victim? Clearly the murdered child is the primary victim, but a close second are the parents of the murdered child. I can think of the nothing more horrible than having your child die at all, forget a terrible way like murder, or worse (that includes being killed myself). So, what is the correct punishment here? capital punishment? meh. should his child be killed? If i was the parent of the murdered child I certainly would feel that that was the only equivalent punishment, having his child ripped from him as well. clearly this is not right though. |
Here you have shown that you are confused. That doesn't qualify as a rational argument.
given that you are willing to take a life under the name retribution, I just want to know the measure by which punishments are decided.
| juniper wrote: | | you still are making a silly grandiose claim that religious dogma is the basis for an anti death penalty stance. where did you read that tripe, or did you come up with it yourself. |
No, I've made a cohesive, rational, logical argument based on history and statements you guys have made in the past. To wit: "It's just wrong", or "I don't need to have reasons for it, I just know inside that's what's right", and "Everybody knows it". None of you are able to offer a compelling, logically sound argument why capital punishment should not exist. You offer a small collection of logically flawed arguments (e.g., "everybody knows... teh hole civilized world knows"), very weak arguments (e.g., "what if an innocent guy gets executed", which is meaningless because the same thing can be said about any punishment), and feces-throwing (such as what you just did above).
But, if you want to live a life as a brainwashing victim, unable to even justify or explain your own positions on important subjects like this, go right on ahead. Just don't growl or chuck a spear at me. |
1) just because an idea comes from religion, doesn't make it wrong.
2) you haven't showed it does.
3) if you come from a moral system where it is ok to take a life, then you just degraded the classic capital crime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Old School
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 231
Location: The Covered Bridge Capital of Oregon
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fifth Place! Behind Iran! C'mon guys, we can do better than that. This is the United States of America, for Pete's sake. Join me in a chant:
USA, USA, USA!
We're number one, we're number one, we're number one!
Now all you slacker states; it's up to you to pull your own weight. And I'm looking at you, Massachusetts. You can't just depend on Florida and Texas to do the dirty work.
_________________
I am not young enough to know everything.
- Oscar Wilde |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Off the Wall
