|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/13/2008 10:47:16 PM · #226 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Louis should have said what you just said..."Rugman attributed statements to Sam that he never made...case closed....no Strawman in that statement. |
Forgive me, and at the risk of absurdly derailing this conversation even further, I accused Rug of the classic straw man argument. It wasn't an attack on his character. It wasn't a stupid remark about his personality. I didn't invent a position he doesn't have, then attack it (this being the definition of "straw man"). I simply made an accurate observation of his fallacious style of arguing.
As time goes by, it's becoming increasingly obvious that the majority of people have blinders on when they engage in discussions about which they may have a strong opinion. Every contrary opinion is taken to be an attack against one's character. Every unique idea, irrespective of how unpalatable it is, is twisted into something monstrous for the convenience of those who otherwise don't have the stomach for real argument.
If you have an opinion, let's have it. If you have something to say against whatever's been offered up, stick to exactly what's been offered up. You look foolish injecting hyperboly into an otherwise civil conversation. You look downright mean treading all over the character of another person for simply having an idea you don't like.
Edit: use of universal "you" assumed.
Message edited by author 2008-08-13 22:48:29. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 10:50:11 PM · #227 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
B*) Most criminals get caught, some don't. Those caught each spend years in prison, where they are punished, humiliated, raped. This time is a horrible experience for them. When they get out, they are often in worse condition than before. Many of them continue to commit crimes. Crime rates are high. (Again, you know the story...) |
You gave us theoretical "A" and "B" to choose from in your OP. I want to go back to that for a minute if I may. Focus on the part I have placed in bold from your statement. Who punishing, humiliating, and raping the criminal? |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 10:51:11 PM · #228 |
I'm glad you put that "edit" statement in. I was about to inject some more hyperboly until I saw it.
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by kenskid:
Louis should have said what you just said..."Rugman attributed statements to Sam that he never made...case closed....no Strawman in that statement. |
Forgive me, and at the risk of absurdly derailing this conversation even further, I accused Rug of the classic straw man argument. It wasn't an attack on his character. It wasn't a stupid remark about his personality. I didn't invent a position he doesn't have, then attack it (this being the definition of "straw man"). I simply made an accurate observation of his fallacious style of arguing.
As time goes by, it's becoming increasingly obvious that the majority of people have blinders on when they engage in discussions about which they may have a strong opinion. Every contrary opinion is taken to be an attack against one's character. Every unique idea, irrespective of how unpalatable it is, is twisted into something monstrous for the convenience of those who otherwise don't have the stomach for real argument.
If you have an opinion, let's have it. If you have something to say against whatever's been offered up, stick to exactly what's been offered up. You look foolish injecting hyperboly into an otherwise civil conversation. You look downright mean treading all over the character of another person for simply having an idea you don't like.
Edit: use of universal "you" assumed. |
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 10:56:16 PM · #229 |
Originally posted by SDW:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
B*) Most criminals get caught, some don't. Those caught each spend years in prison, where they are punished, humiliated, raped. This time is a horrible experience for them. When they get out, they are often in worse condition than before. Many of them continue to commit crimes. Crime rates are high. (Again, you know the story...) |
You gave us theoretical "A" and "B" to choose from in your OP. I want to go back to that for a minute if I may. Focus on the part I have placed in bold from your statement. Who punishing, humiliating, and raping the criminal? |
The prison sentence itself is supposed to be a punishment, right? And the humiliating and raping is taken care of by the prison guards and the fellow inmates (I guess the raping part is reserved for the other inmates). Where are you going with this? |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 11:03:08 PM · #230 |
On the part in Bold...what prisons are you speaking of? European, Canadian, US, Russia, China or all of the above?
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by SDW:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
B*) Most criminals get caught, some don't. Those caught each spend years in prison, where they are punished, humiliated, raped. This time is a horrible experience for them. When they get out, they are often in worse condition than before. Many of them continue to commit crimes. Crime rates are high. (Again, you know the story...) |
You gave us theoretical "A" and "B" to choose from in your OP. I want to go back to that for a minute if I may. Focus on the part I have placed in bold from your statement. Who punishing, humiliating, and raping the criminal? |
The prison sentence itself is supposed to be a punishment, right? And the humiliating and raping is taken care of by the prison guards and the fellow inmates (I guess the raping part is reserved for the other inmates). Where are you going with this? |
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 11:08:36 PM · #231 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
On the part in Bold...what prisons are you speaking of? European, Canadian, US, Russia, China or all of the above? |
I don't think it'll help this discussion a lot if we start comparing prisons in different parts of the world. The point is that under B*) (and in most countries of this world) being in prison is meant to be an unpleasant experience. Some actually argue it should be as unpleasant as possible.
I contrasted this with my scenario A*) where being in prison is less unpleasant. The camp in Norway I wrote about is an example of a prison that would rather fit into the A*) scenario. (Note that prisoners there have previously spent years in a prison of the unpleasant kind.) |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 11:11:14 PM · #232 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by SDW:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
B*) Most criminals get caught, some don't. Those caught each spend years in prison, where they are punished, humiliated, raped. This time is a horrible experience for them. When they get out, they are often in worse condition than before. Many of them continue to commit crimes. Crime rates are high. (Again, you know the story...) |
You gave us theoretical "A" and "B" to choose from in your OP. I want to go back to that for a minute if I may. Focus on the part I have placed in bold from your statement. Who punishing, humiliating, and raping the criminal? |
The prison sentence itself is supposed to be a punishment, right? And the humiliating and raping is taken care of by the prison guards and the fellow inmates (I guess the raping part is reserved for the other inmates). Where are you going with this? |
Where am I going with this? All the humility inflicted on a criminal is by another criminals. So our justice system is not failing them they are failing our justice system. Sure some guards may be doing some of this but very few, I would believe. So a criminal is going to be a criminal in or out of jail correct?
We could set them up in the Hilton, give them cable TV, three square meals a day, theropy, counciling, drugs to fix their problem. But guess what they are going to be raped their too - by other criminals.
I don't condone inmate violence but we all know jail is hell; here in the US and all other countries. We don't have to step inside one to know that. So if you don't want to be subjected to the possible humility then don't do the crime. If I don't want to get dirty I'm not going to dive in a dumpster.
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 11:16:17 PM · #233 |
Originally posted by egamble:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
If that makes him funny, you must be the comedian of the year.
Of course nothing's funny about tossing the poor out to die or acts of revenge, or is that your idea of a good time? |
Um. I actually answer your comments and questions that you direct to me. I don't just ignore people after I make a comment.
Also...I never said anything about 'tossing the poor out to die' ...your bleeding heart just can't wrap your mind around the idea of actually helping people instead of only making yourself feel better.
as for revenge...if these people want to break the laws of the land..they deserve whatever they get. |
If help is what you call it to make yourself feel better, go ahead.
You call yourself a christian and talk about your church, but you seem awful bloodthirsty for a follower of Jesus.
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 11:27:02 PM · #234 |
Originally posted by SDW:
Where am I going with this? All the humility inflicted on a criminal is by another criminals. So our justice system is not failing them they are failing our justice system. Sure some guards may be doing some of this but very few, I would believe. So a criminal is going to be a criminal in or out of jail correct?
We could set them up in the Hilton, give them cable TV, three square meals a day, theropy, counciling, drugs to fix their problem. But guess what they are going to be raped their too - by other criminals.
I don't condone inmate violence but we all know jail is hell; here in the US and all other countries. We don't have to step inside one to know that. So if you don't want to be subjected to the possible humility then don't do the crime. If I don't want to get dirty I'm not going to dive in a dumpster. |
You are right, a significant part of the punishment is probably inflicted by other inmates. Still, we knowingly subject prisoners to this kind of treatment. Some here would probably even be disappointed if inmates didn't mistreat each other. It would make life too easy for them.
I agree that this behavior among inmates adds to the deterring effect of prisons. So from this point of view the society should welcome it.
On the other hand, this mistreatment is probably not very conducive to commendable behavior of convicts after being released. It will not make them more peaceful and compassionate, on the contrary.
I hope you see that there is a trade-off. We can make prisons more unpleasant thereby increasing the deterring effect, but also reducing the probability that prisoners become laudable members of society after being released. Or we can make them more pleasant, thereby decreasing the deterring effect, but increasing the probability that former prisoners will not turn to crime again. It is clear that both extremes (making criminals suffer as much as possible or pampering them) are not good ideas. So we should find a good compromise somewhere in between. The Norwegian camp is such a compromise. Prisoners spend most of their sentence in an ordinary prison (which should work as a deterrent), but for the last months they are transferred to a camp where they learn values like friendship, compassion, hard work, etc. and are prepared for their life afterwards.
Message edited by author 2008-08-13 23:38:38. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 11:40:13 PM · #235 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
I hope you see that there is a trade-off. We can make prisons more unpleasant thereby increasing the deterring effect, but also reducing the probability that prisoners become laudable members of society after being released. Or we can make them more pleasant, thereby decreasing the deterring effect, but increasing the probability that former prisoners will not turn to crime again. It is clear that both extremes (making criminals suffer as much as possible or pampering them) are not good ideas. So we should find a good compromise somewhere in between. The Norwegian camp is such a compromise. Prisoners spend most of their sentence in an ordinary prison (which should work as a deterrent), but for the last months they are transferred to a camp where they learn values like friendship, compassion, hard work, etc. and are prepared for their life afterwards. |
anything "extreme" can never be good.
the "norwegian camp" concept will only work, but only assuming that the initial "ordinary prison" you mentioned above is guaranteed free of in-prison injustice (punished, humiliated, raped). I think this is fantasy. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 11:48:57 PM · #236 |
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
I hope you see that there is a trade-off. We can make prisons more unpleasant thereby increasing the deterring effect, but also reducing the probability that prisoners become laudable members of society after being released. Or we can make them more pleasant, thereby decreasing the deterring effect, but increasing the probability that former prisoners will not turn to crime again. It is clear that both extremes (making criminals suffer as much as possible or pampering them) are not good ideas. So we should find a good compromise somewhere in between. The Norwegian camp is such a compromise. Prisoners spend most of their sentence in an ordinary prison (which should work as a deterrent), but for the last months they are transferred to a camp where they learn values like friendship, compassion, hard work, etc. and are prepared for their life afterwards. |
anything "extreme" can never be good.
the "norwegian camp" concept will only work, but only assuming that the initial "ordinary prison" you mentioned above is guaranteed free of in-prison injustice (punished, humiliated, raped). I think this is fantasy. |
You are right that in-prison injustice in the ordinary prison would teach the inmates something fundamentally different from what they are going to experience in the camp. So in this sense, it works in the wrong direction.
On the other hand, sending inmates to the "pleasant" camp from the very beginning probably wouldn't work. I think they need the time in the ordinary prison to be able to appreciate the additional freedoms and responsibilities in the camp afterwards. And they probably need some time to think about their crime. I wouldn't advocate removing punishment altogether, but we should think about the consequences of the punishments we subject prisoners to. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 12:29:35 AM · #237 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
The Norwegian camp is such a compromise. Prisoners spend most of their sentence in an ordinary prison (which should work as a deterrent), but for the last months they are transferred to a camp where they learn values like friendship, compassion, hard work, etc. and are prepared for their life afterwards. |
This is a honest question and I would like a honest answer from your view point.
Lets look at a rapist that has raped a little girl or boy. Do you think one year (I believe somewhere in this thread your mentioned a year if I not mistaken; correct me if I'm wrong) prison sentence followed by some forms of therapy is what the rapist deserves? When the victim has to live the rest of their life in fear, reliving the moment, remembering the date, having trust factors, emotional, sexual, and relationship problems.
Of the two, the criminal or victim, which is being punished, humiliated, and raped day-in-day-out?
See this is one thing that bothers me about all this analogy. I have yet to see any compassion from you toward the victims. If you have shown any its been in passing to get back on the subject of how the criminal should be dealt with.
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 00:34:54. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:06:47 AM · #238 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by mpeters:
Here is an article that may be germaine to the question. It doesn't specifically talk about the Norwegian prison you referenced, but it does provide some context for the Norwegian CJ system. article 1 It is an article from 2-07.
I can't speak to its credibility(maybe someone from Norway can comment) but only point it out as a counter to the argument that their incarceration/enforcement techniques are working out well for them. |
We have to be careful not to mix up two issues here. One is about catching criminals in the first place (this is what your article refers to), the other one is how to treat them after they have been caught (which is what the video and article I posted refer to). I'd be interested in finding out what caused the rise in crime in Oslo. The article says it's mainly organized crime, something we haven't really discussed yet here. (Those are probably the most rational criminals. Prison terms are something they merely factor into the business model.)
Originally posted by mpeters:
Interesting discussion...I don't feel prison is primarily for reform, nor is it truly a deterrent. Rather it is a way to protect law-abiding citizens and provide justice for the victims. |
Interesting point. Since the protection is only temporary I would assume that you see the main purpose of prison in providing justice for the victims. This may be an important factor for "personal" crimes like rape or murder. What about crimes like theft (e.g. from a supermarket), forgery, copyright infringement, etc.? I don't think that there are any victims for these cases who could get satisfaction from seeing the perpetrator being punished. What about crimes that have no victims (as discussed earlier)? |
Certainly a distinction should be drawn between 'levels' of crime. For 'petty' crimes, I think justice plays a small role. For instance, I would rather see a thief make restitution to the victim by repaying their loss. Crowding up jails with these types of criminals seems counterproductive. Now a serial thief or a con man who dupes people out of millions--they are a danger(detriment) to society and incarceration may be the answer. For "personal" crimes... how can a criminal truly repay a victim in these instances?
As to the Norway article. Off topic yes, but if you asked me my perception of the crime rate in Norway, my likely response would have been, "what crime?" Apparantly my perception would have been off base. I guess the answer is complex and countries everywhere are trying their own methods, including jails with yoga classes! :)
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 01:07:42. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:19:38 AM · #239 |
Originally posted by yanko:
Judi, my heart goes out to you. It was hard reading what you wrote. I truly believe everyone here regardless of opinion want the same thing and that is a safer world. We just have different ideas as to how to go about it. We should all keep this in mind when talking about this subject even if we disagree strongly.
Originally posted by mpeters:
One other point--earlier it was posted that hundreds of cases have been overturned after review of DNA evidence. Check out the innocenceproject.org for information. 218 total, 154 in the last 8 years. Significant numbers? Yes, but not as many as I expected, and barely 'hundreds'. |
So basically the government has 218 counts of unlawful imprisonment (i.e. 19 a year) and according to the ACLU, 129 counts of unlawful imprisonment for just death row inmates (i.e. 3 to 4 a year). With those kind of numbers it's not hard to imagine that the government has killed at least one innocent person over that time. Has the government, state officials, judges or anybody paid for any of these offenses? Why are these stats only viewed as "significant" which has a very emotionless tone to it? There are victims behind these numbers. I'm not singling you out just that in general few people seem to really care about these victims and for the life of me I don't understand why. |
OK, no offence taken. I'm not trying to be sterile or emotionless. I could/should have said "sad". I'm sure if i had a relative or friend who was imprisoned falsly this issue would be personally emotional. But, I think it is a credit to our justice system and scientific discovery that they are able and willing to revisit these cases. They are trying to get it right. Should they pay? Absolutely, though no amount of money would pay an inmate back for 15 years of unlawful imprisonment. Just like no amount of jail time for a convicted(and guilty) criminal would pay back their victim for the wrongs they inflicted(rape, murder, kidnap, etc.). |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 05:10:29 AM · #240 |
Originally posted by SDW:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
The Norwegian camp is such a compromise. Prisoners spend most of their sentence in an ordinary prison (which should work as a deterrent), but for the last months they are transferred to a camp where they learn values like friendship, compassion, hard work, etc. and are prepared for their life afterwards. |
This is a honest question and I would like a honest answer from your view point.
Lets look at a rapist that has raped a little girl or boy. Do you think one year (I believe somewhere in this thread your mentioned a year if I not mistaken; correct me if I'm wrong) prison sentence followed by some forms of therapy is what the rapist deserves? When the victim has to live the rest of their life in fear, reliving the moment, remembering the date, having trust factors, emotional, sexual, and relationship problems.
Of the two, the criminal or victim, which is being punished, humiliated, and raped day-in-day-out?
See this is one thing that bothers me about all this analogy. I have yet to see any compassion from you toward the victims. If you have shown any its been in passing to get back on the subject of how the criminal should be dealt with. |
This whole thread is about a question of priorities. What is more important to us, a peaceful society with a small crime rate or the punishment of criminals?
You compare the suffering of the victim to that of the perpetrator and you seem to wish that the latter be made at least as painful as the former. From the point of view of the victim, this may satisfy a need for revenge and therefore be desirable. However, from the point of view of the society as a whole, it may bring about undesirable side effects (financial costs, further victims).
There are criminals who I agree should remain locked up forever. However, most criminals will have to be released one day. My two theoretical scenarios would play out like this in the case of the rapist:
A*) A man rapes a girl. He is caught and spends a year in a treatment facility. He enjoys this time and learns to find other ways to satisfy his needs. He is released and becomes a commendable member of society and doesn't commit any crime any more.
B*) A man rapes a girl. He is caught and spends fifteen years in a prison. This time is a horrible experience for him, he suffers. Even after his release we make his life miserable by putting him in a public registry. He's unable to lead a normal life. In his desperation he turns to what he got to know best in prison: violence. He rapes two more girls. He is caught again and this time punished even more.
Scenario B*) satisfies the victims' need for revenge or "justice", even three times. However, from a point of view of the society it is costly. We have two more victims. And we need to pay for the prison time.
Scenario A*) does not satisfy the victim's need for revenge, I understand that. However, from the point of view of the society as a whole it is more desirable.
Please note that both scenarios are "idealized" cases, I'm aware of the fact that we can't assume all cases to play out like this. Please also note that I purposefully set the treatment time in scenario A*) low to increase the contrast and highlight the trade-off.
Both scenarios are extremes and not entirely realistic. I believe that we are currently closer to B*) and that we should move toward A*). The Norwegian prison is a step in that direction. A part of the punishment is given up and replaced by an experience that makes inmates more likely to become good members of society after their release.
Please further note that most crimes are not rape. Many people end up in prison because they used violence to solve problems. And what do they learn in prison? That violence is the only way to solve problems, that you have to be brutal to survive. I fear that they will apply what they've learned in prison on the outside afterwards. Maybe it would be better to teach them something else in prison, even if it meant reducing the amount of punishment they get.
You ask me whether I had any compassion for the victims. I do. Also for the additional two girls in scenario B*). However, I don't quite understand why compassion for the victims should mean punishing the criminal as severly as possible. I'm not sure if this is the best we can do for the victim.
Let me illustrate this further with a personal story. Almost 20 years ago I was beat up in school by older kids, repeatedly (probably asked too many questions people didn't want to hear... ;-) ). I lost several teeth. To this day I have painful surgery (the most recent one was in May this year) to deal with the aftermath of those incidents. I had to give up my (still young and probably unpromising) career as a trumpeter. I'm not able to bite into an apple. (This doesn't even come close to rape, but I think it serves to illustrate the general attitude nonetheless.)
The culprits were never punished. I saw one of them in the streets a few weeks ago; he probably doesn't even remember me. I don't bear any grudge. I've come to accept my fate. No kind of punishment would relieve my pain or improve my life in any other way.
Alternatively, I could have dedicated my life to making those of the culprits miserable. And my own, that of my family and of their families at the same time. I don't think that would have helped anyone. And "compassion" would not be the word I'd use to describe it. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 05:28:09 AM · #241 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
You ask me whether I had any compassion for the victims. I do. Also for the additional two girls in scenario B*). However, I don't quite understand why compassion for the victims should mean punishing the criminal as severly as possible. I'm not sure if this is the best we can do for the victim. |
it is not the best thing we can do for the victim, but it must be done to ensure that justice is served.
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Alternatively, I could have dedicated my life to making those of the culprits miserable. And my own, that of my family and of their families at the same time. I don't think that would have helped anyone. And "compassion" would not be the word I'd use to describe it. |
if we allow justice to punish the culprits, then you wont have to dedicate your life for any vengeance. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 05:52:54 AM · #242 |
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
You ask me whether I had any compassion for the victims. I do. Also for the additional two girls in scenario B*). However, I don't quite understand why compassion for the victims should mean punishing the criminal as severly as possible. I'm not sure if this is the best we can do for the victim. |
it is not the best thing we can do for the victim, but it must be done to ensure that justice is served. |
I don't find demands like "It must be done to ensure that justice is served." very useful because they are meaningsless or at least ambiguous. What does it mean to "serve justice"? What are its merits? This is the very core of this discussion.
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Alternatively, I could have dedicated my life to making those of the culprits miserable. And my own, that of my family and of their families at the same time. I don't think that would have helped anyone. And "compassion" would not be the word I'd use to describe it. |
if we allow justice to punish the culprits, then you wont have to dedicate your life for any vengeance. |
Well, it still takes a lot of effort of the victim to go to court, etc. This may be important and helpful for some, for others it might even make them suffer more. In any case, I can't see a lot of value in dedicating much of your thoughts to the perpetrator (wanting to know how they are treated in prison, etc.); they simply don't deserve that kind of attention. And the victim can certainly do better things with their time. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 06:15:00 AM · #243 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
You ask me whether I had any compassion for the victims. I do. Also for the additional two girls in scenario B*). However, I don't quite understand why compassion for the victims should mean punishing the criminal as severly as possible. I'm not sure if this is the best we can do for the victim. |
it is not the best thing we can do for the victim, but it must be done to ensure that justice is served. |
I don't find demands like "It must be done to ensure that justice is served." very useful because they are meaningsless or at least ambiguous. What does it mean to "serve justice"? What are its merits? This is the very core of this discussion. |
JUSTice - fairness; an arm for an arm, eye for an eye. get it?
so if you slap me, it is only just that you get a slap in return :)
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by crayon:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Alternatively, I could have dedicated my life to making those of the culprits miserable. And my own, that of my family and of their families at the same time. I don't think that would have helped anyone. And "compassion" would not be the word I'd use to describe it. |
if we allow justice to punish the culprits, then you wont have to dedicate your life for any vengeance. |
Well, it still takes a lot of effort of the victim to go to court, etc. This may be important and helpful for some, for others it might even make them suffer more. In any case, I can't see a lot of value in dedicating much of your thoughts to the perpetrator (wanting to know how they are treated in prison, etc.); they simply don't deserve that kind of attention. And the victim can certainly do better things with their time. |
so why are we even discussing all of these?
|
|
|
|
08/14/2008 07:20:25 AM · #244 |
Originally posted by crayon:
JUSTice - fairness; an arm for an arm, eye for an eye. get it?
so if you slap me, it is only just that you get a slap in return :) |
I'm arguing that "serving justice" as you describe it, in the sense of "an eye for an eye" cannot be our ultimate goal, the first priority. If it were, you should be happy if for instance every child in this country were raped and each and every perpetrator caught and punished. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 08:10:27 AM · #245 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Then maybe you should watch the video before voicing your opinion on it. |
Wow. You really make me want to beat my brains out on my desk.
I haven't voiced my opinion on in it. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 08:32:34 AM · #246 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by SDW:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
The Norwegian camp is such a compromise. Prisoners spend most of their sentence in an ordinary prison (which should work as a deterrent), but for the last months they are transferred to a camp where they learn values like friendship, compassion, hard work, etc. and are prepared for their life afterwards. |
This is a honest question and I would like a honest answer from your view point.
Lets look at a rapist that has raped a little girl or boy. Do you think one year (I believe somewhere in this thread your mentioned a year if I not mistaken; correct me if I'm wrong) prison sentence followed by some forms of therapy is what the rapist deserves? When the victim has to live the rest of their life in fear, reliving the moment, remembering the date, having trust factors, emotional, sexual, and relationship problems.
Of the two, the criminal or victim, which is being punished, humiliated, and raped day-in-day-out? |
Let me illustrate this further with a personal story. Almost 20 years ago I was beat up in school by older kids, repeatedly (probably asked too many questions people didn't want to hear... ;-) ). I lost several teeth. To this day I have painful surgery (the most recent one was in May this year) to deal with the aftermath of those incidents. I had to give up my (still young and probably unpromising) career as a trumpeter. I'm not able to bite into an apple. (This doesn't even come close to rape, but I think it serves to illustrate the general attitude nonetheless.)
The culprits were never punished. I saw one of them in the streets a few weeks ago; he probably doesn't even remember me. I don't bear any grudge. I've come to accept my fate. No kind of punishment would relieve my pain or improve my life in any other way.
Alternatively, I could have dedicated my life to making those of the culprits miserable. And my own, that of my family and of their families at the same time. I don't think that would have helped anyone. And "compassion" would not be the word I'd use to describe it. |
I'm sorry to hear that you were a victim of such a crime. But I can see you are still dealing with the results of their crime upon you. You have [assuming] had to put out money for medical treatment, had to give up a passion of yours, and probibly more - yet they walk the streets without any punishment or restitution for their crime. I don't see justice in that even though you may be content with it. Now can you say they haven't committed (before or after the crime they perpetrated on you) any other crimes of similar nature?
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 08:38:34. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 08:39:09 AM · #247 |
Originally posted by egamble:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Then maybe you should watch the video before voicing your opinion on it. |
Wow. You really make me want to beat my brains out on my desk. |
Go ahead. Please post pictures (or let somebody else post them).
Originally posted by egamble:
I haven't voiced my opinion on in it. |
You wrote
Originally posted by egamble:
You don't even think straight before you talk. Before you compare Norway to the United States you have to compare all the differences between countries (population, races, income, etc...)
You can't just say. 'It works here, it will work there'. |
Between the insults you argued that concepts from Norway might not be suitable for the US. I assumed you referred to the prison documented in the video because this is what we were discussing. I now realize you must have meant something else in Norway. Please elaborate. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 08:49:32 AM · #248 |
Originally posted by SDW:
I'm sorry to hear that you were a victim of such a crime. But I can see you are still dealing with the results of their crime upon you. You have [assuming] had to put out money for medical treatment, had to give up a passion of yours, and probibly more - yet they walk the streets without any punishment or restitution for their crime. I don't see justice in that even though you may be content with it. Now can you say they haven't committed (before or after the crime they perpetrated on you) any other crimes of similar nature? |
Yes, it's unfair. Fortunately, the insurance of the school still pays most of the medical bills.
I'm not "content" with the situation. But there's nothing I can do about the medical situation, I simply have to accept it. And I'd rather spend my time doing things I enjoy than trying to make someone else's life miserable. There's nothing to gain for me. I don't derive pleasure from seeing others suffer, even if they deserved it.
I don't know if they committed other crimes. And I don't know whether punishing them at this young age would have taught them a valuable lesson or would have taken them even further down the wrong track. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 12:35:21 PM · #249 |
Originally posted by SDW:
Now can you say they haven't committed (before or after the crime they perpetrated on you) any other crimes of similar nature? |
This got me thinking a bit. It's a good argument for reporting the crime and pursuing legal measures, just to make sure it's on record. It will allow authorities to identify repeat offenders and deal with them accordingly. However, how to punish/treat them is still something to be discussed. |
|
|
|
08/14/2008 01:33:26 PM · #250 |
This Friday Louisiana will outlaw Cockfighting. (Two roosters with blades on their feet fighting to the death). People hold the fights and bet on the outcome and it is legal.
Many here say that after Friday, cockfighting will continue but move "underground" and into the darkness.
Cockfighting exploits and hurts chickens. It will obviously continue.
What should be done if anyone is caught fighting their cock?
A. Nothing and let the cock fight continue.
B. Stop the cock fight and disperse the crowd but don't arrest the participants.
C. Dole out the punishment as spelled out in the law?
Current penalty is:
First-time offenders caught participating in cockfights will face maximum $1,000 fines and six-month prison terms.
So I would say they may get as little as probation and smaller fines for first timers.
Message edited by author 2008-08-14 13:46:32. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 06/19/2025 01:07:56 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/19/2025 01:07:56 PM EDT.
|
