| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/13/2008 12:09:50 PM · #151 |
You really think that vigilantism is something to be proud of?
Originally posted by kenskid:
I remember in the mid 1970's may have been early 80's here in Louisiana....
A young boy about 12 years old was kidnapped by his Karate instructor. He was taken to California. He was molested and if I remember correctly he was raped by the man.
They caught the man in California...freed the child. The child was taken back to Louisiana to his father. The child's hair was dyed jet black for disguise.
A few days later the kidnapper was flown back to Baton Rough. As the COCKY instructor was being led in handcuffs (on TV) through the airport a man (the father) turned out from a phone booth with a pistol. He shot the kidnapper in the head.
The father was arrested but didn't serve any time !
We may drink RC Cola and eat Moon Pies here in Louisiana but we know how to dish out the justice !
Originally posted by egamble:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
=
According to this logic every criminal should be locked away forever. The thinking is based on the assumption that there are good people and evil people and that both will stay the way they are forever. Some people here have suggested they would kill someone who brought harm to their family. If they do it, they will end up in prison themselves. Do you think they would kill again afterwards? Probably not. Are they evil people?
= |
Scratch what I said about being logical.
You are just completely whacked. I am sure Obama enjoys your monthly donations.
How can you compare a person who kills for pleasure to a person who might kill if their wife or children is hurt?
You LOVE to compare apples to oranges and act like they are the same. THEY AREN'T!
A crime of passion is completely different than a crime that happens because of malice or some biological imbalance that cannot be remedied. |
|
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 12:11:48 PM · #152 |
Hey Spaz...here's a link to the video...check it out...you can cry for the dead guy.
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
You really think that vigilantism is something to be proud of?
Proud? Nah...just wanted to add some fire to the thread. Do you want me to send you a Moon Pie?
Originally posted by kenskid:
I remember in the mid 1970's may have been early 80's here in Louisiana....
A young boy about 12 years old was kidnapped by his Karate instructor. He was taken to California. He was molested and if I remember correctly he was raped by the man.
They caught the man in California...freed the child. The child was taken back to Louisiana to his father. The child's hair was dyed jet black for disguise.
A few days later the kidnapper was flown back to Baton Rough. As the COCKY instructor was being led in handcuffs (on TV) through the airport a man (the father) turned out from a phone booth with a pistol. He shot the kidnapper in the head.
The father was arrested but didn't serve any time !
We may drink RC Cola and eat Moon Pies here in Louisiana but we know how to dish out the justice !
Originally posted by egamble:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
=
According to this logic every criminal should be locked away forever. The thinking is based on the assumption that there are good people and evil people and that both will stay the way they are forever. Some people here have suggested they would kill someone who brought harm to their family. If they do it, they will end up in prison themselves. Do you think they would kill again afterwards? Probably not. Are they evil people?
= |
Scratch what I said about being logical.
You are just completely whacked. I am sure Obama enjoys your monthly donations.
How can you compare a person who kills for pleasure to a person who might kill if their wife or children is hurt?
You LOVE to compare apples to oranges and act like they are the same. THEY AREN'T!
A crime of passion is completely different than a crime that happens because of malice or some biological imbalance that cannot be remedied. |
|
|
Message edited by author 2008-08-13 12:13:40. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 12:19:16 PM · #153 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
If someone is not locked up forever, they will leave prison one day. I think they are less likely to revert to their old ways if they spent the last months of their sentence at the camp instead of a regular prison. |
Well that is in the safe and ordered camp, with rules and people around to enforce them. In the real world the honor system is employed and it is up to the individual to enforce the rules for themselves. I think recidivism is much greater under that pressure, not that it would not work on some but it is a really big chance to take in the case of sexual predators and violent offenders. Do we sacrifice the safety of the little girl down the street because we think that Joe pedophile is reformed? How can we be sure?
Message edited by author 2008-08-13 12:30:08. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 12:39:02 PM · #154 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Well that is in the safe and ordered camp. With rules and people around to enforce them. In the real world the honor system is employed and it is up to the individual to enforce the rules for themselves. I think recidivism is much greater under that pressure, not that it would not work on some but it is a really big chance to take in the case of sexual predators and violent offenders. Do we sacrifice the safety of the little girl down the street because we think that Joe pedophile is reformed? How can we be sure? |
As I said before, there are some people that should remain locked away forever. This camp is not about them. It's about those who would get out one day anyway. Do you agree that it would be better for society if a released prisoner had spent the last months of their sentence at the camp where they learned the values of friendship, cooperation, hard work, etc? You have to realize that many of those criminals probably had a terrible childhood. The camp may be the first place where they experience friendship, appreciation, etc. and where they see that life can be lived in a different way.
I'm afraid that regular prisons (especially in the US) teach them different lessons. They reinforce the importance of violence, for example. They reinforce gang-like social structures. They may reinforce resentments toward society.
And an additional comment: At the camp, there is minimum security and hardly any rules are enforced. Prisoners can even go on vacation. It would be easy to escape. Yet, people follow the rules and they do not escape. Why? They do not follow the rules because they are forced to, but because they choose to. Because they see that their lives are better like this. And this is hopefully also what they will do when released, follow the rules because they see their value. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 12:48:55 PM · #155 |
Originally posted by gwe21:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by gwe21:
Originally posted by yanko:
Originally posted by kenskid:
What would Yanko's criminal justice involve....surely not letting criminals go "the first time" with the promise of "never doing it again"... |
Well for starters I'd let free those guilty of drug use/sales and like crimes. |
WEll when we let them free, I hope we send them all to Texas. :) |
Well it's big enough. :P Seriously though, you keep the ones your city, town, state produced and I'll keep mine. Hows that? :) |
well thats not fair. We have a lot of drug related crimes here. Although its not as bad as big cities. |
Why is that not fair? If you want them out, suck it up and take them back. Otherwise, don't say you want them out if you are not willing to take the chance that they will never commit another crime. That's like saying put the guy in jail because he is bad, but you sit on the jury and say dojn't put him in jail. You cannot have it both ways. Pick one or the other. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 12:52:25 PM · #156 |
Originally posted by Intelli:
I live by a rule to never hold grudges. I will give forgive a person if I know he/she has changed their ways.
That said.. I think my choices are clear.. A, A, C. |
So you are honestly saying that if someone killed your whole family, mom, dad, spouse, kids, grandparents, etc..., you would forgive this person? You are either in denial or crazy. My guess is if you could honestly forgive this person, you really didn't care about anyone in your family anyway. You can't really expect me to believe that you would still forgive. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 12:58:42 PM · #157 |
Really? Try that in the neighborhood where I grew up. First off, if they didn't know you, they would probably beat you into a coma, or to death. Second, if you really had the sack to tell them something, no one would ever find your dead, lifeless body with a bullet in your head. That may work in some neighborhood around where you live or work, but it's highly unlikely to happen in the non-beaver neighborhoods throughout a lot of this country. These kids kill cops, why would they possibly listen to you explain what a sign is for and that it is wrong? Get out of the fantasy world your in and open up your eyes. Obviously, you have been shielded from reality for a really long time, as in the movie "The Truman Show".
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Let me tell you a personal story of mine: I saw some kids remove signs and barriers that had been put up by construction workers around a hole dug in the middle of the street (probably to reach pipes or something). The kids just wanted to play with them. I went up to them and asked them what they thought the signs and barriers were good for. They hesitated. So I asked them what would happen if someone on a bike arrived now and didn't see the hole. They figured out that person would badly hurt themselves. I said something like "Then we should better make sure we put the signs back so nobody gets hurt, right?" They agreed and we put the signs back together. I think they learned something. I think they won't try and play with the signs again. They might even tell their friends not to do it if they see them doing it.
Now imagine what would have happened if I had spanked the kids, went to their parents and made them feel really ashamed. They wouldn't have learned anything. And removing the signs might even have become more attractive because kids like to test limits. They might even have used it as a test of courage ("I bet you won't dare to remove the sign! Coward!"). |
Message edited by author 2008-08-13 13:06:23. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:02:47 PM · #158 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
As I said before, there are some people that should remain locked away forever. This camp is not about them. It's about those who would get out one day anyway. Do you agree that it would be better for society if a released prisoner had spent the last months of their sentence at the camp where they learned the values of friendship, cooperation, hard work, etc? |
I think it has some merit for the right inmate.
Originally posted by Sam94720:
You have to realize that many of those criminals probably had a terrible childhood. The camp may be the first place where they experience friendship, appreciation, etc. and where they see that life can be lived in a different way. |
Yes that may be the case but the real world is much different.
Originally posted by Sam94720:
I'm afraid that regular prisons (especially in the US) teach them different lessons. They reinforce the importance of violence, for example. They reinforce gang-like social structures. They may reinforce resentments toward society. |
I think that is the case with most prisons in general. The US does have a bigger problem with gangs but not by much.
Originally posted by Sam94720:
And an additional comment: At the camp, there is minimum security and hardly any rules are enforced. Prisoners can even go on vacation. It would be easy to escape. Yet, people follow the rules and they do not escape. Why? They do not follow the rules because they are forced to, but because they choose to. Because they see that their lives are better like this. And this is hopefully also what they will do when released, follow the rules because they see their value. |
They come back because if they don't they go back to the "Big House" that is the deterrent. Again in the real world it is different. In the US we have what is called half-way houses for those offenders that have been released from prison but require acclimation back into society. I don't know of the success rate but again for the right inmate it may very well be the better choice.
How do we choose who gets to go to the camp? What criteria should be used to define the less risk candidates and who is willing to roll the dice on the safety of the little girl down the street?
Message edited by author 2008-08-13 13:06:18. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:04:13 PM · #159 |
You can't change what people are. This should be known by watching the same people go in and out of prison. You may be able to change the way they act for a little while, but eventually, most people will go back to being themselves and what they know. Doesn't matter what they learn in prison, they know a lot of it before they go to prison anyway.
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Well that is in the safe and ordered camp. With rules and people around to enforce them. In the real world the honor system is employed and it is up to the individual to enforce the rules for themselves. I think recidivism is much greater under that pressure, not that it would not work on some but it is a really big chance to take in the case of sexual predators and violent offenders. Do we sacrifice the safety of the little girl down the street because we think that Joe pedophile is reformed? How can we be sure? |
As I said before, there are some people that should remain locked away forever. This camp is not about them. It's about those who would get out one day anyway. Do you agree that it would be better for society if a released prisoner had spent the last months of their sentence at the camp where they learned the values of friendship, cooperation, hard work, etc? You have to realize that many of those criminals probably had a terrible childhood. The camp may be the first place where they experience friendship, appreciation, etc. and where they see that life can be lived in a different way.
I'm afraid that regular prisons (especially in the US) teach them different lessons. They reinforce the importance of violence, for example. They reinforce gang-like social structures. They may reinforce resentments toward society.
And an additional comment: At the camp, there is minimum security and hardly any rules are enforced. Prisoners can even go on vacation. It would be easy to escape. Yet, people follow the rules and they do not escape. Why? They do not follow the rules because they are forced to, but because they choose to. Because they see that their lives are better like this. And this is hopefully also what they will do when released, follow the rules because they see their value. |
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:07:41 PM · #160 |
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Really? Try that in the neighborhood where I grew up. First off, if they didn't know you, they would probably beat you into a coma, or to death. Second, if you really had the sack to tell them something, no one would ever find your dead, lifeless body with a bullet in your head. That may work in some neighborhood around where you live or work, but it's highly unlikely to happen in the non-beaver neighborhoods throughout a lot of this country. These kids kill cops, why would they possibly listen to you explain what a sign is for and that it is wrong? Get out of the fantasy world your in and open up your eyes. Obviously, you have been shielded from reality for a really long time, as in the movie "The Truman Show". |
I told you of an actual experience I had. There were many similar ones. This is reality. At least here in Europe. I don't have to be afraid of getting a bullet in my head.
The place you live in seems to be very different. Why do you think this is the case? |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:16:17 PM · #161 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
How do we choose who gets to go to the camp? What criteria should be used to define the less risk candidates and who is willing to roll the dice on the safety of the little girl down the street? |
The safest strategy would be to keep everyone locked up forever. And then there may be people who have never committed a crime before, but who are more likely to rape that girl than some former prisoner. So we should lock those up, too, just to be on the safe side.
It is obvious that locking up every potential rapist forver is not feasible. So we have to make an assessment which ones to let out and which ones to keep locked away. The point I'm making is that once we decide to release someone it would be better to let them spend their last months at a facility like the Norwegian one instead of a regular prison. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:19:50 PM · #162 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
And then there may be people who have never committed a crime before, but who are more likely to rape that girl than some former prisoner. So we should lock those up, too, just to be on the safe side. |
Come on! Now we are back to the "Thoughtcrime" and totalitarian ideologies. We can't "go there" in this discussion.
Message edited by author 2008-08-13 13:22:02. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:21:44 PM · #163 |
Why is that the case? I'm not sure but it's not because we have a too STRICT prison system.
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by rugman1969:
Really? Try that in the neighborhood where I grew up. First off, if they didn't know you, they would probably beat you into a coma, or to death. Second, if you really had the sack to tell them something, no one would ever find your dead, lifeless body with a bullet in your head. That may work in some neighborhood around where you live or work, but it's highly unlikely to happen in the non-beaver neighborhoods throughout a lot of this country. These kids kill cops, why would they possibly listen to you explain what a sign is for and that it is wrong? Get out of the fantasy world your in and open up your eyes. Obviously, you have been shielded from reality for a really long time, as in the movie "The Truman Show". |
I told you of an actual experience I had. There were many similar ones. This is reality. At least here in Europe. I don't have to be afraid of getting a bullet in my head.
The place you live in seems to be very different. Why do you think this is the case? |
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:21:58 PM · #164 |
Originally posted by rugman1969:
You can't change what people are. This should be known by watching the same people go in and out of prison. |
Your argument means that prison is ineffective as a deterrent. So what is the purpose of prison? Keeping criminals temporarily away and then unleashing them again on the population? This doesn't make any sense. Punishing the criminals? With what goal in mind? You argue that they'll turn to crime again anyways. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:24:11 PM · #165 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Why is that the case? I'm not sure but it's not because we have a too STRICT prison system. |
Maybe because our system perpetuates violence?  togtog tried to illustrate this in his post (which was probably too long for most of you...). |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:26:07 PM · #166 |
I agree with Wazoo on this post. If we are currently off the OP topic then this post will REALLY put it out of reach.
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
And then there may be people who have never committed a crime before, but who are more likely to rape that girl than some former prisoner. So we should lock those up, too, just to be on the safe side. |
Come on! Now we are back to the "Thoughtcrime" and totalitarian ideologies. We can't "go there" in this discussion. |
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:29:55 PM · #167 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
And then there may be people who have never committed a crime before, but who are more likely to rape that girl than some former prisoner. So we should lock those up, too, just to be on the safe side. |
Come on! Now we are back to the "Thoughtcrime" and totalitarian ideologies. We can't "go there" in this discussion. |
Yes, you are right, I don't want to continue the discussion in that direction. However, if you say that the probability that someone will rape a child should determine whether we keep them locked up or not, it would only be logical to extend this concept to those not yet in prison. You are right, this would be problematic because we would punish people for crimes they might commit in the future. However, you have to realize that we are doing exactly the same with people who did rape. If we keep them locked up after they served their sentence, we are punishing them for crimes they might commit in the future. It's a trade-off between the safety needs of the society and the rights of the individual. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:31:04 PM · #168 |
I don't have any sympathy for the dead guy.
The sick part is that you hold this up as something to take pride in, when in fact, the fathers actions, while understandable from an emotional standpoint, are no better than those of a lynch mob.
You might as well hold up a sign that says' "Louisiana, where we kill 'em; guilty or not."
Originally posted by kenskid:
Hey Spaz...here's a link to the video...check it out...you can cry for the dead guy.
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
You really think that vigilantism is something to be proud of?
Proud? Nah...just wanted to add some fire to the thread. Do you want me to send you a Moon Pie?
Originally posted by kenskid:
I remember in the mid 1970's may have been early 80's here in Louisiana....
A young boy about 12 years old was kidnapped by his Karate instructor. He was taken to California. He was molested and if I remember correctly he was raped by the man.
They caught the man in California...freed the child. The child was taken back to Louisiana to his father. The child's hair was dyed jet black for disguise.
A few days later the kidnapper was flown back to Baton Rough. As the COCKY instructor was being led in handcuffs (on TV) through the airport a man (the father) turned out from a phone booth with a pistol. He shot the kidnapper in the head.
The father was arrested but didn't serve any time !
We may drink RC Cola and eat Moon Pies here in Louisiana but we know how to dish out the justice !
Originally posted by egamble:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
=
According to this logic every criminal should be locked away forever. The thinking is based on the assumption that there are good people and evil people and that both will stay the way they are forever. Some people here have suggested they would kill someone who brought harm to their family. If they do it, they will end up in prison themselves. Do you think they would kill again afterwards? Probably not. Are they evil people?
= |
Scratch what I said about being logical.
You are just completely whacked. I am sure Obama enjoys your monthly donations.
How can you compare a person who kills for pleasure to a person who might kill if their wife or children is hurt?
You LOVE to compare apples to oranges and act like they are the same. THEY AREN'T!
A crime of passion is completely different than a crime that happens because of malice or some biological imbalance that cannot be remedied. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:32:38 PM · #169 |
If you have faulty assumptions, you will have faulty conclusions. So, do not challenge the assumptions.
I choose A - no more crime. Since I chose A, the C & D scenarios are not applicable.
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:35:03 PM · #170 |
Originally posted by dtremain:
If you have faulty assumptions, you will have faulty conclusions. So, do not challenge the assumptions.
I choose A - no more crime. Since I chose A, the C & D scenarios are not applicable. |
Yes, scenarios A) and B) are unrealistic. A*) and B*) are better. Which one would you prefer? |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:35:52 PM · #171 |
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
And then there may be people who have never committed a crime before, but who are more likely to rape that girl than some former prisoner. So we should lock those up, too, just to be on the safe side. |
Come on! Now we are back to the "Thoughtcrime" and totalitarian ideologies. We can't "go there" in this discussion. |
Yes, you are right, I don't want to continue the discussion in that direction. However, if you say that the probability that someone will rape a child should determine whether we keep them locked up or not, it would only be logical to extend this concept to those not yet in prison. You are right, this would be problematic because we would punish people for crimes they might commit in the future. However, you have to realize that we are doing exactly the same with people who did rape. If we keep them locked up after they served their sentence, we are punishing them for crimes they might commit in the future. It's a trade-off between the safety needs of the society and the rights of the individual. |
But with those that have already raped they have set the precedent and been incarcerated. They have shown themselves a danger to society. They have given up their right to be thought of in any other way except for rapist.
Whats the old saying "Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!" I would rather the offender be put under a microscope and their life made miserable in hope of protecting that little girl. Sorry bad guy but you don't get to go do it again.
Message edited by author 2008-08-13 13:39:26. |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:40:28 PM · #172 |
Originally posted by thegrandwazoo:
But with those that have already raped they have set the precedent and been incarcerated. They have shown themselves a danger to society. They have given up their right to be thought of in any other way except for rapist.
Whats the old saying "Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me!" I would rather the offender be put under a microscope and their life made miserable in hopes of protecting that little girl. Sorry bad guy but you don't get to go do it again. |
Yes, I agree, as a society we can come to the conclusion that we value the safety of our children higher than the rights of the prisoners and therefore keep them locked up.
P.S.: I think you got that saying wrong: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A ;-) |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:41:38 PM · #173 |
LOL He is such a dumb ass! :-P |
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:42:01 PM · #174 |
Hey man don't you know it's against the law in the US to use the word "Lynch"?
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
I don't have any sympathy for the dead guy.
The sick part is that you hold this up as something to take pride in, when in fact, the fathers actions, while understandable from an emotional standpoint, are no better than those of a lynch mob.
You might as well hold up a sign that says' "Louisiana, where we kill 'em; guilty or not."
Originally posted by kenskid:
Hey Spaz...here's a link to the video...check it out...you can cry for the dead guy.
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
You really think that vigilantism is something to be proud of?
Proud? Nah...just wanted to add some fire to the thread. Do you want me to send you a Moon Pie?
Originally posted by kenskid:
I remember in the mid 1970's may have been early 80's here in Louisiana....
A young boy about 12 years old was kidnapped by his Karate instructor. He was taken to California. He was molested and if I remember correctly he was raped by the man.
They caught the man in California...freed the child. The child was taken back to Louisiana to his father. The child's hair was dyed jet black for disguise.
A few days later the kidnapper was flown back to Baton Rough. As the COCKY instructor was being led in handcuffs (on TV) through the airport a man (the father) turned out from a phone booth with a pistol. He shot the kidnapper in the head.
The father was arrested but didn't serve any time !
We may drink RC Cola and eat Moon Pies here in Louisiana but we know how to dish out the justice !
Originally posted by egamble:
Originally posted by Sam94720:
=
According to this logic every criminal should be locked away forever. The thinking is based on the assumption that there are good people and evil people and that both will stay the way they are forever. Some people here have suggested they would kill someone who brought harm to their family. If they do it, they will end up in prison themselves. Do you think they would kill again afterwards? Probably not. Are they evil people?
= |
Scratch what I said about being logical.
You are just completely whacked. I am sure Obama enjoys your monthly donations.
How can you compare a person who kills for pleasure to a person who might kill if their wife or children is hurt?
You LOVE to compare apples to oranges and act like they are the same. THEY AREN'T!
A crime of passion is completely different than a crime that happens because of malice or some biological imbalance that cannot be remedied. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
08/13/2008 01:50:38 PM · #175 |
So you are saying you would prefer the criminals to stay on the streets? Sorry pal, but not what I want.
Let's go for broke; an eye for an eye. Want to prevent crime, let someone know that if they shoot or rape someone, or commit any crime, they will get the same treatment back? Deters me from ever doing anything, no matter how bad off I am.
Originally posted by Sam94720:
Originally posted by rugman1969:
You can't change what people are. This should be known by watching the same people go in and out of prison. |
Your argument means that prison is ineffective as a deterrent. So what is the purpose of prison? Keeping criminals temporarily away and then unleashing them again on the population? This doesn't make any sense. Punishing the criminals? With what goal in mind? You argue that they'll turn to crime again anyways. |
|
|
