1 in 30 in US part of the prison system!?

[Taxious]

The death penalty isn't necessary for that. Nor is it a deterrent tocrime. It serves no purpose other than revenge.

Despite being against the D.P. I think the "if you are going to punish/warn people, you have to speak their language" is interesting. Obviously some people think the consequences aren't harsh enough to not commit certain crimes...

[Freecare Spiritwise]

Agreed on all points Embar.

And yeah, it's a lousy deterrent. If someone has that low of a value of life, it's virtually guaranteed that they don't value their own. Hmm and prison itself is probably a lousy deterrent for that matter. If you're sitting in a hot hotel room hitting the crack pipe, or getting drunk and beating the old lady, or harming children, or whatever, then almost by definition your mindset isn't one that's burdened with pondering the consequences of your actions.

But what to do with those people, and where to draw the line? And how to serve justice without becoming unjust ourselves? We have met the enemy, and he is us.

As I've said, I think it's hypocritical to kill them, but I don't want that child molestor crusing the local school either. Nobody does.

I've always said that at least for sexual predators, they should be given the option of prison time or voluntary castration. For other types of dangerous criminals, it doesn't seem so easy.

[Harlowe]

I am so aggravated with you 2 right now I can't even make a coherent response... If I was Freecare I wouldn't be getting attacked for saying anything.

Now, now you weren't coherent to begin with. You're either lying or kidding yourself about what you posted. We certainly aren't all failing at reading compression, you are simply attempting to do the Tour de France of backpedaling now because you are most likely embarrassed by what you said. It was just that fucked up.

Comparing your words to something Freecare would say is laughable. Freecare would have never said the bullshit you spewed, because he values human life and has a sense of fairness & empathy and Embar has been nothing but positive to you during your whole "I can't post in a thread without mentioning my self-esteem issues" period, so sorry, that made no sense either. It's bullshit.

I think you border on being batshit crazy.

Also, the state should not be in the business of killing its own citizenry, with the exception of the need to do so in circumstances where there is a clear and imminent danger to ther citizens (liking taking out a guy who is shooting at people). The government should impose the least amount of force necessary to protect its population, nothing more. The death penalty isn't necessary for that. Nor is it a deterrent tocrime. It serves no purpose other than revenge.

Totally agree with Embar.

[Taxious]

Oh man, this is going to get good...

[Freecare Spiritwise]

A sign that used to hang on the wall at a company I worked for:

[Taxious]

Is that you taking the picture with your camera phone? White collar + dark hair?

[Ariannda Kusanagi]

My point is that IF i was Freecare something I said wouldn't have been attacked. There would have been "Hmmm thank you for that point of view, I disagree because..." but then again Freecares opinion is respected, while mine is not. And why you're dragging other threads into this one I'll never know.

I have said nothing to be embarrassed about, I am not backpedaling, I am attempting to further elaborate on something that apparently holds no vested interest except as a direct mean to attack me. I thought we got over the calling me names. I know I infuriate you, however thats never been my intent. for THAT I apologize, and nothing more.

I never even actually said I supported the death penalty. What I have said is I don't understand how things seem to happen the way they do in relation to the prison system. If the goal is rehabilitation of criminals BEFORE they turn into the type of people we can't have in society period (sex offenders excluded, because I agree with Freecare) then the system itself needs a major overhaul. The main problem with rehabilitation is that people have to want to change, or want to have better lives, or want to <insert the need/want here>. Overhauling the needs of the prison system would encompass so much more, like social reform as well as housing reform, public assistance. It's all sort of tied together. If an employer doesn't feel he can trust someone then they can't get a job, can't pay for housing, can't work to become better people IN society, but that desire has to be there to begin with. True rehabilitation can only be accomplished by someone on their own, but they still need to have certain tools and resources available to them to be able to accomplish anything in the end.

Isn't it all about contribution, or lack of, to society ?

[Freecare Spiritwise]

No, I just remembered the sign and googled it. And if you ever see me in a white collar, ask me how the job interview went

[Freecare Spiritwise]

"He will triumph who knows when to fight, and when not to fight" ~ Sun Tzu: The Art of War

http://www.chinapage.com/sunzi-e.html

[Ddrak]

My point is that IF i was Freecare something I said wouldn't have been attacked. There would have been "Hmmm thank you for that point of view, I disagree because..." but then again Freecares opinion is respected, while mine is not.

Nope. If Freecare (or me, or anyone) said what you said they would have been shot down in flames. It was a silly position.

i) The number of people on death row is an insignificant cost as compared to the overall system cost.
ii) The cost of executing someone is far higher than life imprisonment.
iii) You can't reduce the cost of executing someone without increasing the risk of killing innocents.

Those are true whether you support the death penalty or not, and I'm not entering into that argument right now. Your statement that we should take less due diligence on determining someone's objective guilt (a confession isn't enough - there's lots of nutjobs out there who confess to things they never did) which has the undeniable effect of putting innocent people to death in order to save cash on 0.05% of the total is just a poorly thought out knee jerk. Defending it is even dumber. Pretending it's an attack on you personally instead of an attack on the statement you made is just bizarre.

You do need to calm down and stop seeing it as a personal attack.

Dd

[Embar Angylwrath]

And, I might add, you might want to consider the fact that I treated you the same way I've treated Harlowe, Freecare, Ddrak, Partha, Lurker, Kulaf, Tax etc, when I've disagreed with them. Especially on issues regarding the value of human life. So you can take that as I treat you with the same respect as I treat them, or I treat you with the same disrespect as I treat them... but I treat all of them, and you, the same.

[Freecare Spiritwise]

The Germans did some groundbreaking research during the 1940's into killing people cheaply and efficiently. With advances in industrial technology since then, and enough volume, I'm sure we could get the cost per execution probably close to a dollar if we buy the cyanide in bulk.

We could even cut deals with the TV networks and make some reality shows out of it. With some creative marketing and product placement, maybe we could even turn a profit from executing our citizens! And if we execute someone by mistake, hey, save that for the dramatic season finale!

And if the condemned shouts "redbull gives you wings" at the time of execution, then the Fox network will buy his widow a Prius.

"Live, from the Hard Rock casino in Las Vegas, and brought to you by Slim Jim..."

[Freecare Spiritwise]

And, I might add, you might want to consider the fact that I treated you the same way I've treated Harlowe, Freecare, Ddrak, Partha, Lurker, Kulaf, Tax etc, when I've disagreed with them. Especially on issues regarding the value of human life. So you can take that as I treat you with the same respect as I treat them, or I treat you with the same disrespect as I treat them... but I treat all of them, and you, the same.

Oh hell yeah, we all beat each other up pretty good in some of those threads. And I'm always happy to receive a boot to the ass to keep me honest. It's one of the reasons why I heart brell rants. I love these no-punches-pulled discussions. This place is much better than those over-moderated, watered-down, dumbed-down sites where everyone pretends to be civil.

The kung fu here is strong.

[Partha]

Sorry, I'm with Nina on this one. As long as those who are verifiably monstrous are alive, there is the future possibility of them getting out and doing it all over again. When I was young, a psychopathic asshole named Ray Lee Stewart (among other things) robbed a gas station, and afterwards shot the unresisting clerk five times, the last in the face. A decade later, I was working in that store and stepped over the place where that fucknut executed a harmless teenager at least twice a day. When he was executed, you're damn right I celebrated, because that meant that someone else's life was saved in the future. Another prisoner, a guard, an innocent civilian when he escaped? Does not matter one bit to me.

[Harlowe]

I don't think you can argue this kind of thing with just some personal anecdotal information. There are larger issues and I think Ddrak covered them succinctly -

i) The number of people on death row is an insignificant cost as compared to the overall system cost.
ii) The cost of executing someone is far higher than life imprisonment.
iii) You can't reduce the cost of executing someone without increasing the risk of killing innocents.

"Let's kill more guilty people quickly to save cash" is a pretty barbaric and naive way of looking at a very complicated situation. Even if you agree with the death pentalty, our justice system is by no means good enough to be cavalier about putting people to death.

I think we'd save a hell of a lot more money by not locking up non-violent drug offenders.

[Harlowe]

My point is that IF i was Freecare something I said wouldn't have been attacked. There would have been "Hmmm thank you for that point of view, I disagree because..." but then again Freecares opinion is respected, while mine is not.

Just to add, uhh, that's just delusional "poor me" nonsense. WHO the hell here talks like that to each other? People don't pull punches ever. There is a person(s) that pick on Partha, Klast, Select, Fallakin, Trollbait, me, Kulaf, etc. Everyone has one or more people that get on their case about shit and do it with relish. Stop playing victim, and recognize you are on a rant board where people discuss shit with vigor and sometimes with childish vigor. It's more an attack on your ideals and your behavior than who you are as a person.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

No shit, if I would've said it Partha and Lurker would've ripped me a new asshole... then Harlowe would've agreed with them.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Forgot that Embar would call me a dick too... gosh, I'm such an ungrateful dick.

[Ariannda Kusanagi]

"Let's kill more guilty people quickly to save cash" is a pretty barbaric and naive way of looking at a very complicated situation. Even if you agree with the death penalty, our justice system is by no means good enough to be cavalier about putting people to death.

Barbaric perhaps but not naive, as long as we can re-word that to say "Lets kill the people we've found guilty more quickly" which is what I was trying to say... however that ties into the second part of the sentence. If the system itself is flawed, being as everyone who's judging and sentencing the accused IS human and therefore subject to human error and/or emotion then what do we do exactly ? Is there a better or more effective way to prove someone's guilt or innocence, there by eliminating the need for second guessing and allowing those society as a whole (child rapists, murderers and the like) views to be monsters to remain imprisoned or otherwise kept at bay from the general public without allowing them certain luxuries like additional education, cable television etc etc?

I think that there's an idea that there are certain people that should NOT be allowed to live, even if we would rather not see them killed (say in the case of child rapists for example). So what's to be done ? Yes, punishments other then jail time would work for non-violent offenders reducing the amount of people in the prison to begin with, but then the definitions need to be changed don't they ? What deems someone as a non violent offender, versus a potential violent offender ? Someone with 15 DUI's is clearly a risk to society and while maybe they haven't killed someone yet the potential is there, while the kid with the joint probably isn't going to be killing anyone.

The death penalty isn't necessarily the answer, agreed, but I still stick with the idea that neither is building more prisons. The system is flawed and in need of a major overhaul.

Srsly Fallakin I thought you'd have a bit more to say then that. I'm dissapointed

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Sure I'd love to put truly guilty people to death, but everyone deserves the right to fight for their life. They deserve to appeal the decision that landed them where they are and have all the evidence for or against them reviewed and shown to a new jury of their peers (or new judge). Also, on the chance that new evidence is found (which is happening with a lot of older inmates after DNA has been tested and brought forward from their cases) they deserve to be set free and pursue legal repercussions for their wrongful incarceration.

Also, Rehabilitation does work for some people and those people go on to be very successful citizens... being in jail just clicks something in their brains that "saves" them. You can't just blanket kill guilty people when rehabilitation does work.

No system is perfect because humans aren't perfect. The only "perfect" system is a police state where everyone is under 24/7 supervision and people have a chip implanted in their body that can't be removed or altered without death (so that you know where everyone is at all times). I think I'd rather have freedom.