One Punch, One Kill

Off Topic
161

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

It’s specifically BECAUSE plenty of persons get drunk every weekend without cold-cocking someone that this man is peculiar. There’s something wrong with him. Trying to solve the problem rather than just locking him up for a while seems to be the clearly superior method to me, but I guess none of you see that.

Treating him keeps him away from society all the same, so your argument is moot in this respect. As for deterrents, law clearly is not. Violent crime is higher, not lower. Besides, even if it worked as a deterrent, you wouldn’t be solving their psychological and/or chemical problems, you would merely be suppressing it.

Also, you don’t know me or my past so your theory is unfalsifiable and unverifiable, making it pointless.

You think yourself some hardcore realist. Apparently, this is an illusion shared by many on this site. But trust me and I’m being kind when I say, you’re merely deriving an ought from an is. [/quote]

Do you masturbate to ejaculate these pseudo-intellectual cum stains. Are do they merely eject from your mouth like a wet fart, leaving yet another stain in rear?

He’s not peculiar in any sense. There are plenty of idiots in every bar, every night, that haul off and crack someone. I know. Because I had the pleasure of grabbing those anti-social motherfuckers by their neck and showing them the door 100s of times. And although I am no bully, I would be praying those silly motherfuckers would make me the target of their anti-social bullying behavior so that I could unleash my own justice upon these animals. I never got my satisfaction. None of these cowards was stupid enough to direct their aggression in my direction. Well, there were two. I forgot. It didn’t go well for them. And sometimes someone is seriously injured (aggravated assault) or dies (murder, or variations thereof) as a result of those assaults. And when that recklessness results in such an outcome, you have to pay the price - however inconvenient or fucked up prisons are, it’s what we have at the moment. There are those among us that are comfortable with violence, particularly against the weak or weaker among us, and this case is no different, not “peculiar”. It was anything but “peculiar”, it was “typical” and the assault was committed by a cowardly bully.

This is not a debate about our prison systems and failures at rehabilitation. This is about removing a dangerous (yes, dangerous because he plies his trade against those that are weaker than he) criminal from society, to separate him for his rights, as punishment for his crime. If during those 6 years you want be volunteer as a counselor where he is incarcerated and listen to his story and perhaps masturbate him under the visiting room tables and touch him like his uncle did when he was 5, then have at it. I’d at least respect that commitment, however misguided, as opposed to your liberal musings delivered from your bedroom in Canada.

Hardcore realist? Did you invent that label? If you’re going to invent labels, at least define them for us so that we can follow along with your thoughtstains.

And although violent crime is higher and we live in a violent world, those of us with the higher reasoning skills and moral compass to fit into civilized society, are deterred by the prospect of punishment. I can honestly say I do not give the beatings I would love to deliver and that are richly deserved, because I do not want to be taken from my loved ones and children. I do not want to forfeit my freedoms. Those animals among us with lower reasoning skills, still understand punishment. Remove punishment and crime would rise even higher. Counseling is not punishment. At least the monkeys among us TRY TO GO UNDETECTED FOR THEIR CRIMES. I’m sure they would be much more brazen the minute we get all Canandian-touchy-feely on them and lend an ear to the “my uncle touched my pee pee when I was 4” excuses for their anti-social and violent behavior.

Nice try. Stick to hockey. [/quote]

So this is what passes for wit around here, eh?

He’s peculiar in the same way anyone so quick to be violent is peculiar… I don’t know why you ranted so much about such a small thing. =/

I don’t particularly care about your personal experiences because they are not statistically significant, therefore NOT an argument for a statistically significant course of action. The numbers point towards prisons NOT lowering crime as violent crime is going up.

And why is this not a debate about our prison systems and failures at rehabilitation? Because you say so? Oh, that’s right, YOU came to ME, I suppose that means you have the right to tell me what I’m talking about… =/
Also, I’ve already stated that treatment keeps them away from society all the same, which makes this argument of yours completely redundant. Also, I’m no liberal. In fact you couldn’t be more wrong. What is with persons on this site and drawing such irrational conclusions so prematurely?

I called you a “hardcore realist” because that’s what you’re trying to be. Your argument (excluding the ad hominems, straw mans and non-sequiturs) essentially amounts to “Phh, your sissy “helping people” theory can’t work, violent people need to be imprisoned! Beaten even! That’s how the REAL world works”. Which is psychotic and so far unbacked by any rational reasoning.

So prisons work because it deters persons who already are not prone to violent behavior? WTF? Do you even think about your arguments before you submit them? How utterly pointless a system is if it only deters those who need no deterrents. =/

I mean, you’re absolutely psychotic! You walk around LOOKING for an excuse to hurt persons? You WANT to enact vengeance? The ONLY thing stopping you is the threat of prison? You are every bit as insane as the persons you so virulently seek to attack. [/quote]

The system already takes into account whether or not a criminal has mental issues or problems. Usually, such persons are put into special facilities where they can be rehabilitated. This goon had the opportunity to prove that he was incapable of knowing the possible consequences of his actions. Appropriately, being intoxicated is not a defense. People need to learn to act responsibly. If they know they are prone to be asshats when drinking, they should stop drinking.

Also, although sentences are generally taken from set or common guidelines, judges can take into consideration certain mitigating factors when deciding what the criminal’s appropriate sentence should be. For example, Leroy or Jimmy the Boxer can say how they’re sorry, and then their mothers can come up and exclaim how they were such good boys…always went to church on Sundays, etc. Then the judge rightly throws the book at them because they are full of shit. Seriously though, there are cases where judges have significantly reduced sentences b/c they felt that the defendant was sincere and/or that the defendant made a mistake.

Until you have actually experienced the system firsthand, on either side of the equation, you have no basis for the statements you are making.

Yes, retribution is a big part of the justice system, but as others have said, so are deterrence and incapacitation. Do you really think that the rate of violence will decrease b/c instead of being imprisoned, criminals are coddled and rehabilitated in some facility? Joey Toughshit will see that Jim Fuckhead didn’t have to spend 6 years of his life in a jail cell getting shanked by Mexicans, so he goes out knifing people knowing that the worst possible consequence is some lady in a white uniform giving him medicine and reading him bedtime stories.

Also, the increase in violence from your statistics is not directly related to the function of our punishment system. How much of this violence occurs when law enforcement isn’t around? How much of this violence occurs in locales where law enforcement agencies are understaffed or have shit budgets? Do you really think these figures of yours would be the same if cops patrolled every street corner in the country (and all LEOs were competent)? Sure, you would have some idiots that would break the law regardless, but the majority of people would probably be deterred from committing any crime.

162

The chances of RyuuKyuzo being over the age of 20 seems incredibly small.

163

[quote]theOUTLAW wrote:

The system already takes into account whether or not a criminal has mental issues or problems. Usually, such persons are put into special facilities where they can be rehabilitated. This goon had the opportunity to prove that he was incapable of knowing the possible consequences of his actions. Appropriately, being intoxicated is not a defense. People need to learn to act responsibly. If they know they are prone to be asshats when drinking, they should stop drinking.

Also, although sentences are generally taken from set or common guidelines, judges can take into consideration certain mitigating factors when deciding what the criminal’s appropriate sentence should be. For example, Leroy or Jimmy the Boxer can say how they’re sorry, and then their mothers can come up and exclaim how they were such good boys…always went to church on Sundays, etc. Then the judge rightly throws the book at them because they are full of shit. Seriously though, there are cases where judges have significantly reduced sentences b/c they felt that the defendant was sincere and/or that the defendant made a mistake.

Until you have actually experienced the system firsthand, on either side of the equation, you have no basis for the statements you are making.

Yes, retribution is a big part of the justice system, but as others have said, so are deterrence and incapacitation. Do you really think that the rate of violence will decrease b/c instead of being imprisoned, criminals are coddled and rehabilitated in some facility? Joey Toughshit will see that Jim Fuckhead didn’t have to spend 6 years of his life in a jail cell getting shanked by Mexicans, so he goes out knifing people knowing that the worst possible consequence is some lady in a white uniform giving him medicine and reading him bedtime stories.

Also, the increase in violence from your statistics is not directly related to the function of our punishment system. How much of this violence occurs when law enforcement isn’t around? How much of this violence occurs in locales where law enforcement agencies are understaffed or have shit budgets? Do you really think these figures of yours would be the same if cops patrolled every street corner in the country (and all LEOs were competent)? Sure, you would have some idiots that would break the law regardless, but the majority of people would probably be deterred from committing any crime. [/quote]

THIS

164

[quote]Nards wrote:
The chances of RyuuKyuzo being over the age of 20 seems incredibly small.[/quote]
Checked his Hub…says 17. Looks like I was right and owe myself a beer.

Well, with his opposition to the justice system and opposition to capitalism he will do very well in university in two years. Hot and cold running chicks. Not my kind of chicks to be sure, but he’ll do quite well with the ones that look like Lisa Loeb.

165

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

the punch didn’t kill him the fall did?
[/quote]

Uh, yeah, that is what happened. I do believe that is the difference in this country between involuntary and voluntary man-slaughter. If your lawyer can get a jury to believe that you did not intend on killing him and that he died not because of the direct hit but what happened afterwards, then you get involuntary.

I know we have some lawyers here who can clarify that.[/quote]

It wasn’t the fall that got him, it was the impact on the ground.

I would sue the contractor that installed the curb as well as the city.

166

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]RTJenforcer wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

Have you even read my posts? Virutally all these issues have been adressed.

  1. Note, violent crime. I’m comparring laws that existed in the past and still exist to this day.
  2. He is either psychologically imbalanced, or chemically imbalanced. If you have another theory, nows the time to say it. [/quote]

Fucking chemical imbalance or not, when he let rip on an innocent man, he knew he was breaking the law! A law which is there to protect people from stuff like this happening - he knew it was illegal, thus he has to take responsibility and punishment for his actions. God knows how you can complicate something so incredibly simple into actually having sympathy for this arsehole.
[/quote]

You saw this man do one act and you condemn him in his entirety. You’re so quick to judge, what’s so wrong with preffering a solution, with wanting to actually find out what mechanism in his mind or biology caused this and work to solve it rather than just jumping right to “lock the fuckers up”?

[/quote]

I saw this man do one act which culminated in the death of an innocent man, so yeah it’s fairly safe to say I’m condemning him.

If there was some wonder drug which could turn people like this into functioning citizens then I might even agree with you, but there isn’t. I wouldn’t feel comfortable having people like this walk the streets, drugged up to the eyeballs or not.

I think you’re being an idealist about the whole thing, when in reality, this man has to be locked away for public safety, for penance (as mentioned by Nards I think), and possibly for rehabilitation. I sincerely doubt that the latter is a viable solution - but they can experiment on him all they want in prison for all I care.

You say that prison is a flawed solution - but you seem to forget that criminals have free will too. This guy made a conscious decision to step outside the pub and break the fucking law.

167

[quote]Nards wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]Nards wrote:
You’re using the word ‘revenge’ here because of its negative connotations and trying to lay a debating trap for those that argue against you.
[/quote]

I use the word “revenge” because by definition, this is revenge. Do you know a better word?[/quote]

We call it justice.

I think the reason humans developed laws and punishments for breaking them was an attempt by our ancestors to duplicate nature.
If Og, the stupid caveman decides to climb up a tall tree and jump off…he will likely be badly hurt. If that doesn’t happen, others will be very surprised that Og somehow ‘got away’ with it.
If Og then kicks a sleeping bear and the bear doesn’t chase him and instead gives him a pat on the head, others will balk at this incredibly lucky (for Og) turn of events.
If Og decides to sleep all day and not contribute to the tribe but hit the females that are gathering berries over the head…the others now see something they can actually effect.
They may hit Og over the head repeatedly. They are attempting to create the natural effect that was missing when this fool Og went against the natural law and nothing happened.

Also, we all know revenge is an emotional and what we call philosophically a ‘loaded’ word. If you want to go against all history before you may decide to change “justice system” to “revenge system,” but that would be dishonest
Even though I may want revenge on someone who’s wronged me, the idea that all the police, lawyers, judges and jury members between me and the suspect going to jail are all motivated by revenge is not possible.

[/quote]

You call is “justice”, the dictionary calls it revenge. I side with the dictionary on this because it is an objective observer. Nobody likes to think of themsevles as the bad guy.

Perahps you’ve heard of Psycho-history? It’s possibly one of the most interesting things you could ever read about. Basically, it postulates the thoery that mankind has gone thorugh “clasess” defined by inter-subjective psychological tendencies (especially in terms of child-rearing). That is, if vengence is taught to be justice to society by society, then that’s what becomes the norm.

http://www.psychohistory.com/

168

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

It’s specifically BECAUSE plenty of persons get drunk every weekend without cold-cocking someone that this man is peculiar. There’s something wrong with him. Trying to solve the problem rather than just locking him up for a while seems to be the clearly superior method to me, but I guess none of you see that.

Treating him keeps him away from society all the same, so your argument is moot in this respect. As for deterrents, law clearly is not. Violent crime is higher, not lower. Besides, even if it worked as a deterrent, you wouldn’t be solving their psychological and/or chemical problems, you would merely be suppressing it.

Also, you don’t know me or my past so your theory is unfalsifiable and unverifiable, making it pointless.

You think yourself some hardcore realist. Apparently, this is an illusion shared by many on this site. But trust me and I’m being kind when I say, you’re merely deriving an ought from an is. [/quote]

Do you masturbate to ejaculate these pseudo-intellectual cum stains. Are do they merely eject from your mouth like a wet fart, leaving yet another stain in rear?

He’s not peculiar in any sense. There are plenty of idiots in every bar, every night, that haul off and crack someone. I know. Because I had the pleasure of grabbing those anti-social motherfuckers by their neck and showing them the door 100s of times. And although I am no bully, I would be praying those silly motherfuckers would make me the target of their anti-social bullying behavior so that I could unleash my own justice upon these animals. I never got my satisfaction. None of these cowards was stupid enough to direct their aggression in my direction. Well, there were two. I forgot. It didn’t go well for them. And sometimes someone is seriously injured (aggravated assault) or dies (murder, or variations thereof) as a result of those assaults. And when that recklessness results in such an outcome, you have to pay the price - however inconvenient or fucked up prisons are, it’s what we have at the moment. There are those among us that are comfortable with violence, particularly against the weak or weaker among us, and this case is no different, not “peculiar”. It was anything but “peculiar”, it was “typical” and the assault was committed by a cowardly bully.

This is not a debate about our prison systems and failures at rehabilitation. This is about removing a dangerous (yes, dangerous because he plies his trade against those that are weaker than he) criminal from society, to separate him for his rights, as punishment for his crime. If during those 6 years you want be volunteer as a counselor where he is incarcerated and listen to his story and perhaps masturbate him under the visiting room tables and touch him like his uncle did when he was 5, then have at it. I’d at least respect that commitment, however misguided, as opposed to your liberal musings delivered from your bedroom in Canada.

Hardcore realist? Did you invent that label? If you’re going to invent labels, at least define them for us so that we can follow along with your thoughtstains.

And although violent crime is higher and we live in a violent world, those of us with the higher reasoning skills and moral compass to fit into civilized society, are deterred by the prospect of punishment. I can honestly say I do not give the beatings I would love to deliver and that are richly deserved, because I do not want to be taken from my loved ones and children. I do not want to forfeit my freedoms. Those animals among us with lower reasoning skills, still understand punishment. Remove punishment and crime would rise even higher. Counseling is not punishment. At least the monkeys among us TRY TO GO UNDETECTED FOR THEIR CRIMES. I’m sure they would be much more brazen the minute we get all Canandian-touchy-feely on them and lend an ear to the “my uncle touched my pee pee when I was 4” excuses for their anti-social and violent behavior.

Nice try. Stick to hockey. [/quote]

So this is what passes for wit around here, eh?

He’s peculiar in the same way anyone so quick to be violent is peculiar… I don’t know why you ranted so much about such a small thing. =/

I don’t particularly care about your personal experiences because they are not statistically significant, therefore NOT an argument for a statistically significant course of action. The numbers point towards prisons NOT lowering crime as violent crime is going up.

And why is this not a debate about our prison systems and failures at rehabilitation? Because you say so? Oh, that’s right, YOU came to ME, I suppose that means you have the right to tell me what I’m talking about… =/
Also, I’ve already stated that treatment keeps them away from society all the same, which makes this argument of yours completely redundant. Also, I’m no liberal. In fact you couldn’t be more wrong. What is with persons on this site and drawing such irrational conclusions so prematurely?

I called you a “hardcore realist” because that’s what you’re trying to be. Your argument (excluding the ad hominems, straw mans and non-sequiturs) essentially amounts to “Phh, your sissy “helping people” theory can’t work, violent people need to be imprisoned! Beaten even! That’s how the REAL world works”. Which is psychotic and so far unbacked by any rational reasoning.

So prisons work because it deters persons who already are not prone to violent behavior? WTF? Do you even think about your arguments before you submit them? How utterly pointless a system is if it only deters those who need no deterrents. =/

I mean, you’re absolutely psychotic! You walk around LOOKING for an excuse to hurt persons? You WANT to enact vengeance? The ONLY thing stopping you is the threat of prison? You are every bit as insane as the persons you so virulently seek to attack. [/quote]

LOL

Provide your supporting statistics that PUNISHMENT DOES NOT DETER CRIME.[/quote]

I’m assuming you wrote this before looking at my later posts…

169

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:
I’m going to agree with Nards. This Ryuu kid is parrotting the kind of silly attitude that is easily refuted in practice. He/she probably thinks communism is a great form of government too.[/quote]

So easy that you made no attempt to do so… yeah.

Also, no, I’m no communist. Strange that you would make such an assertion… =/[/quote]

Why don’t you explain how you drew the conclusion that the law is not an effective deterrant to crime based on nothing other than the increased per-capita rate of crime? If you honestly think that’s the only variable at play in an overwhelmingly complex issue, then I have nothing to say to you. Or hell, maybe you can tell me how you expertly determined that this man has a chemical imbalance based on a 15-second video clip, while of course knowing nothing about him personally.[/quote]

Have you even read my posts? Virutally all these issues have been adressed.

  1. Note, violent crime. I’m comparring laws that existed in the past and still exist to this day.
  2. He is either psychologically imbalanced, or chemically imbalanced. If you have another theory, nows the time to say it. [/quote]

I’ll answer. You’re haven’t compared shit. Please provide your credible references that form the foundation for your opinion. I want to see the statistics. Violent crime is on the rise because of the failures of our systems. Not because punishment isn’t the answer, but because we do not punish harshly enough.

MOAR VENGEANCE!!!

If you’ve already accepted that crime is higher now, then exactly what sort of statistics do you want??? You want statistics showing that crime is lower in less maniacal countries? well, okay… List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

As you can see, intentional homicide rates per 100,000 population in North America is about 6.5. Compare that to East Europe (15.7) and Southern Africa (37.3!) and you see that, relative to homicide, having a stricter government doesn’t do shit for lowering crime rates. I would argue that just the opposite his true. Making the law stricter on punishment merely suppresses violent behaviour until it becomes something lethal. This is what you opt for, suppression of the problem, NOT a solution to the problem.

The rest of your post was incoherent rambling mirroring things you’ve already said, so I’m going to leave it at that.
[/quote]

If you think what passes for “government” in Africa is relevant, you’re dumber than I thought.[/quote]

Completely non-cognitive response. Africa is highly statist. Besides, I also listed East Europe. How convenient it is for you to have missed that. =/

170

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

Have you even read my posts? Virutally all these issues have been adressed.

  1. Note, violent crime. I’m comparring laws that existed in the past and still exist to this day.
  2. He is either psychologically imbalanced, or chemically imbalanced. If you have another theory, nows the time to say it. [/quote]

So what is your actual experience with violent criminals?

Have you been one, or are you currently?

Do you work on the therapeutic side of it?

If you want to make a claim without at the very least some academic citations, Establish some credibility as to how you have developed your opinion as expressed here.
[/quote]

Actually, I’m purposefully NOT mentioning any credentials of mine because authority is NOT a replacement for an argument. I know it would be easier for the lazy among us to simply look at whomever has the largest degree collection and follow him like a herd of sheep, but that’s not what I want. You’re going to actually have to read my arguments, consider the evidence and make up your mind for yourself. [/quote]

Oh, Right. So you don’t have any.

You haven’t presented an argument or any evidence to back it. Certainly not in any formal or comprehensive manner, anyways.

Posturing as an authority FAIL. Go troll somewhere else. You remind me of another farce who’s been stinking up these boards for the past few weeks with her pseudo intellectual garbage.
[/quote]

I suppose I was just writing random words then? I started out with the reasoning behind my position and have in fact posted statistics a few posts above this one. But, if you want something more formal, then fine.

  1. There are violent persons in the world
  2. There is a reason for their violence (whether it be psychological or chemical)
  3. Therefore, the most beneficial way to deal with this is to remove these persons from society and treat them so that we (society) can both re-introduce these persons to society and find out why they committed such acts in the first place.

Esentially, I`m asking why such things happen and what can be done about it. This in contrast to my opposition;

  1. There are violent persons in the world
  2. There is a reason for their violence (whether it be psychological or chemical)
  3. Lock the fuckers up

This line of thought doesn`t even attempt to understand the problem, rather it suppresses it.

I then have gone on to show that more strict punishments do not necessitate lower crime rates as shown in my post a few above this one.

Honestly, I don`t know why this is so controversial. It seems to be basic logic to me that fixing the problem is a superior method to simply pushing it out of sight and out of mind.

171

Not every post in a thread has to be written by you, RyuuKyuzo.

172

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
the most beneficial way to deal with this is to remove these persons from society and treat them so that we (society) can both re-introduce these persons to society and find out why they committed such acts in the first place.

[/quote]

aka: Lock the fuckers up

173

[quote]Amiright wrote:
Omg… don’t feed the troll… its apparent that Ryuu is absolutely a troll. He has done nothing but reword his previous comments adding zero substance(straw man arguments spread throughout). If he wasn’t a troll he’d at least attempt to show something with statistical relevance to back his claim.

Also even if he was a leading doctor in some shit(its late lol) sense he wants us to believe in such… and 88.9% of the time these cases show that this persons mental state is an issue and he needs medical treatment over prison etc… As a doctor(or anyone that is capable of reading) he would know this man could be part of the 11.1% and a 15 sec video is not even remotely enough to confirm any diagnosis.

Also… member from 2008 with only 41 posts… and its this thread that accounts for probably more than half. He either was incredibly passionate about this topic even though similar have been covered in the past or hes trolling.

not sure what I just wrote… I was on my way to bed… sorry if grammar/spelling basic logic is flawed… to lazy to check. [/quote]

not sure what I just wrote… I was on my way to bed… sorry if grammar/spelling basic logic is flawed… to lazy to check. [/quote]

Are you all retarded? Ive had to tell EVERY SINGLE one of you that I posted statistics just a few posts above the ones youre all making!

Also, why the hell are you all riding this “chemical causation” theory like I’ve based my career on it? How many times do I have to type “OR psychological” before you get it???

174

Yes, but your supposition is based on the fallacy that it is our problem to understand and fix. That is the flaw.

Your premise is flawed and your supporting argument has big holes all throughout. Until you patch those and revise the premise, you can not be right.

When you get to college take a couple of courses on argument and composition.

Before you can synthesize, you need the anti-thesis and the thesis. You are lacking in the anti-thesis.

Translated to common terms- Before you can create a new “something”, you need to take what is real and what is ideal. You are lacking in what is real.

It’s an all too common case of trying to think outside the box without knowing what is in it yet.

175

[quote]theOUTLAW wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

It’s specifically BECAUSE plenty of persons get drunk every weekend without cold-cocking someone that this man is peculiar. There’s something wrong with him. Trying to solve the problem rather than just locking him up for a while seems to be the clearly superior method to me, but I guess none of you see that.

Treating him keeps him away from society all the same, so your argument is moot in this respect. As for deterrents, law clearly is not. Violent crime is higher, not lower. Besides, even if it worked as a deterrent, you wouldn’t be solving their psychological and/or chemical problems, you would merely be suppressing it.

Also, you don’t know me or my past so your theory is unfalsifiable and unverifiable, making it pointless.

You think yourself some hardcore realist. Apparently, this is an illusion shared by many on this site. But trust me and I’m being kind when I say, you’re merely deriving an ought from an is. [/quote]

Do you masturbate to ejaculate these pseudo-intellectual cum stains. Are do they merely eject from your mouth like a wet fart, leaving yet another stain in rear?

He’s not peculiar in any sense. There are plenty of idiots in every bar, every night, that haul off and crack someone. I know. Because I had the pleasure of grabbing those anti-social motherfuckers by their neck and showing them the door 100s of times. And although I am no bully, I would be praying those silly motherfuckers would make me the target of their anti-social bullying behavior so that I could unleash my own justice upon these animals. I never got my satisfaction. None of these cowards was stupid enough to direct their aggression in my direction. Well, there were two. I forgot. It didn’t go well for them. And sometimes someone is seriously injured (aggravated assault) or dies (murder, or variations thereof) as a result of those assaults. And when that recklessness results in such an outcome, you have to pay the price - however inconvenient or fucked up prisons are, it’s what we have at the moment. There are those among us that are comfortable with violence, particularly against the weak or weaker among us, and this case is no different, not “peculiar”. It was anything but “peculiar”, it was “typical” and the assault was committed by a cowardly bully.

This is not a debate about our prison systems and failures at rehabilitation. This is about removing a dangerous (yes, dangerous because he plies his trade against those that are weaker than he) criminal from society, to separate him for his rights, as punishment for his crime. If during those 6 years you want be volunteer as a counselor where he is incarcerated and listen to his story and perhaps masturbate him under the visiting room tables and touch him like his uncle did when he was 5, then have at it. I’d at least respect that commitment, however misguided, as opposed to your liberal musings delivered from your bedroom in Canada.

Hardcore realist? Did you invent that label? If you’re going to invent labels, at least define them for us so that we can follow along with your thoughtstains.

And although violent crime is higher and we live in a violent world, those of us with the higher reasoning skills and moral compass to fit into civilized society, are deterred by the prospect of punishment. I can honestly say I do not give the beatings I would love to deliver and that are richly deserved, because I do not want to be taken from my loved ones and children. I do not want to forfeit my freedoms. Those animals among us with lower reasoning skills, still understand punishment. Remove punishment and crime would rise even higher. Counseling is not punishment. At least the monkeys among us TRY TO GO UNDETECTED FOR THEIR CRIMES. I’m sure they would be much more brazen the minute we get all Canandian-touchy-feely on them and lend an ear to the “my uncle touched my pee pee when I was 4” excuses for their anti-social and violent behavior.

Nice try. Stick to hockey. [/quote]

So this is what passes for wit around here, eh?

He’s peculiar in the same way anyone so quick to be violent is peculiar… I don’t know why you ranted so much about such a small thing. =/

I don’t particularly care about your personal experiences because they are not statistically significant, therefore NOT an argument for a statistically significant course of action. The numbers point towards prisons NOT lowering crime as violent crime is going up.

And why is this not a debate about our prison systems and failures at rehabilitation? Because you say so? Oh, that’s right, YOU came to ME, I suppose that means you have the right to tell me what I’m talking about… =/
Also, I’ve already stated that treatment keeps them away from society all the same, which makes this argument of yours completely redundant. Also, I’m no liberal. In fact you couldn’t be more wrong. What is with persons on this site and drawing such irrational conclusions so prematurely?

I called you a “hardcore realist” because that’s what you’re trying to be. Your argument (excluding the ad hominems, straw mans and non-sequiturs) essentially amounts to “Phh, your sissy “helping people” theory can’t work, violent people need to be imprisoned! Beaten even! That’s how the REAL world works”. Which is psychotic and so far unbacked by any rational reasoning.

So prisons work because it deters persons who already are not prone to violent behavior? WTF? Do you even think about your arguments before you submit them? How utterly pointless a system is if it only deters those who need no deterrents. =/

I mean, you’re absolutely psychotic! You walk around LOOKING for an excuse to hurt persons? You WANT to enact vengeance? The ONLY thing stopping you is the threat of prison? You are every bit as insane as the persons you so virulently seek to attack. [/quote]

The system already takes into account whether or not a criminal has mental issues or problems. Usually, such persons are put into special facilities where they can be rehabilitated. This goon had the opportunity to prove that he was incapable of knowing the possible consequences of his actions. Appropriately, being intoxicated is not a defense. People need to learn to act responsibly. If they know they are prone to be asshats when drinking, they should stop drinking.

Also, although sentences are generally taken from set or common guidelines, judges can take into consideration certain mitigating factors when deciding what the criminal’s appropriate sentence should be. For example, Leroy or Jimmy the Boxer can say how they’re sorry, and then their mothers can come up and exclaim how they were such good boys…always went to church on Sundays, etc. Then the judge rightly throws the book at them because they are full of shit. Seriously though, there are cases where judges have significantly reduced sentences b/c they felt that the defendant was sincere and/or that the defendant made a mistake.

Until you have actually experienced the system firsthand, on either side of the equation, you have no basis for the statements you are making.

Yes, retribution is a big part of the justice system, but as others have said, so are deterrence and incapacitation. Do you really think that the rate of violence will decrease b/c instead of being imprisoned, criminals are coddled and rehabilitated in some facility? Joey Toughshit will see that Jim Fuckhead didn’t have to spend 6 years of his life in a jail cell getting shanked by Mexicans, so he goes out knifing people knowing that the worst possible consequence is some lady in a white uniform giving him medicine and reading him bedtime stories.

Also, the increase in violence from your statistics is not directly related to the function of our punishment system. How much of this violence occurs when law enforcement isn’t around? How much of this violence occurs in locales where law enforcement agencies are understaffed or have shit budgets? Do you really think these figures of yours would be the same if cops patrolled every street corner in the country (and all LEOs were competent)? Sure, you would have some idiots that would break the law regardless, but the majority of people would probably be deterred from committing any crime. [/quote]

An actual response. I’m shocked.

The system merely “taking it into account” doesn’t change that it is a system primarily built upon the notion of vengeance against criminals. The point remains that when someone acts out in this way it falls under one of three categories.
1.Self defense
2.Psychological problem
3.Chemical problem

We can rule out number one, which leaves us with it being psychological or chemical. Both need treatment to be solved. If there are persons who end up “better” due to imprisonment, then fine, but they are an exception. Besides, a competent analysis would show this anyway.

Initially, you would be right that I need first hand experience in or around these prisons and witnessed how these convicts behave after. However, there’s something called “statistics”. Statistics allow us to see the raw numbers independent of emotion, therefore statistics are a superior method to decide how to deal with such behaviour.

Understand, most persons avoid stealing and killing for reasons greater than “because the law says so”. Given that society would first have to come to a point of great compassion for treatment to replace vengeance, I doubt very much that MORE crime would happen as a result of trying to figure out why it occurs in the first place. Besides, being under treatment takes away your freedoms in much the same way that imprisonment does. The difference is convicts would come out with more than just a hardened heart and a wider asshole.

If a persons is so screwed up that they cannot be rehabilitated, then that person needs to be Euthanized. Perhaps this seems cruel, but it is much more compassionate than keeping this person in a cage their entire life at the expense of others. This is also why I doubt persons would suddenly decide it’s a good idea to enact unnecessary violence.

Most acts of homicide are done within high population areas. These also happen to be the areas with the most police protection. I would say that just about all departments are under funded, but that’s just what you get when police protection is under a coercive monopoly.

It’s worth noting that I’m opposed to vengeance as a means of dealing out “justice”, I’m NOT opposed to police protection at all.

176

[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:

If you’ve already accepted that crime is higher now, then exactly what sort of statistics do you want??? You want statistics showing that crime is lower in less maniacal countries? well, okay… http://en.wikipedia.org/...l_homicide_rate

As you can see, intentional homicide rates per 100,000 population in North America is about 6.5. Compare that to East Europe (15.7) and Southern Africa (37.3!) and you see that, relative to homicide, having a stricter government doesn’t do shit for lowering crime rates. I would argue that just the opposite his true. Making the law stricter on punishment merely suppresses violent behaviour until it becomes something lethal. This is what you opt for, suppression of the problem, NOT a solution to the problem.

OK you dumb fuck since you seem to be well a dumb fuck. If you for one second think that eastern european countries, or more so South Africa has a stricter government you are delusional.

You can debate till your face turns blue, but until someone comes up with a better solution to deal with crime that is also PRACTICALLY FEASIBLE prisons are what have to be used to deal with it.

On another note, Saudi Arabia is you can clearly notice has one of the lowest crime rates according to those statistics provided by you and the govern there is tighter than a virgin’s asshole: → disproving your theory

I would argue that just the opposite his true. Making the law stricter on punishment merely suppresses violent behaviour until it becomes something lethal. This is what you opt for, suppression of the problem, NOT a solution to the problem.

Suppresses violent behaviour? until it becomes lethal? what the hell are you talking about?

You are basically saying that we will inevitably give in to our primal instincts or better yet( suppression ), override them (solution)?

with that attitude you are basically reducing society to live like animals or be “cured” of it. Which in theory is fine but to maintain a functioning society is absolutely impossible.

A lot of people who sit in the comfort of their luxuries have big mouths about issues such as these because they are never touched by any of the issues. We as humans are not owed anything by the world, in life we are not entitled to anything. Western culture was based on the human ability to make moral choices. If you want to live in a society that has other norms you can feel free to go and join them, you will soon realize that it might not fit with your lifestyle the way you think. Unless you have actually gone anywhere else and experienced how other cultures operate you won’t understand how great the north american lifestyle is (used to be ) even with all it’s flaws.[/quote]

In what way is communism and dictatorships more lenient than North American politics? You never actually explain why, you just assert it.

In what way is trying to rehabilitate infeasible? It’s done at least in part NOW is it not? Again, you merely assert this with no reasoning behind it.

You have to take in to consideration what constitutes as intentional homicide in Saudi Arabia, as well as the utter lack of statistics provided for that area. Saudi Arabia has a very different style of dealing with murder than we do (eg. Diyya). There will always be exceptions from year to year. The trends are what matters.

Emotions are a fact of life. Suppressing them only served to aggregate them later. If you supress your emotions long enough, they explode violently. Therefore it is in the best interest of anyone who wishes to avoid unnecessary homicide to fix the problem rather than suppress it.

177

[quote]Rational Gaze wrote:
Not every post in a thread has to be written by you, RyuuKyuzo.[/quote]

Lol

Honestly, I’m thinking about just ignoring 90% of the comments made to me. Most are redundant and barely even interesting.

178

[quote]RTJenforcer wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]RTJenforcer wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

Have you even read my posts? Virutally all these issues have been adressed.

  1. Note, violent crime. I’m comparring laws that existed in the past and still exist to this day.
  2. He is either psychologically imbalanced, or chemically imbalanced. If you have another theory, nows the time to say it. [/quote]

Fucking chemical imbalance or not, when he let rip on an innocent man, he knew he was breaking the law! A law which is there to protect people from stuff like this happening - he knew it was illegal, thus he has to take responsibility and punishment for his actions. God knows how you can complicate something so incredibly simple into actually having sympathy for this arsehole.
[/quote]

You saw this man do one act and you condemn him in his entirety. You’re so quick to judge, what’s so wrong with preffering a solution, with wanting to actually find out what mechanism in his mind or biology caused this and work to solve it rather than just jumping right to “lock the fuckers up”?

[/quote]

I saw this man do one act which culminated in the death of an innocent man, so yeah it’s fairly safe to say I’m condemning him.

If there was some wonder drug which could turn people like this into functioning citizens then I might even agree with you, but there isn’t. I wouldn’t feel comfortable having people like this walk the streets, drugged up to the eyeballs or not.

I think you’re being an idealist about the whole thing, when in reality, this man has to be locked away for public safety, for penance (as mentioned by Nards I think), and possibly for rehabilitation. I sincerely doubt that the latter is a viable solution - but they can experiment on him all they want in prison for all I care.

You say that prison is a flawed solution - but you seem to forget that criminals have free will too. This guy made a conscious decision to step outside the pub and break the fucking law.
[/quote]

Again, being under treatment keeps you away from society all the same. How is it possible for you ALL to not understand this? Read the posts I write to persons other than yourselves. I’m done responding to points already adressed.

179

[quote]RTJenforcer wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
the most beneficial way to deal with this is to remove these persons from society and treat them so that we (society) can both re-introduce these persons to society and find out why they committed such acts in the first place.

[/quote]

aka: Lock the fuckers up
[/quote]

Except, you know, with the obvious difference of doing more than repressing the problem.

Violent patients can’t be allowed to roam freely into public, this is just a fact of life. At least with treatment they can be re-introduced to society with a little more certainty than hoping the prescribed boarding period magically solved his problems.

180

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

Honestly, I don`t know why this is so controversial. It seems to be basic logic to me that fixing the problem is a superior method to simply pushing it out of sight and out of mind. [/quote]

Because if you were twice as old as you are now, you’d fucking realize that we don’t live in a time where all problems can be “fixed”. Therefore, it is necessary to remove those that prove to be anti-social and dangerous from society for a period of time. If you’re waiting for society, rather than the individual, to fix the problem, go ahead and hold your breath please, I’ll wait. Because society doesn’t work that way. Because we already have programs in place for those that WANT help. You can swim against the stream if you want, but it will end in prison or worse. That my young friend, is nature, the rule of the land.