Sigh always these rah-rah people crying out for punishment of the evil. You ****ing idiots its been proven a million times that prison and the death penalty is not a deterrant for crime. Its just for your sick minds to jerk off to the notion of someone suffering.

People in prison should be rehabilitated as they are in civilized countries. There are exceptions to this but holy **** this entire "THEY MUST BE PUNISHED!" **** is so ridic it almost makes me laugh. You guys really do long for the savage times of cutting body parts of as punishment for thieves dont you?

Get a ****ing grip and see outside your sick mind wanting punishment. It's pretty clear you don't see prison as clearing someone either, since if a rapist/child molester gets out they are basically hunted down after their punishment because some people deems it wasn't harsh enough. So what do you want? Should we just kill everyone suspected of everything?

lmao what universe do u live in?
that might be one of the stupidest posts I've ever read.
there is just so much factually incorrect in your post it's hilarious.

god we're such sickos wanting people who commit heinous crimes to be punished!
I'm sure if someone raped and murdered your wife and kids you'd be all for rehabilitating him so he could realize the errors of his was and rejoin society.
gtfo.

but ya those poor child molesters and sex offenders, god we really need to treat those guys better.

Don't kid yourself, you aren't rehabiliting the Ted Bundys of the world.

The system is flawed and ergo I think the death penalty should be abolished or applied only in a tiny handful of cases, but don't pretend that there currently exists a system where we can take a sociopath, lock them up for X number of years, treat them, and they can be released safely back into society.

also LOLOLOL at denigrating ppl who support punishing criminals.
you're fine with prison but call us sickos for wanting punishment?

is this some kindv troll?
you realize prison is a punishment right?

also, we don't hunt down sex offenders after they're released cuz "some deem the punishment not harsh enough", are u even reading what you're typing before u post?

the quote was not meant for anyone here. i'm sorry if you misinterpreted it that way. i was just trying to depict the mindset of why I try to feel compassion for the most heinous criminals.

i'm not an arrogant, insufferable douchebag and i'm sorry you feel that way.

this is somewhat poorly worded but i was today thinking of the line true goal of corrections. in many missions statements it includes rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

the way things are set up though, i do not see that to be the true mission. it's punishment/housing- followed by stigmatization once released even after post release supervision (parole).

i don't understand how anyone is supposed to obtain gainful employment when they have to check "the box" about being convicted of a felony- that pretty much ensures any application is going straight to the shredder.

------
as i see it, the state has decided that the only form of compensation that is accepted for crimes is payment in days/years of your life. i'm ok with that. My question is, when does that bill expire? Make no mistakes that you're not paid in full when released from prison if you have post release supervision. Even after that you're not paid up because you get to check the box on job applications, and there are public assistance blockages (still trying to decide my stance on this) and in many cases you're even barred from voting....


michael vick- did his time, got back on the football field- but he's possibly the most extreme outlier. For regular people, i'm unsure how they can possibly get their feet underneath them and even participate in society when they're released.

--


i'm aware this is off roading from topic, just a random thought. it does tie into the punishment/justice argument though.

jfc guys can you really not make a distinction between people incarcerated for non-violent or petty crimes and insane ****ing psychopaths that rape/murder/torture/kill people?

i mean holy hyperbole batman.

You yourself said that prison is "punishment". You guys see no point in even trying rehabilitation. You just want to see extraordinary suffering. Obviously I was maybe not in a good mindset when I made my rant post, but the point stands that you can't help society by filling up prisons cause you need some moral satisfaction. You somehow think that skipping the rehabilitation part completely is something positive as long as the prisoner gets PUNISHED and suffered! People even talk about how lenient they have it in todays prisons. I even regularly see how people reference to people being raped as something GOOD if they did something that you are upset about.

How is that mentality helping anything? Maybe you believe that the entire prison culture in the US is good today? Obviously this is more leaned toward crimes lesser than murders but if you ever plan to release someone you need to rehabilitate them, thats just how it works. You can't just **** someone up even harder for life and expect them to not be even WORSE when you let them out, and thats on your conscience.

And where do we draw the line with your eye for an eye logic? I mean I apologize for making a incoherent post semi-drunk but all this hate and punishment-cheering in this thread just got to me. It's like some of you wish by all your heart that you could live in medieval times.

Also the whole false-accusation of child molesting/rape is a big enough factor to not be a supporter of the death penalty for those crimes. Even if they are horrible horrible crimes.


I agree completely. I think people let their emotions run extremely wild and want to knee-jerk punish people. Some people even cheer on vigilante justice! check out the subreddit JusticePorn on reddit for loads of examples of this. I only see americans and people not from the nordic crying over how lenient they are on Breivik 'WHY CANT THEY JUST PUNISH HIM MORE' people are SO UPSET that we arent treating him inhumanily, it's almost inconceivable to them. So much hatred and wanting to see suffering, it's disgusting to me. It just feels like you yourself have some sociopathic problem if you want to see people suffer and or be harshly punished beyond anything else.

Well in terms of one of them should be put to death by the state, no they can't. But maybe i misunderstand your point?

Probably? It might be beneficial to society as a whole. You aren't making any good arguments for the death penalty here, in fact I am struggling to see any argument whatsoever.

I'm struggling to understand yours, and others, argument against.

Has anyone who is pro death penalty ever said it was a deterrent to crime? I only hear anti death penalty people talking about deterrents. Same with it costing a lot of money pro death penalty people don't mind spending a little extra....Also I think its also been proven that forced rehabilitation doesn't work either. Everybody in prison is anti authority, so trying to make them do anything is a waste of time.

and hence the lock them up and forget about them mentality.

take a look around, i feel like almost everyone in society is ****ing anti authority right now, much less just inmates.

and nobody will be able to make them change their ways either, so why do they think you can rehabilitate someone who is not only anti-authority but a career criminal as well.

What is this... I don't even...

You want to make a philosophical argument, but introduce genetic determination as a point against choice? Can't have the cake and eat it too. If genetics determine the "choices" you make, then those choices aren't choices at all to begin with.

Fundamentally, the concept of choice is not limited by genetic predetermination. Even the sociopath makes moral choices. This isn't, "do I go with chocolate or vanilla", it's, "do I kill him/her or not?" The genetic roll of the dice that gave the sociopath their state of sociopathy does not preclude certain choices that non-sociopaths make. To say otherwise is absurd. They don't not have a choice in acting out anti-socially. They clearly choose. Without remorse.

Hardball,

Bet you're an INTJ bro.

Arguments against:

Because it doesn't benefit society vs the alternative
Because it costs more than the alternative
Because the state ends up killing innocents
Because it is no deterrent whatsoever
Because there is no more justice meted out in ending someones life

Arguments for:

They deserve to die because I have arbitrarily decided so!

And, thats it as far a I can gather....

Of course, that's why being a paedophile is not a crime. But sexually assaulting children is!

What is the alternative? and how is it a deterrent, will innocent people not be affected by it at all 100%, how does it benefit society in a way that death doesn't, and is there more justice in the alternative than in death?

If your talking about life in prison than you're wrong, prison time is not a deterrent, innocents are put in prison and have never gotten out, I can't see any difference in benefits to society and an eye for an eye is pretty much the definition of justice. So what alternative are you talking about?

I couldn't have said it better, but I'm not really annoyed, even less surprised that this post won't be understood or appreciated like it should.

The reason is that for anyone 99% sane, this doesn't make any sense. Can't grasp the "you don't really make your own decisions" concept. Either one struggles with some kind of mental illness (temporary mild depression doesn't count) and understands exactly what you're talking about, or one is perfectly sane and won't be able to relate to your post in any way because a sane brain will rationalize everything and just can't really grasp what you're talking about.

That and because serious mental illness such as psychosis, schizophrenia etc scare the **** out of people, make the society just want to get rid of the sick ones. I don't even think it's due to a lack of humanity, it's mostly due to people simply not understanding.

Meh, moralistic arguments are just so boring because it all rests on a self-subscribed/self-created superiority and sense of righteousness based upon an artificial construct.

"The benefit is that the person no longer exists". How is that a benefit? Your whole post just exactly boils down to the last point I made. Congrats. YOU have decided arbitrarily that the punishment fits the crime. Also there is some deterrent in punishment in a justice system but no additional deterrent in the death penalty for those crimes that fit.

Also no, I am sorry, improvements to the system could not ensure innocent people are not executed. We don't live in a science fiction film, this is reality.

Anyone that says the system can be fixed to stop killing innocents has obviously never spent any time working for the system.

Oh and if killing's allowed then torture is fair game. Lets bring back hobbling and pithing m i rite pplz!?

I believe these two are mutually exclusive in the current real world that we live in. I mean, if there were some alternative to what we are already doing that was both cheaper and more accurate, why would we not already being doing that?

Also, I'm an INTJ, so if I'm not misreading, I'm on the wrong side of this argument? I personally don't like being part of a system that kills people since killing people is wrong.

It 100% insures that that person will not murder again. Yes, people can murder other people in prison. Also it is a benefit to many victims. Imagine the anguish to many Oklahoma City bombing victims if Timothy McVeigh were still alive.