Printable View
I advocate no sodomy policy for this voluptuous nation nor any beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces, to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world, our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of Carpathian leadership is at hand.
I've killed a lot of cereal in my time.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmack86
At the crux of this discussion is a subject I used as a conversation piece for some time - is prisons main purpose punishment or rehabilitation ?
This seems appropriate
Our prisons are frightening and inhumane. And in Arizona, they charge you a fee if you want to visit your lived one in prison. Remember that many relatives of prisoners are probably poor to begin with.
Incarceration, in and of itself, is severe punishment. Why let people lie fallow in a jail cell when we could work toward healing our most disturbed and vulnerable section of the populace? Just removing the right to choose when you do things is such a severe punishment, I don't see why it can't have a dual focus.Quote:
Originally Posted by vulcandeathgrip
I usually agree with what you say Bmack but the last two days on this thread you have been spot on .... cr****Quote:
Originally Posted by bmack86
Prison reform is one of the things I really want to work on in my career. As is sensible sentencing for crimes and a focus on rehabilitation. These things are my non-music passions
Oh no!!! Someone who still cares ..... cr****Quote:
Originally Posted by bmack86
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j2...n/dinasour.jpg
I completely agree with the ideal here. The grey area for me is when a person has served their time and have not been completely rehabilitated do we then continue the incarceration beyond the term of the initial punishment ?Quote:
Originally Posted by bmack86
Under the current system we don't really do anything in terms of rehabilitation in most prisons. Ideally the goal would be to rehabilitate someone and then release them, early if possible, so as to reduce crowding and to encourage people to be active members of society. If someone cannot be rehabilitated in a set time, or at all, then they would likely be the kind of person who needs to be incarcerated or watched at some level. usually I'd say someone such as that belongs in a mental institute rather than a prison though.
The current psychiatric perspective is finding that it's near impossible to treat or cure sociopaths. Pedophiles also pose a pretty serious hurdle in the rehabilitation area. What would you propose you do with someone who's demonstrated a marked, repeated propensity towards lacking a normal semblance of empathy for fellow humans (e.g. a career enforcer for organized crime) or repetitive molestation of, say, 6 year olds?Quote:
Originally Posted by bmack86
The Norwegian system is a model I would advocate for. If someone poses a continued threat to society, either through violence or sexual propensity, then they are confined to a mental institute, because ultimately punishing those people is not going to do anything for their behavior. While a mental institute is far from the most ideal situation, and is in fact in some instances just as bad or worse than prison, at very least there would be trained professionals who could continually work with the person to see if, in the future, they may be able to assist the person. Confinement may be necessary, but at least if we're going to hold someone for life we could try to work with them towards maybe finding some way to help them better cope with their (very serious) issues.
Something kind of relevant to this discussion is that today a website was launched by our state government that allows public access to the sex offender register. You enter your own name & address and the photo of any offenders living within a certain radius of your home is shown. Whilst I obviously find sex offenders repulsive I am not sure what the government thinks the end result of this will be. I can just see so many issues arising that I am not sure I am a fan of the concept as currently used.
In news more relevant to the actual thread, I have just noticed that my fucking jerk neighbours have spread a liberal dose of snail pellets across the border of our gardens. This really pisses me off. I am trying to calm down before going over there and knocking on their door to ask if they mind just using them on there 2 FUCKING POTTED PLANTS ! And to warn them that if either my dog or cat is sick as a result of their over reaction to A COUPLE OF FUCKING SNAILS I will burn their house down.
So is your position that human life is to be held in such value that there are no circumstances under which it can be justifiably extinguished?Quote:
Originally Posted by bmack86
The fact that this worthy debate is hidden in the bad mood thread is putting me in a bad mood.
The boy has easy outs to the trap I'm setting for him, I just wanna test him to see whether he got into the right profession.
WATCH OUT BRYAN IT'S A TRAP
Aside from being occasionally aroused by Romy Croft's vocals Saturday night, much time was spent at the cemetery questioning whether or not I'm really a serial killer.
If you were, you would have killed someone already.
Not whatsoever. There are plenty of circumstances where life can be justifiably extinguished. I'm a firm proponent of the right to choose the end of life, especially in circumstances of grave illness. However, I don't think the state should ever be the one to condone the killing of another. I feel that it is wrong, and sets a troubling precedent, for the state to adjudge that someone should no longer be alive based upon their actions. Lets leave aside the fact that the system is run by people and that means that we can, and do, get it wrong and sentence innocent people to death. Regardless, the state should not condone murder in any circumstance, and killing of someone who, by their actions, has been placed under the full care of the state as a punishment for their actions runs counter to what I believe the justice system as well as our ideal government should work for.Quote:
Originally Posted by RotationSlimWang
Spring the trap.
Now here's a bad mood: cr****
With quill and silver knife
She carved a poison pen
Wrote to her lover's wife:
"Your husband's seed has fed my flesh".
As if a leper's face
That tainted letter graced
The wife with choke-stone throat
Ran to the day with tear-blind eyes.
Impaled on nails of ice
And raked with emerald fire
The wife with soul of snow
With steady hands begins to write:
"I'm still, I need no life
To serve on boys and men
What's mine was yours is dead
I take my leave of mortal flesh"
Ugh.
Leave it to Ron to highlight the worst of King Crimson.
Does an excess of limes accelerate senility?
You sure he wasn't always like this?
It's gone from caretaker to nursing home.
Fairly well evaded. However, I draw your attention to the bolded text above. If we define murder as the extinguishing of a human life and we state that the government is not to condone it under any circumstances, how do we justify abortion rights? Pro-choice beliefs state that, under certain conditions of parasitism and/or detriment or harm that the life in question might pose to another's life, why then is it unfair for the government to determine that a person who has displayed a repeated propensity for murdering innocent members of society be put to death? What if these psychopaths burst loose from their confines under your system of coddling and attempts to rehabilitate individuals medical science widely believes to be beyond help and commit another murder, say of one of their doctors? How do you defend the death of yet another innocent in the name of preserving a pointless hope to reform individuals who have clearly slipped beyond the pale?Quote:
Originally Posted by bmack86
Yeah, psychiatry has reached the boundaries of absolute knowledge and is a perfect science, right?
Psychiatry is the basis for any semblance of a belief that "rehabilitation" of such individuals is possible to begin with. If we don't listen to the psychiatrists about what is and is not possible within their own field, who the hell are we supposed to listen to?