Page 1 of 5
#1
So when a man is being sentenced for a crime he did, do you think the attitude for the punishment should mainly be "Okay, lets do whatever is best to simply prevent reoffending and hopefully make this man a functioning part of society."

Or do you think there should also be some sense of "Well, this man did do something very wrong and immoral. He deserves to suffer or put up with some kind of unpleasurable consequence as payback for his actions."

Keep in mind there can be varying levels for the above ideas. I think most people view prison that way, but a more extreme example would be that rapists should be castrated.

And as for preventing reoffending, that'd probably be more along the lines of rehabilitation.

I sort of think the idea of retribution might be alright in theory, but it can be so hard to determine exactly what kind of punishment or suffering somebody deserves.

Keep in mind it is possible to have both. A sense of rehabilitation and retribution.
Last edited by The Madcap at Aug 12, 2011,
#2
Rehabilitation in general as a practice has proven to be the more effective punishment in reducing crime than the "just deserts" retribution-type model of justice. However, even though rehabilitation is more practical, I do believe personally that, morally, retribution can be a good cause for punishment.

aka the death penalty...
Dead soldier! Go now to Valhalla!
#3
Retribution should not come into play at all during sentencing. The justice system is there to objectively arbitrate, not cater to one's personal whim. Keep the offender isolated from society until he or she is presumed to no longer be a threat. Rehabilitation, yo.
#4
Eye for an eye. If you can't handle the consequences, don't do the act, whether it be a crime or otherwise. Resolve is formed before hand, and the consequences are accepted before you do something.

Obviously as you say there are varying degrees, but for something like cleanly convicted murder in manner that wasn't protecting either self or other, a swift death is the answer, IMO.

Although truthfully if the justice system in my country (US) worked as it was supposed to, I would likely have a different opinion. It's just so convoluted, corrupted, and filled with ways for the same people committing the crimes to get away with it, that I feel a vigilante mindset would be almost a blessing.
Do you feel warm within your cage?

And have you figured out yet -


Life goes by?
Quote by Hydra150
There's a dick on Earth, too
It's you
#5
Quote by due 07
Retribution should not come into play at all during sentencing. The justice system is there to objectively arbitrate, not cater to one's personal whim. Keep the offender isolated from society until he or she is presumed to no longer be a threat. Rehabilitation, yo.


This.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#6
Quote by strat0blaster
Eye for an eye.

This doesn't solve any problems. All it does is kill more people.
#8

DON'T MAKE ME DESTROY YOU!


___________________________________________________


TURN OFF YOUR MIND RELAX AND FLOAT DOWNSTREAM

Quote by Scumbag1792
My God, this must be the smartest/greatest guy ever.
#9
The goal of sentencing should be to prevent future offenses (by both the offender and others) via punishment. Castrating a rapist, which is in my mind completely justified, not only prevents future offenses, but sets an example for would-be rapists. Therapy/peaceful rehabilitation into society is hardly an effective deterrent for future criminals.
Quote by Boonnoo666
Another factor that has grown this myth is a bunch of opinionated guys who really don't know what they're talking about, which to be brutally honest is a bunch of you guys on here.
Last edited by Strat007 at Aug 12, 2011,
#10
Quote by Strat007
The goal of sentencing should be to prevent future offenses (by both the offender and others) via punishment. Castrating a rapist, which is in my mind completely justified, not only prevents future offenses, but sets an example for would-be rapists. Therapy/peaceful rehabilitation into society is hardly an effective deterrent.
For a second I thought your avatar was a nude pic.
#11
I'm definitely for rehabilitation. I think people need to remember that a lot more innocent people than you'd think are put behind bars. Retribution would only harm those people with no good coming out of it. Rehabilitation will also lower crime rates and make convicts more productive in society. I also saw that the death penalty was mentioned in one of the posts. The huge reason in why I don't condone the death penalty is that it is actually much more expensive than just letting them stay in prison until they die. Of course there is still the chance that that person could be innocent and killing them, would be even worse.
#13
It's Genevieve Morton if anybody was wondering.
Quote by Boonnoo666
Another factor that has grown this myth is a bunch of opinionated guys who really don't know what they're talking about, which to be brutally honest is a bunch of you guys on here.
#14
Quote by Strat007
The goal of sentencing should be to prevent future offenses (by both the offender and others) via punishment. Castrating a rapist, which is in my mind completely justified, not only prevents future offenses, but sets an example for would-be rapists. Therapy/peaceful rehabilitation into society is hardly an effective deterrent.


This is my last post here so I don't end up arguing for pages, but deterrence by extreme punishment doesn't really work most of the time.
#15
The huge reason in why I don't condone the death penalty is that it is actually much more expensive than just letting them stay in prison until they die.

A 9mm round costs what, 0.80$?
Quote by Boonnoo666
Another factor that has grown this myth is a bunch of opinionated guys who really don't know what they're talking about, which to be brutally honest is a bunch of you guys on here.
#17
Quote by Strat007
Castrating a rapist, which is in my mind completely justified, not only prevents future offenses, but sets an example for would-be rapists. Therapy/peaceful rehabilitation into society is hardly an effective deterrent for future criminals.


Most criminals don't think about the consequences of their actions when they do them. There have been many studies with convicts that showed that they have a reduced capacity to think about the consequences of their actions. Telling a potential murderer that he will be put to death for killing someone won't stop them from killing, it will just make them try harder to escape. You should also realize that even in rehabilitation, jail isn't exactly a great place to be. Most people don't want to return to jail whatsoever and if given tools to be productive, will not do as much crime, but rather get a job and move on with their life.
#18
Quote by due 07
This doesn't solve any problems. All it does is kill more people.

Some people deserve to die.
Do you feel warm within your cage?

And have you figured out yet -


Life goes by?
Quote by Hydra150
There's a dick on Earth, too
It's you
#20
food for thought: there's a lot of people in jail. Some of them didn't even do anything, some will never get out, some actually enjoy it, and some of them will be released without experiencing an improvement in their attitude towards living within the morals and laws our society gives them. A very small percentage avoid all this, and return to society as more willing to follow said vitues, laws and social codes of understanding.
#21
Quote by Strat007
The goal of sentencing should be to prevent future offenses (by both the offender and others) via punishment. Castrating a rapist, which is in my mind completely justified, not only prevents future offenses, but sets an example for would-be rapists. Therapy/peaceful rehabilitation into society is hardly an effective deterrent for future criminals.

Castrating rapists to prevent future offenses is the sentencing equivalent to dropping a nuclear bomb. It's overkill. Not to mention, it doesn't even address the problem -- most rapists aren't predators because they are horny. As for you last sentence, basing the justice system off of deterrence -- especially for something like rape -- is destined for failure. Despite more punitive sentences, California's criminal recidivism rate remained incredibly high; more than two thirds of prisoners return to prison within three years of their release. The number is even greater in San Francisco (a recidivism rate of over seventy eight percent).
Quote by strat0blaster
Some people deserve to die.

According to...?
#22
Quote by strat0blaster
Some people deserve to die.


True statement in that when you have no concept of humanity left anywhere in your brain, your are a constant physical danger to people, and in some way, that needs to be dealt with. Someone who rationalizes murder, rape, sodomy and such will not change. i.e. John Wayne Gacy
#23
Quote by Strat007
A 9mm round costs what, 0.80$?


Actually it's court costs. If you're on death row, I'm pretty sure you're going to go through every effort to get out of it. It takes years to give someone the death penalty, because they keep calling for mistrials, retrials, or whatever they can think of to push it off. It ultimately costs much more than just giving them a life sentence. They're also not going to shoot a guy. They're going to give him Sodium Thiopental, which I honestly have no idea how much it costs.
#24
Quote by due 07
Castrating rapists to prevent future offenses is the sentencing equivalent to dropping a nuclear bomb. It's overkill. Not to mention, it doesn't even address the problem -- most rapists aren't predators because they are horny. As for you last sentence, basing the justice system off of deterrence -- especially for something like rape -- is destined for failure. Despite more punitive sentences, California's criminal recidivism rate remained incredibly high; more than two thirds of prisoners return to prison within three years of their release. The number is even greater in San Francisco (a recidivism rate of over seventy eight percent).

According to...?


If you cut their yanger off, and make their life a living hell in prison, they will be less inclined to break the law. If it doesn't work, then keep cutting off body parts until they get the hint.
#25
Quote by Strat007
A 9mm round costs what, 0.80$?


The appeals process takes what, 15 years or so of litigation? And it costs what, like $1.2 million from trial to actual execution per defendant, as opposed to $740k for life imprisonment? And the courts still have a horrible track record of executing people who are actually innocent?

Oh shit, I'm right on all counts. And you're stuck in a mindset that fell out of favor around 1000 AD. You're in no way making a useful contribution to any kind of intelligent discussion, so please do us all a favor and educate yourself, or refrain from posting.

Quote by Pat_s1t
I remember Das_Skittles made me rage hard.

Quote by WCPhils
I can't stand Das_Skittles everything he says makes me mad.

Quote by due 07
Skittles is the shit you cuntles. Slob on his knob.

My Band Youtube Channel Last.fm
#26
Quote by kratos379
Actually it's court costs. If you're on death row, I'm pretty sure you're going to go through every effort to get out of it. It takes years to give someone the death penalty, because they keep calling for mistrials, retrials, or whatever they can think of to push it off. It ultimately costs much more than just giving them a life sentence. They're also not going to shoot a guy. They're going to give him Sodium Thiopental, which I honestly have no idea how much it costs.


Sodium Thiopental is a fast acting anesthetic. There are actually 2 other drugs that do the killing, Potassium Chloride and something else I can't remember. There is significant evidence that lethal injection can be far from painless.

Whether it costs more or not is trivial. We're talking about people's lives here. They may have committed a crime, but they're still people. See: the fundamental attribution error.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#27
Quote by due 07


According to...?

The person who lost their loved one because somebody killed them.
The girl that was raped.


Generally, the victim of an unforgivable, unprovoked crime that took something from them they'll never get back, whether physical or otherwise.
Do you feel warm within your cage?

And have you figured out yet -


Life goes by?
Quote by Hydra150
There's a dick on Earth, too
It's you
#28
Quote by ethan_hanus
If you cut their yanger off, and make their life a living hell in prison, they will be less inclined to break the law. If it doesn't work, then keep cutting off body parts until they get the hint.


nuh uh
Last edited by piratemetalhead at Aug 12, 2011,
#29
Quote by JDizzle787
True statement in that when you have no concept of humanity left anywhere in your brain, your are a constant physical danger to people, and in some way, that needs to be dealt with. Someone who rationalizes murder, rape, sodomy and such will not change. i.e. John Wayne Gacy


Again it costs more to kill them. If you keep them in a solitary confinement and let them die on their own, they will not be capable of harming anyone ever again.
#31
Quote by Das_Skittles
The appeals process takes what, 15 years or so of litigation? And it costs what, like $1.2 million from trial to actual execution per defendant, as opposed to $740k for life imprisonment? And the courts still have a horrible track record of executing people who are actually innocent?

Oh shit, I'm right on all counts. And you're stuck in a mindset that fell out of favor around 1000 AD. You're in no way making a useful contribution to any kind of intelligent discussion, so please do us all a favor and educate yourself, or refrain from posting.


I'm always glad to see you and due posting in threads like these because I know intelligence will happen
#32
Quote by ethan_hanus
Yeah huh


Normally I'd be all over pointing out how idiotic you posts are, but the clown cannon comment legitimately made me lol


Quote by D&DLover
I'm always glad to see you and due posting in threads like these because I know intelligence will happen


Quote by Pat_s1t
I remember Das_Skittles made me rage hard.

Quote by WCPhils
I can't stand Das_Skittles everything he says makes me mad.

Quote by due 07
Skittles is the shit you cuntles. Slob on his knob.

My Band Youtube Channel Last.fm
Last edited by Das_Skittles at Aug 12, 2011,
#33
personally, i think those type of crazies that rapetorturekill innocent people and get off on it, you know, maybe it's better for everybody else if they catch a bullet.

there's no reason why we have to put up with keeping totally sociopathic monsters alive.

of course, there's an emotional side to those sort of really drastic crimes.

here's a story, not a long read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Junko_Furuta

i gaurantee you you'll feel so disgusted... even though we try to look at things like this without letting the emotional side get to us, some things that happen are just so awful
#34
Yes, if we kill people for crimes that merit it (rape, pedophilia, murder) then we can be 100% sure they'll never commit it again. If it turns out they were innocent, whoops, mistakes happen. No worries, we'll eventually catch the guy that actually did it. Sounds about right.
#35
Quote by Eastwinn
Sodium Thiopental is a fast acting anesthetic. There are actually 2 other drugs that do the killing, Potassium Chloride and something else I can't remember. There is significant evidence that lethal injection can be far from painless.

Whether it costs more or not is trivial. We're talking about people's lives here. They may have committed a crime, but they're still people. See: the fundamental attribution error.


I think you're missing the point of my post. If I try to talk about the injustice of killing another person, others are going to dismiss it. If I talk about costs, people will relate to it and see that on a rational level, it doesn't make sense. Also I know what the fundamental attribution error is. I understand the point you're trying to make, but that won't change anybody's mind. Others will have already dehumanized them and not think much of it. Also costs are not trivial given the financial instability of the world right now.
#36
Quote by kratos379
I think you're missing the point of my post. If I try to talk about the injustice of killing another person, others are going to dismiss it. If I talk about costs, people will relate to it and see that on a rational level, it doesn't make sense. Also I know what the fundamental attribution error is. I understand the point you're trying to make, but that won't change anybody's mind. Others will have already dehumanized them and not think much of it. Also costs are not trivial given the financial instability of the world right now.


Oh, really only the first two sentences of my post were in response to yours. The rest was me rambling.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#37
Quote by Eastwinn
Oh, really only the first two sentences of my post were in response to yours. The rest was me rambling.



My bad.
#39
^Deserve to live? People are already alive. Why ought we to deny them existence is the more appropriate question.
Quote by piratemetalhead
i gaurantee you you'll feel so disgusted... even though we try to look at things like this without letting the emotional side get to us, some things that happen are just so awful


*reads link*

Last edited by The Madcap at Aug 12, 2011,
#40
Quote by The Madcap
^Deserve to live? People are already alive. Why ought we to deny them existence is the more appropriate question.]

It was a way of putting the same question back to him, someone said 'some people deserve to die' he said 'according to?' so i'm asking who decides if people deserve to stay alive anyway?

Or for another point, why are we so willing to lock offenders away? Who decides they deserve that? I obviously agree with it, but i'm just saying, i find it odd that people are so willing to say it's fine to lock people away but death is just too much? Why are people so willing to say someone deserves to go to prison but not willing to say someone deserves to die?
Page 1 of 5