NationStates Jolt Archive

Sorry for any spelling mistakes.

You may think I'm being vicious, bloody minded, evil, malicious or Joking but I assure you I'm none of those things. Think about prison isn't a deterrent, its merely a place that criminals congregate in large numbers, its pracitically a net-working agentacy. It the words of Charlie Richards, "what do you get if you put bad people into one place, one place full of bad people". Simple answer to the problem, young offender shoplifts do you a, make them do community service, which offers no retribution to the shop owners and does little to deter future crimes. Do you b, put them in jail, so they associate with other criminals and stunt their education so they have no choice but to enter a life of crime. Or do you C use corpral punishment to, lash, electrocute or other wise inflict pain in someway. That way it would

1) Deter them from future crimes
2) Cause reform by making them aware of the concequences of their actions
3) Serve retribution for the victims of the crime
4) Give the criminal adaquate vindiction from their crimes.

Their education wouldn't suffer, they could be back at school or at work the next day. They would be strongly detered from commiting future crimes, both from fear of being caught and fear of the police in the first place. In cases of a miscarridge of justice the person in question would be released the next day and they certainly wouldn't commit a crime

Too Biblical for my tastes...

What happens when you get an epileptic shoplifter and accidently kill them from the electric shock? Should someone who stole less than $100 worth of merchandise for the first time really be put to death?

What says the law? You will not kill! How does it say it? By killing!

Dictatorial and barbaric. Violence is not a deterrent. The best focus is on tackling the root causes of crime (usu. poverty) and rehabilitation. Find out why the youth felt need to shoplift, and tackle the root cause. By causing the said youth pain, you aren't actually fixing anything. It's only going to make that youth have a further grudge against the system.

Don't be soft, the youth has child benefits and their parents have benfits. They only shop lift because they want to by DVD players and CDs or drugs. The root Cause is boredom, and in which case they should spend their time learning things on there FREE school service provided for them by the society that they claim lets them down. In answer to the other questions they wouldn't be electrocuted if they were elipletic. Lets just say they would be lashed and solve that chesnut. And saying its barbaric, why?

I could actually feel my intelligence get lower while reading that. Disturbing.

I could actually feel my intelligence get lower while reading that. Disturbing.

It is, I should consult a doctor, or perhaps your nearist Aslheimer's clinic or failing that just get a close friend to reverse over your head

It is, I should consult a doctor, or perhaps your nearist Aslheimer's clinic or failing that just get a close friend to reverse over your head

No need, dismissing you has restored me.

Don't be soft, the youth has child benefits and their parents have benfits. They only shop lift because they want to by DVD players and CDs or drugs. The root Cause is boredom, and in which case they should spend their time learning things on there FREE school service provided for them by the society that they claim lets them down.

I'm bored too, I want CD's. But you don't see me running out to shoplift. I am lucky enough to come from a stable family, and have actually found a part-time job.

Others may not be so fortunate. Most kids that do shoplift and vandalise stuff have problems, at home and at school. Problems that can be fixed, mind you, if only someone would pay attention. Violence isn't going to fix *anything*. Your belief that boredom drives people to break the law is simply false.

And saying its barbaric, why?

Because, in simplistic terms, it reduces humanity to: "Og did bad thing. Zog smash Og so he not do bad thing again!! RRRARRGH!"

I'm not saying corpral punishment can solve all of society's problems only that is an alternative to custodial sentences, and I still stand by that. And I still don't see why you think it is barbaric, cavemen kiled things for food, so do we, cavemen fought for territory, so do we, cavemen painted, so do we, like it or not we still are cavemen just ones that lead more complex lives we are not special in any way, there is no giant book or tome or whatever (barring relgious texts which are debatable) taht says this is morally correct and this is wrong.

I accept that we need to rehabilitate people but is not the only solution, people still need to respect authority.

What says the law? You will not kill! How does it say it? By killing!

Not quite.

Most state statutes in the US, for example, define certain killings as legal - killing someone in self defense, police officers or prison gaurds killing in the line of duty, etc. These are usually called excusanble or justifiable homicide.

Furthermore, the law provides a range of punishments, depending on various factors such as intent. (That's why you hear about various types or degrees of murder or manslaughter.) Penalties can include death, imprisonment, or even simply a fine. (usually the latter is for cases of manslaughter.)

For some examples:
http://policy.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0200304065DAL
http://www.ncsu.edu/public_safety/Information/NCLaw.html
http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=180400004.K

And what about the victims of crime. A government's role is not just to prevent crime but to devliver retribution, I'm, talking about Justice here and sending some kids to paint fences and to go to self-help classes will not provide that. Will it give "due allocation of reward and punishment"?

I'm not saying corpral punishment can solve all of society's problems only that is an alternative to custodial sentences, and I still stand by that. And I still don't see why you think it is barbaric, cavemen kiled things for food, so do we, cavemen fought for territory, so do we, cavemen painted, so do we, like it or not we still are cavemen just ones that lead more complex lives we are not special in any way,

We have come to realise, with the advent of civilized society, that "an eye for an eye and the whole world is blind."

(And I don't fight for territory, or support those that do.)

there is no giant book or tome or whatever (barring relgious texts which are debatable) taht says this is morally correct and this is wrong.

Which is precisely why you can't force people to live by your moral code for threat of physical pain.

I accept that we need to rehabilitate people but is not the only solution, people still need to respect authority.

No. People need to respect their fellow man, not imposed-from-above social constructs. If the only reason people aren't running amok and destroying everything is because of a fear of physical punishment, you have something seriously wrong with that society. Rule by violence breeds violence.

And what about the victims of crime. A government's role is not just to prevent crime but to devliver retribution, I'm, talking about Justice here and sending some kids to paint fences and to go to self-help classes will not provide that. Will it give "due allocation of reward and punishment"?

Is the shopkeeper going to feel a great sense of satisfaction after having the stolen goods returned in witnessing a public lashing of the perpetrator? I hope not, because that's disgusting, not justice.

Is the shopkeeper going to feel a great sense of satisfaction after having the stolen goods returned in witnessing a public lashing of the perpetrator? I hope not, because that's disgusting, not justice.

Look I have not said they were to be publically lashed, although come to think about it...., I do think that some moral ideology has to be drawn up by the government, but that is up for an individul government to decided, the point I was trying make is that their is no finite limit on what a government can decide, if they decided to kill everyone called Harold, I would think it was wrong but I could not say that me thinking it was wrong was a universal truth that It was wrong, Lightening bolts would not leap from the sky to kill the Harold murders. In other words you cannot "prove" that it is immoral for this law to be imposed however much you dislike. You can merely debate its usefullness, calling it names won't solve anything. So I will take what you said as "it is not justice" that is a matter for courts to decide not for yourself or myself, I simply believe that judges should have the authority to impose corpral Punishment (apologies if I did not make that point earlier) if they feel nessacary. This point aside in the example given should the shopkeeper feel satisfied that the criminal has paid for their crimes, yes they should, come to think of it so should the crininmal, that they were given the oppurtunity to be vindicated of their crimes.

I also feel that we are straying from the point somewhat I was arguing that corpral punisment is better then jail. Can you think of a method of punishment?
Preferably one that doesn't involve quoting Ghandi.

Ahw, yes state sponsored murder. Why not bring back public floggings and the guillotine?

i agree that jail is not the best alternative, it just takes citizens money away, but corpral punishment, seriously that is idiocy.
why not have the "criminals"(nothing wrong with shoplifting from walmart) do community service or work for whomever they stole from until reparations are fulfilled?

There is a minor problem with that; in the UK and the rest of the EU there happens to be the Human Rights act which prevents such things. Corporal punishment hasn't been in use for at least 60 years, and the last person to be executed, was over 25 years ago. Moves such as these would be ngative and derogatory.

How about we get a city or an island put a big wall around and jam all the prisoners in there and don't ever let them out.

Or we could try therapy so that whenever they try to commit violence they feel really sick and want to die.

How about we get a city or an island put a big wall around and jam all the prisoners in there and don't ever let them out.

Or we could try therapy so that whenever they try to commit violence they feel really sick and want to die.
the island idea has be tried. it's called australia

i have a question,
if corporal punishment is put into practice, will the leaders of countries and other "important" people get whipping boys?

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Like so? (http://www.taser.com/law/videos02.htm)

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
since the PATRIOT act was put into effect the constitution is now being used to wipe bush's ass

It always makes me think of Clockwork Orange... Urgh...

Like so? (http://www.taser.com/law/videos02.htm)
Read your own link. The cell make got out of control and was putting the lives of others at risk.

Read your own link. The cell make got out of control and was putting the lives of others at risk.
and of course that is the only time that officers would do something like that...
(heavy sarcasm for those who didn't pick up on it)

and of course that is the only time that officers would do something like that...
(heavy sarcasm for those who didn't pick up on it)
Yeah well.

Dictatorial and barbaric. Violence is not a deterrent. The best focus is on tackling the root causes of crime (usu. poverty) and rehabilitation. Find out why the youth felt need to shoplift, and tackle the root cause. By causing the said youth pain, you aren't actually fixing anything. It's only going to make that youth have a further grudge against the system.

Kids don't steal bread to feed their family, this is the only "Biblical" concept concerning this matter. You want to know who steals? The punk ass 13-17 year old kid coming from stable working suburbanite family. Kids who have come from a weak ass up-bringing at home because both parents work and can't be bothered to teach their children and a even weaker ass up-bringing from a even more pathetic education system. Shop lifting is done because the norm among kids of this age is that morality is an archaic, irrelevant concept and consequence have been spared countless times by everyone they have ever known. Shoplifting children aren't from poor welfare families, those kids learn VERY early to live within their means, shoplifters are the kids that couldn't convince their parents to give them money for something they just "have to have" and couldn't be bothered to give a flying fuck about the concept of other people's ownership because hey, their right to indulge is the most powerful unabridged "right" they have.

Believe me if the local badass punk gets publicly flogged for shoplifting a Blink 182 CD, he isn't going to try it again, he is going to hate society and it's fucking rules but you know what, the useless fuck hated them before he broke them. At least afterwards he both hates them and RESPECTS them. Odds are, anyone that sees something like that is going to feel the same respect running though their unharmed back.

If the only reason people aren't running amok and destroying everything is because of a fear of physical punishment, you have something seriously wrong with that society. Rule by violence breeds violence..

in responce to this are you sugguesting that a society could exist without laws on a basis of mutual understanding. IF so you are a dreamer.

I'm not advocating capitial punishment merely a deterrent that saves young offenders education. Being put in jail ruins this, no one has come up with a solution that solves this. Community service is neither a deterrent or retribution. IF someone mugs an old lady, for instance, no amount of fiancail compensation can give back her dignity.

bump

There are methods of implanting electrodes into someone's cortex so that a small electrical stimulation gives the implantee the sensation of more pain than they could ever experience physically (tens of thousands of times greater). With no physical damage.

Probably very persuasive. You could make the same kind of connection to induce pleasure - greater than anything you could experience in real life.

Make someone your personal slave.

I'm not too comfortable about that idea

I'm not too comfortable about that idea

Well, if it turned out you falsely convicted some poor bastard, and you gave him the pain treatment, you could say "The State is truly sorry, so you'll get 24 hours of unmitigated pleasure as a token of our apology".

You could make the same kind of connection to induce pleasure - greater than anything you could experience in real life.

Why the bloody hell is this not being marketed?!?

lol!

Why the bloody hell is this not being marketed?!?

It's a well known effect. But, you have to endure what they call "stereotactic" surgery. Brain surgery - for the implantation of electrodes. Then they have to test which ones have the right effect.

It is postulated that if you had the pleasure circuit identified, and had the button, you would press that button until you died of thirst or starvation - and would kill or do anything to get the button.

Rats cross shock grids to get to it. Monkeys die of thirst and starvation.

Much, much more addictive and pleasurable than any drug on earth. Far, far more pleasurable than sex.

Not sure what neurosurgeon would actually perform such surgery.

Well damn... :(

:D

Well damn... :(

:D

Would probably be a great thing for the terminally ill. Just plug them in and give them extreme pleasure until they died.