LogFAQs > #904826386

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, Database 3 ( 02.21.2018-07.23.2018 ), DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	2 Young Washington State Brothers Brutally Murdered and RAPED a 16 y/o BOY!!!
Zeus 07/10/18 1:37:00 PM #40:	Kyuubi4269 posted... Zeus posted... No, it's the result of a fundamentally broken system where the penalties more closely resemble North Korea's than the rest of the civilized world. If we had a working justice system, there wouldn't be a death penalty for anything short of leading a revolutionary army. Says you? There's nothing fundamentally wrong with killing people who have and will harm your country. No, says the developed world. Meanwhile your opinions are mostly in keeping with the shittiest, least-developed countries. Kyuubi4269 posted... Zeus posted... If you're just going to put to death people who surrender, there's zero incentive to surrender. That potentially makes every interaction more violent and dangerous, both to civilians and law enforcement. Nope. If you surrender you get humanely put down, you run you get brutally attacked in the streets and left to suffer as you bleed out. When we know the person is scum then we shouldn't hold vack like we should with mere suspects. Some people need to die and we need that around to keep animals in line. Again, that's no fucking incentive. If a person is going to be put to death either way, they might as well kill anybody who could be a potential witness to their crime and die in a shootout with cops rather than let themselves get taken. Basically you're just encouraging murderers to kill more people. So instead of imprisoning somebody who killed one person, you have people fighting to the death and taking dozens of extra people with them. Nichtcrawler X posted... Maturity is more fluid than just an age cut-off. The possibility of having a psychiatrist decide where someone falls when in that age-stretch makes perfect sense to me. Then get rid of the age of the majority entirely and subjectively evaluate every kid. However, more realistically speaking, impulse control often isn't fully developed until kids are in their TWENTIES so we should be looking up, not down. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&ContentID=3051 Nichtcrawler X posted... Edit: Cannot find a foreign equivalent to TBS, but it is basically an obligatory psyche treatment while incarcerated. Yeah, America's justice system is pretty fucking backwater -- after all, we still the death penalty -- so stuff like that isn't mainstream. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:904826386] in 2 Young Wa... [t:76792904]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>No, it's the result of a fundamentally broken system where the penalties more closely resemble North Korea's than the rest of the civilized world. If we had a working justice system, there wouldn't be a death penalty for anything short of leading a revolutionary army.</quote> Says you? There's nothing fundamentally wrong with killing people who have and will harm your country.</quote> No, says the developed world. Meanwhile your opinions are mostly in keeping with the shittiest, least-developed countries. <cite>Kyuubi4269 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Zeus posted...</cite> <quote>If you're just going to put to death people who surrender, there's zero incentive to surrender. That potentially makes every interaction more violent and dangerous, both to civilians and law enforcement.</quote> Nope. If you surrender you get humanely put down, you run you get brutally attacked in the streets and left to suffer as you bleed out. When we know the person is scum then we shouldn't hold vack like we should with mere suspects. Some people need to die and we need that around to keep animals in line.</quote> Again, that's no fucking incentive. If a person is going to be put to death either way, they might as well kill anybody who could be a potential witness to their crime and die in a shootout with cops rather than let themselves get taken. Basically you're just encouraging murderers to kill more people. So instead of imprisoning somebody who killed one person, you have people fighting to the death and taking dozens of extra people with them. <cite>Nichtcrawler X posted...</cite> <quote>Maturity is more fluid than just an age cut-off. The possibility of having a psychiatrist decide where someone falls when in that age-stretch makes perfect sense to me. </quote> Then get rid of the age of the majority entirely and subjectively evaluate every kid. However, more realistically speaking, impulse control often isn't fully developed until kids are in their TWENTIES so we should be looking up, not down. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/encyclopedia/content.aspx?ContentTypeID=1&ContentID=3051 <cite>Nichtcrawler X posted...</cite> <quote>Edit: Cannot find a foreign equivalent to TBS, but it is basically an obligatory psyche treatment while incarcerated.</quote> Yeah, America's justice system is pretty fucking backwater -- after all, we still the death penalty -- so stuff like that isn't mainstream. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1