serious issues Should life mean life?

[LiquidEyes]

Capn_Jack said:

I'd prefer an authority that didn't feel the need to use cruel and unusual punishments against people. I do not want to live in the middle ages or in a Taliban inspired society, thanks.

This is another excellent point.

[LiquidEyes]

benrostwood said:

not sure about the difference between gamblers as i dont do it or know the rules or different wasy to play etc.

Ben, I think the analogy was pretty clear. I know you're not stupid, so sometimes I just wonder if you're too lazy to bother reading people's posts properly? Or if you just selectively ignore all the criticisms of your own arguments?

[Kether]

Most of the replies in this thread show why the general public aren't judges.

 

Yes people commit sick crimes, they do their time, are rehabiliated (hopefully) and are not granted parole unless they are deemed fit to be let back out.

 

I don't believe in an eye for an eye, I don't believe in the death penalty - I would like to see chain gangs again cos they wear cool clothes and at least they can put back into society instead of rotting in a cell at the tax payer's expense.

[Claire DC]

liquideyes said:

 

You seem to imply that your opinion holds more weight because of this?

 

Why do you feel you are in a particularly "good position to make a comment"? (i.e. enough to feel the need to mention it?)

 

Is it because:

1. you know more facts about the issue at hand; or

2. you are more emotionally attached to the issue?

 

Surely you don't think that mutilation of offenders is a constructive suggestion?

If so, do you have a good reason to support your view?

Or is it just a gut feeling?

 

Maybe i worded it wrong.. what i meant was that as i have been victim to one that i know how it makes you feel/violates you/affects you in future/family wise etc etc!! I dont know more facts about the issue as each case is different as people are different, but i do know about effects it can have and i do also know what iv been told about these kinds of people while goin through therapy for it too!! I guess i am emotionally attatched to the issue yeah, but thats not to be helped im afraid I never said mutilation of offenders was the answer but if someone feels that in their opinion that it is.. then thats their choice, it doesnt have to be constructive as none of this thread will have any bearing on what happens to offenders according to the law. Its just a debate/issue where people are puttin THEIR opinions forward whether they are constructive to others or not isnt the issue in hand here imo!!

[LiquidEyes]

Claire DC said:

if someone feels that in their opinion that it is.. then thats their choice, it doesnt have to be constructive

 

Its just a debate/issue where people are puttin THEIR opinions forward whether they are constructive to others or not isnt the issue in hand here imo!!

What kind of a debate is that?

 

What makes the "serious" forum a waste of space is when people "fire and forget" - make wild comments but can't be arsed to back them up with reason.

 

It seems that, for some people, this forum is about posting your opinion and seeing how many people agree with you. Pathetic! That's not a discussion, it's a load of random comments - there are other forums for that.

 

I take pride in always being open to new ideas and alternative views. If someone presented a compelling case in favour of mutilating offenders, I would consider changing my view. But what is the point of a random reckless comment like "we should just cut their bits off" without any reasoning whatsoever?

 

Put it another way: I bet you would have responded differently if somebody had said "well I think rape victims should stop their [censored] whinging". But "it doesnt have to be constructive" does it Claire...?

 

as none of this thread will have any bearing on what happens to offenders according to the law.

So you think the "origin of the universe" discussions are futile too? Because I hardly think they will have any bearing on time & space!

 

Besides if everyone took such a back-seat on serious issues like crime, then we'd still be stuck in the dark ages!

[Claire DC]

liquideyes said:

 

What kind of a debate is that?

 

What makes the "serious" forum a waste of space is when people "fire and forget" - make wild comments but can't be arsed to back them up with reason.

 

It seems that, for some people, this forum is about posting your opinion and seeing how many people agree with you. Pathetic! That's not a discussion, it's a load of random comments - there are other forums for that.

 

I dont agree, tbh i post my opinion and whether people agree with it or not, its still my opinion.. i wont change that because someone thinks different.. ok i may be shown a different perspective on things but my base opinion will still be the same!!

 

I take pride in always being open to new ideas and alternative views. If someone presented a compelling case in favour of mutilating offenders, I would consider changing my view. But what is the point of a random reckless comment like "we should just cut their bits off" without any reasoning whatsoever?

 

He was puttin his view across tho, ok it wasnt compelling enough for you to consider changing your views on it but it was his opinion and he is entitled to that, thats all i am saying!!

 

Put it another way: I bet you would have responded differently if somebody had said "well I think rape victims should stop their [censored] whinging". But "it doesnt have to be constructive" does it Claire...?

 

To be honest, i possibly wouldnt have even responded to that and if ihad responded to it it would probably be different, yes. But more because they were the victim in it, not the offender!!

 

So you think the "origin of the universe" discussions are futile too? Because I hardly think they will have any bearing on time & space!

 

Besides if everyone took such a back-seat on serious issues like crime, then we'd still be stuck in the dark ages!

 

No, i didnt mean it was futile, i was merely saying that his opinion isnt suddenly gonna change the law/way offenders are dealt with.. it has nothin to do with bein futile or not!!

 

You're missing my point.. i wasn't saying his opinion was one that i agreed with, i was saying that he is entitled to his opinion whatever it is!! Thats what an open forum is about!!

[LiquidEyes]

Claire DC said:

liquideyes said:

It seems that, for some people, this forum is about posting your opinion and seeing how many people agree with you. Pathetic! That's not a discussion, it's a load of random comments - there are other forums for that.

I dont agree, tbh i post my opinion and whether people agree with it or not, its still my opinion.. i wont change that because someone thinks different.. ok i may be shown a different perspective on things but my base opinion will still be the same!!

So: Say for example, you believed rapists should be castrated; but then somebody pointed out a wealth of evidence indicating it would be a really bad idea. What you are saying is, you would stick to your original "base" opinion anyway? That is called being "stubborn". There's nothing grown up about having unmovable opinions.

 

He was puttin his view across tho, ok it wasnt compelling enough for you to consider changing your views on it but it was his opinion and he is entitled to that, thats all i am saying!!

...

he is entitled to his opinion whatever it is!!

Here's another question: do you think Hitler was "entitled" to his views?

Do you think a racist/homophobe/rapist is entitled to his views?

 

he is entitled to his opinion whatever it is!! Thats what an open forum is about!!

No, that's what the random bollocks forum is for. Surely the serious issues forum isn't a place to make reckless, unjustified comments?

 

Let me put the following thought to you: (this is just my opinion)

 

The majority of people who say things like "all rapists should be castrated":

1. have no [censored] idea what they are talking about;

2. are leaping on the paedo / rapist-bashing bandwagon;

3. suffer from the misconception that being scathing & judgmental about other people makes themselves look better;

4. care more about their own self-righteous image than the actual issue they are talking about;

5. are not even expressing their own views (rather what they perceive to be the popular/acceptable thing to say on the matter; what their mates would say; what their parents say; and so on).

[FredTheBaddie]

Claire DC said:

i was saying that he is entitled to his opinion whatever it is!! Thats what an open forum is about!!

 

Right. So if I said all women should be wives and mothers and shouldn't work, or that all black people should be shot, or that the age of consent should be lowered to 9 you'd still say I was entitled to my opinion would you ?

 

I don't think so.

[big_ee69]

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"..mis-atrributed to Voltaire...sums up my thoughts about people's right to their own opinions, in this area.

 

+ I have never really been one for no-platform Ie the feeling that some issues, and truths are so self-evident (Dr King ect) that we do not even need to debate them.

 

The fact is that a majority of people DO think we should bring back the death penalty, and many people would favour surgical castration for rapists and child molestors. The likelyhood, is that, this is because such views are promoted by the populist media, and or bloodthirsty religions, and people inate instincts.

 

This does not make it right, just popular.

 

Then so were Hitler, and Stalin, and Gengis Khan, and Vlad the Impaler. (Popular not right)

 

Though Impaling as a form of execution did have a certain elegant simplicity. Being pushed naked arse first onto a sharpend small tree trunk or branch. And left to die over a long period of hours or days in horrible agony as the tree sat in your guts, and you very slowly bled to death.. Almost makes crucifiction sound pleasent. At least someone could break your legs, to speed up the death if you were crucified.

 

MORE ON VLAD

 

"Vlad the Impaler was a prince known for executing his enemies by impalement. He was a fan of various forms of torture including disemboweling and rectal and facial impalement. Vlad the Impaler tortured thousands while he ate and drunk among the corpses. He is said to have impaled every person in the city of Amlas -- 20,000 men, women and children.

 

Vlad often ordered people to be skinned, boiled, decapitated, blinded, strangled, hanged, burned, roasted, hacked, nailed, buried alive, stabbed, etc. He also liked to cut off noses, ears, Sexual Organs and limbs. But his favorite method was impalement on stakes, hence the surname "Tepes" which means "The Impaler" in the Romanian language. It is this technique he used in 1457, 1459 and 1460 against Transylvanian merchants who had ignored his trade laws.

 

He also looked upon the poor, vagrants and beggars as thieves. Consequently, he invited all the poor and sick of Wallachia to his princely court in Tirgoviste for a great feast. After the guests ate and drank, Vlad ordered the hall boarded up and set on fire. No one survived. Most Romanians ddispute this. They think he was not evil and seem to like him.

 

Impalement was a gruesome from of execution. The victim was impaled between the legs upon a large sharpened stake, with the width of a man's upper arm and hoisted upright in the air. Then the weight of the body would begin to drag them downwards, causing the sharpened end of the stake to pierce their internal organs very slowly. Vlad especially enjoyed mass executions, where several victims were impaled at once. In order to better enjoy these brutal acts, Vlad would place the impaled victims, in front of a banquet table and would then enjoy and commonly dine in his "forest of the impaled", to the sounds of the dying. It was these incredibly brutal acts, that got him the nickname "Tepes", which in Romanian means "Impaler".

 

It is alleged that prince Vlad was responsible for the death, of over a hundred thousand people within a few years. This figure, is including the twenty-five thousand people, who died due to Impalement. "

 

 

Perhaps we should bring public impaling back for murderers.

 

ian

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Claire DC]

FredTheBaddie said:

Claire DC said:

i was saying that he is entitled to his opinion whatever it is!! Thats what an open forum is about!!

 

Right. So if I said all women should be wives and mothers and shouldn't work, or that all black people should be shot, or that the age of consent should be lowered to 9 you'd still say I was entitled to my opinion would you ?

 

I don't think so.

 

You are entitled to your opinion, that doesn't mean to say that i agree with it.

[Claire DC]

liquideyes said:

 

So: Say for example, you believed rapists should be castrated; but then somebody pointed out a wealth of evidence indicating it would be a really bad idea. What you are saying is, you would stick to your original "base" opinion anyway? That is called being "stubborn". There's nothing grown up about having unmovable opinions.

 

No, what i mean is someone may show me a different perspective on things, a different perspective doesnt always mean a mindchanging revelation does it. You can see somethin from another perspective but still keep your own opinion on things!! Only I will change my own mind.. not someone else, if it is through something that someone else has said to me then it is still me changing my mind, because i want to. Not someone changing my mind for me.. does that make more sense? Im not someone who will not change their mind on something if have enough reason/belief to but im also not someone who will have someone change their mind for them!!

 

question: do you think Hitler was "entitled" to his views?

Do you think a racist/homophobe/rapist is entitled to his views?

 

EVERYONE is entitled to their views, that doesnt automatically mean that i agree with them!!

 

No, that's what the random bollocks forum is for. Surely the serious issues forum isn't a place to make reckless, unjustified comments?

 

Let me put the following thought to you: (this is just my opinion)

 

The majority of people who say things like "all rapists should be castrated":

1. have no [censored] idea what they are talking about;

2. are leaping on the paedo / rapist-bashing bandwagon;

3. suffer from the misconception that being scathing & judgmental about other people makes themselves look better;

4. care more about their own self-righteous image than the actual issue they are talking about;

5. are not even expressing their own views (rather what they perceive to be the popular/acceptable thing to say on the matter; what their mates would say; what their parents say; and so on).

 

Or maybe they just have that opinion?!

[FredTheBaddie]

Claire DC said:

FredTheBaddie said:

 

 

Right. So if I said all women should be wives and mothers and shouldn't work, or that all black people should be shot, or that the age of consent should be lowered to 9 you'd still say I was entitled to my opinion would you ?

 

I don't think so.

 

You are entitled to your opinion, that doesn't mean to say that i agree with it.

 

I really don't think that's all you'd have to say if I posted those opinions as fact.

[Claire DC]

FredTheBaddie said:

Claire DC said:

FredTheBaddie said:

 

 

Right. So if I said all women should be wives and mothers and shouldn't work, or that all black people should be shot, or that the age of consent should be lowered to 9 you'd still say I was entitled to my opinion would you ?

 

I don't think so.

 

You are entitled to your opinion, that doesn't mean to say that i agree with it.

 

I really don't think that's all you'd have to say if I posted those opinions as fact.

 

Nobodies opinion is fact. Like i said tho, you are entitled to your opinion, doesn't meant to say that i agree with it or think you are correct in saying it, but then that is my opinion, which i am entitled to.