Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Annoyed]

Some women fall into the mistaken belief that they can "change them" so they get into relationships with these type of guys and then it all falls to pieces most of the time.

Oh, I know the process, I've seen it play out over and over again. All of the woman's friends can tell the guy she is dating is nothing but trouble, abusive, and in general an all around scumbag.

I just don't understand how women can find such behavior attractive. (Or men either, for that matter, but the behavior is far more common among women.)

[Falcon Horus]

Love is blind -- it's not just a saying.

[Annoyed]

For me, it's a Christian thing. We all make mistakes. Some of us follow down dark paths. But we all have the capacity to turn around and make up for our mistakes. It's about compassion and mercy. Justice without that is not much justice at all. If we are incapable of compassion or mercy, then we aren't truly just. It is also about self recognition. We are not perfect, we are all equally capable of doing wrong. And not all actions that are "wrong" come about because of malicious intent. That's the one area that Human law cannot account for. Thus the need for mercy and compassion.

Oh, I understand and agree with the concept of leniency and mercy for first/early offense situations. Many young people cross the line as they are growing into maturity. You don't want to throw these people away because they experimented on a wrong path in their youth. This is why we have many judicial options such as adjournment contemplating dismissal, for example. With ACD, the judge decrees that if the young lawbreaker keeps his nose clean for X months, the charges are dismissed, so there is no permanent criminal record. This is a good path for a first offender and I support it in most cases. (obviously, a particularly heinous offense is not something this is meant for).

What I have no sympathy for is the career criminal, who racks up numerous offenses; in effect declaring that he has no intention of being a law abiding citizen. I've read criticism of "three strikes and you're out" laws, but in reality, by the time someone meets the 3 strikes threshold there are also numerous other offenses where the system has shown the offender mercy.

These folks should be sentenced to very long terms at hard labor; perhaps 3 strikes, then a 15 - 20 year sentence to a prison labor camp, not a country club prison with cable
tv, weight rooms and all the other modern luxuries of prison life. If they behave in prison, maybe early release at 10 years. But after that? If that doesn't change the person's mind about being a criminal, next offense is buh-bye, life in a prison labor camp, no possibility of release.

One other thing. I don't support automatic mandatory sentences codified into law; the sitting judge should always have the option to adjust the penalty for specific extenuating circumstances, if they apply.

[Falcon Horus]

Prison labor camps -- I didn't know you were Russian.

[SoulReaver]

These folks should be sentenced to very long terms at hard labor; perhaps 3 strikes, then a 15 - 20 year sentence to a prison labor camp, not a country club prison with cable
tv, weight rooms and all the other modern luxuries of prison life. If they behave in prison, maybe early release at 10 years. But after that? If that doesn't change the person's mind about being a criminal, next offense is buh-bye, life in a prison labor camp, no possibility of release.

might as well make it 3 grievous crimes then

Prison labor camps -- I didn't know you were Russian.

you'd be surprised how many merican Patriots(tm) admire Putin/Stalin

[pookey]

I think what Annoyed is getting at, correct me if i am wrong, but life in prison is a bit too cushy, they get three square meals a day, tv, the various games that they play on those square boxes, no bills to pay, they get more than a poor sod living on the street does and a pensioner, maybe the guys on the street and the pensioners should nip out an commit some crimes

[Annoyed]

^ Is not wrong.

[Annoyed]

might as well make it 3 grievous crimes then

you'd be surprised how many merican Patriots(tm) admire Putin/Stalin

Why is it you seem to favor ideas which allow people who have made it clear by their behavior that they have no intent of living within the laws established by the society they live in to be able to continue in their criminal careers?

If that is your goal, we will never agree, as my goal is to encourage people to behave themselves and to protect society from such people who refuse to do so.

[SoulReaver]

Why is it you seem to favor ideas which allow people who have made it clear by their behavior that they have no intent of living within the laws established by the society they live in to be able to continue in their criminal careers?

cept that ain't what I was talking about

but you know what, since you favour disproportionate punishment, how about these laws: I propose that any major corporate who fires employees unjustly (ie. despite the employees not having committed any wrondoing, and despite the layoff not being necessary for the corporation to continue making ****loads of $ ) also be punished - by being burnt at the stake

so, what d'ya say? after all you did propose a lifetime sentence in the gulags for repeat offenders who commit minor misdemeanors like stealing a pizza etc. so I propose inquisition-style treatments for greedy corporate honchos. that too should sound fair doesn't it?

[Annoyed]

Your question has nothing to do with this discussion.

You just don't understand the free enterprise system, do you?

You cannot legislate that employers be required to keep employees any more than you can legislate that employees cannot quit a job.

[Falcon Horus]

I think what Annoyed is getting at, correct me if i am wrong, but life in prison is a bit too cushy, they get three square meals a day, tv, the various games that they play on those square boxes, no bills to pay, they get more than a poor sod living on the street does and a pensioner, maybe the guys on the street and the pensioners should nip out an commit some crimes

Yes, true... However, they are not free. They spend more time inside that room than they do outside.

If you've ever been in a position where you can't leav your place for whatever reason and have nothing else to do but watch TV or read a book or surf the web without much contact with the outside world -- that gets boring real fast.

[aretood2]

Oh, I understand and agree with the concept of leniency and mercy for first/early offense situations. Many young people cross the line as they are growing into maturity. You don't want to throw these people away because they experimented on a wrong path in their youth. This is why we have many judicial options such as adjournment contemplating dismissal, for example. With ACD, the judge decrees that if the young lawbreaker keeps his nose clean for X months, the charges are dismissed, so there is no permanent criminal record. This is a good path for a first offender and I support it in most cases. (obviously, a particularly heinous offense is not something this is meant for).

What I have no sympathy for is the career criminal, who racks up numerous offenses; in effect declaring that he has no intention of being a law abiding citizen. I've read criticism of "three strikes and you're out" laws, but in reality, by the time someone meets the 3 strikes threshold there are also numerous other offenses where the system has shown the offender mercy.

Then the question is what do you mean? When you say why do people have sympathy, what exactly are you talking about?

These folks should be sentenced to very long terms at hard labor; perhaps 3 strikes, then a 15 - 20 year sentence to a prison labor camp, not a country club prison with cable
tv, weight rooms and all the other modern luxuries of prison life. If they behave in prison, maybe early release at 10 years. But after that? If that doesn't change the person's mind about being a criminal, next offense is buh-bye, life in a prison labor camp, no possibility of release.

It would have to be meaningless labor. Otherwise you incentivize locking people up for just about anything to increase an incredibly cheap source of labor. And it would in turn run a lot of people out of their jobs. I think the issue is that you think in vacuums. No one thing impacts another. The problem is...nothing exists in a vacuum. Your labor camp solution has a negative impact on law abiding citizens and the economic fall out (Less consumers means less demand for products thus less need for production thus less need for workers and so on). Never mind the ethical issues of forced labor for someone (criminal or not).

One other thing. I don't support automatic mandatory sentences codified into law; the sitting judge should always have the option to adjust the penalty for specific extenuating circumstances, if they apply.

As long as you are consistent when you say "extenuating circumstances".

[SoulReaver]

Your question has nothing to do with this discussion.

You just don't understand the free enterprise system, do you?

of cos I do. as much as you understand the concept of punishment befitting crime

You cannot legislate that employers be required to keep employees any more than you can legislate that employees cannot quit a job.

yeah basically you can't legislate on it because it hasn't been legislated on (even though many west european countries do but w/e)
of course a similar brand of logic could be applied to abortion but I won't go there (again)

[pookey]

Yes, true... However, they are not free. They spend more time inside that room than they do outside.

If you've ever been in a position where you can't leave your place for whatever reason and have nothing else to do but watch TV or read a book or surf the web without much contact with the outside world -- that gets boring real fast.

I love that life if i didnt have a job, that would be my entire life, maybe i should commit a few crimes, i fancy a diamond heist, i love the sparklies, PH can drive the getaway car

[Annoyed]

I love that life if i didnt have a job, that would be my entire life, maybe i should commit a few crimes, i fancy a diamond heist, i love the sparklies, PH can drive the getaway car

No, she can't drive. We have a whole thread devoted to the topic of women driving: http://forum.gateworld.net/threads/3...Can-they-drive