'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-09-2012, 09:59 AM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 09:52 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  
(27-09-2012 09:44 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Explain to me how a murderer is sane? Said suspect would have had to suspend every ounce of rationality, at least for the act, indicating that they cannot control themselves. Lock them up.

No, I never thought that. I am asking you as to how you could justify it.

You're gonna say that acting irrationally automatically makes someone clinically insane? So every religious person in the world should be declared clinically insane? Every person that ever over-reacts to a situation is clinically insane? Every person who ever makes a stupid decision is clinically insane?

Courts already make judgements on whether or not a criminal is sane and treat them accordingly. What is wrong with doing that?

Where did I say simply acting irrationally means you are clinically insane? If that were the case, every person on Earth would be imprisoned (which, in a sense, we are). I said a murderer is clinically insane.

Courts don't, scientists do. When do judges or the jury go and research genetics and neuroscience?

Now, justify vengeance.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 10:04 AM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 09:56 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(27-09-2012 09:52 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  [
You're gonna say that acting irrationally automatically makes someone clinically insane? So every religious person in the world should be declared clinically insane? Every person that ever over-reacts to a situation is clinically insane? Every person who ever makes a stupid decision is clinically insane?

Courts already make judgements on whether or not a criminal is sane and treat them accordingly. What is wrong with doing that?

Actually, everything is wrong with that, but it's all we got as yet.

Like said above, we don't know shit about what causes these things and some day we will and there will be a fix and our age will be looked upon as the age of ignorance and cruelty.

People commit murders for all sorts of reasons and almost none of these people are insane. A court system is they best way we have for sorting it all out. Not perfect mind you, just the best. I don't like the death penalty because mistakes can be made otherwise I have no problem with it. I just am not willing to take the risk of killing an innocent person.

Emerson was pretty spot on about people that commit murder (and other crimes):

“Murder in the murderer is no such ruinous thought as poets and romancers will have it; it does not unsettle him, or fright him from his ordinary notice of trifles; it is an act quite easy to be contemplated.”

" Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."
David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 10:05 AM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 09:59 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Where did I say simply acting irrationally means you are clinically insane? I said if you kill someone, you are clinically insane.

Courts don't, scientists do. When do judges or the jury go and research genetics and neuroscience?

Now, justify vengeance.

"Explain to me how a murderer is sane? Said suspect would have had to suspend every ounce of rationality"

There's where you said it.

Can you really say you are honestly above vengeance? What if someone raped a child but within a week those urges had gone, would you release them because they are no longer a threat to society? What if it was proven that giving a paedophile their freedom and a million pound cheque reduced re-offending rates by 90%, would you scrap custodial sentences? What if someone got into an argument with your best friend and killed him in cold blood but was instantly overcome with remorse for his actions, would you argue that he shouldn't be punished?

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hughsie's post
27-09-2012, 10:06 AM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 10:04 AM)KidCharlemagne1962 Wrote:  I don't like the death penalty because mistakes can be made otherwise I have no problem with it. I just am not willing to tkae the risk of killing an innocent person.

You've hit the nail on the head there. I totally agree.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hughsie's post
27-09-2012, 10:07 AM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 09:47 AM)morondog Wrote:  What do you have to do to get stuck in one of those? That's horrible Sad

Convicted terrorists, gang leaders, spies, and similar prisoners in a supermax prison known as ADMAX, the Federal administrative maximum security prison in Florence, Colorado, west of Pueblo.

Some famous SuperMax inmates...
Al-Qaeda terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui was sentenced to life without parole at Florence upon his conviction on May 4, 2006. Residents also include Theodore Kaczynski, a domestic terrorist otherwise known as the Unabomber, who once attacked via mail bombs; Robert Hanssen, an American FBI Agent turned Soviet spy; Terry Nichols, an accomplice to the Oklahoma City bombing; and Richard Reid, known as the "Shoe Bomber", who was jailed for life for attempting to detonate explosive materials in his shoes while on board an aircraft.

I think in the end, I just feel like I'm a secular person who has a skeptical eye toward any extraordinary claim, carefully examining any extraordinary evidence before jumping to conclusions. ~ Eric ~ My friend ... who figured it out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 10:40 AM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 10:04 AM)KidCharlemagne1962 Wrote:  People commit murders for all sorts of reasons and almost none of these people are insane. A court system is they best way we have for sorting it all out. Not perfect mind you, just the best. I don't like the death penalty because mistakes can be made otherwise I have no problem with it. I just am not willing to take the risk of killing an innocent person.

Emerson was pretty spot on about people that commit murder (and other crimes):

“Murder in the murderer is no such ruinous thought as poets and romancers will have it; it does not unsettle him, or fright him from his ordinary notice of trifles; it is an act quite easy to be contemplated.”

How do you know any of this? Do you know of some brain research I don't know about, or some retroactive way to read people's thoughts about things that have passed in time?

Sorry, but we are simply projecting. We don't know shit.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 11:51 AM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 09:34 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  This is all purely hypothetical. That is why it's in 'Philosophy' and not 'Politics'. If you wanna respond with a post about how such a system is unworkable or has too great a margin for error then you're missing my point.

What we'd really need to look at is what is best for the given society. Is it best to keep the person around, but locked away so they can't have contact with anyone? Is it best to mutilate them (thieves get their hands cut off or rapists get the eunuched) and send them on their way? Is it best to kill them and remove any further cost to the society in the form of chance of reoffending or imprisonment upkeep?

Those are my thoughts and I don't have the answer for them.


(27-09-2012 09:34 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  GabrielSun, that wasn't aimed purely at you by the way. I feel half the people reading this thread are missing my point and so I'm just trying to make sure I'm absolutely clear on what I mean. Smile

No worries. I like these kinds of discussions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 11:56 AM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 10:40 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(27-09-2012 10:04 AM)KidCharlemagne1962 Wrote:  People commit murders for all sorts of reasons and almost none of these people are insane. A court system is they best way we have for sorting it all out. Not perfect mind you, just the best. I don't like the death penalty because mistakes can be made otherwise I have no problem with it. I just am not willing to take the risk of killing an innocent person.

Emerson was pretty spot on about people that commit murder (and other crimes):

“Murder in the murderer is no such ruinous thought as poets and romancers will have it; it does not unsettle him, or fright him from his ordinary notice of trifles; it is an act quite easy to be contemplated.”

How do you know any of this? Do you know of some brain research I don't know about, or some retroactive way to read people's thoughts about things that have passed in time?

Sorry, but we are simply projecting. We don't know shit.

What is your definition of insane? The reason that defense usually fails is the burden of proof is not met, in my opinion, not because it is too hard but because most people commit their crimes for reasons that have nothing to do with insanity. Highly charged emotional state? Sure. Protecting drug turf? Absoultely. Under the infuence of drugs/alcohol? Yup. Clinically insane? Not bloody likely.

With all the studies on crime and criminals ove the past 100 years if you had a large quantity of insane people commiting these acts I think the data would have settled out. I for one would never allow anything but institutionalization for somebody mentally ill. People outside the crimianl justice system have an unrealistic view of what and why things go down as they do.

" Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."
David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 12:27 PM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 11:56 AM)KidCharlemagne1962 Wrote:  
(27-09-2012 10:40 AM)Dom Wrote:  How do you know any of this? Do you know of some brain research I don't know about, or some retroactive way to read people's thoughts about things that have passed in time?

Sorry, but we are simply projecting. We don't know shit.

What is your definition of insane? The reason that defense usually fails is the burden of proof is not met, in my opinion, not because it is too hard but because most people commit their crimes for reasons that have nothing to do with insanity. Highly charged emotional state? Sure. Protecting drug turf? Absoultely. Under the infuence of drugs/alcohol? Yup. Clinically insane? Not bloody likely.

With all the studies on crime and criminals ove the past 100 years if you had a large quantity of insane people commiting these acts I think the data would have settled out. I for one would never allow anything but institutionalization for somebody mentally ill. People outside the crimianl justice system have an unrealistic view of what and why things go down as they do.

I am not arguing with the judicial system and I did say that it is all we got. But we have it in it's current shape because we do not know shit about the brain.

All human actions are initiated by brain processes, and unusual actions are likely to be caused by unusual brain processes. We have slapped labels on varying degrees of "oddness" of brain processes, that's all.

We have zero understanding of what these processes actually are. We project our own way of processing onto the wayward individual and label things according to how large the variance we can perceive is.

I still say that when it comes to the understanding of what makes people tick, we are only one half step above the dark ages. People from the future will surely look back at how we did things and call it ignorant and cruel.

There is encouraging progress in analysing brain functions though, and I feel quite confident that we will be able to actually identify the issues sometime in the near future.

That will bring us closer to being able to provide the "missing link" in the brain process, and an individual labelled "psychopath" today will be able to seek treatment instead of being put to death or locked away.

In the meantime, we do have to do what we can to protect society. As imperfect and ignorant as that may be.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 12:36 PM
RE: 'We Shouldn't Stoop To Their Level'
(27-09-2012 12:27 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(27-09-2012 11:56 AM)KidCharlemagne1962 Wrote:  What is your definition of insane? The reason that defense usually fails is the burden of proof is not met, in my opinion, not because it is too hard but because most people commit their crimes for reasons that have nothing to do with insanity. Highly charged emotional state? Sure. Protecting drug turf? Absoultely. Under the infuence of drugs/alcohol? Yup. Clinically insane? Not bloody likely.

With all the studies on crime and criminals ove the past 100 years if you had a large quantity of insane people commiting these acts I think the data would have settled out. I for one would never allow anything but institutionalization for somebody mentally ill. People outside the crimianl justice system have an unrealistic view of what and why things go down as they do.

I am not arguing with the judicial system and I did say that it is all we got. But we have it in it's current shape because we do not know shit about the brain.

All human actions are initiated by brain processes, and unusual actions are likely to be caused by unusual brain processes. We have slapped labels on varying degrees of "oddness" of brain processes, that's all.

We have zero understanding of what these processes actually are. We project our own way of processing onto the wayward individual and label things according to how large the variance we can perceive is.

I still say that when it comes to the understanding of what makes people tick, we are only one half step above the dark ages. People from the future will surely look back at how we did things and call it ignorant and cruel.

There is encouraging progress in analysing brain functions though, and I feel quite confident that we will be able to actually identify the issues sometime in the near future.

That will bring us closer to being able to provide the "missing link" in the brain process, and an individual labelled "psychopath" today will be able to seek treatment instead of being put to death or locked away.

In the meantime, we do have to do what we can to protect society. As imperfect and ignorant as that may be.

Fair enough. I guess I see it through a lens of most crimes being commited becuase of some type of personal gain. I think that at the end of the day the number of truly mentally ill (unable to understand what the are doing is wrong or its consequences cause suffering).

" Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."
David Hume
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: