369 réponses à ce sujet

[Roamingmachine]

PTPR wrote...
Let me ask you a question:
What do you gain from beating a prisoner who is already convicted?

It was clearly a discliplinary action.He knowingly broke the rules and stepped on the wardens' toes and now he pays for it.If they'd be beating him just for the hell of it there wouldn't have been a guard watching the proceeding outside the door.His job, though unstated, is clearly to keep the others from going overboard with the beating.Corporal punishment is disciplinary action at its most basic form.It loses effectiveness if overused, though, but i don't see any other way of keeping the animals in Purgatory in line.Everything else has been tried on them by the socities that sent them there, pain and fear are the only things they respond to anymore.

[PTPR]

Roamingmachine wrote...

It was clearly a discliplinary action.He knowingly broke the rules and stepped on the wardens' toes and now he pays for it.If they'd be beating him just for the hell of it there wouldn't have been a guard watching the proceeding outside the door.His job, though unstated, is clearly to keep the others from going overboard with the beating.Corporal punishment is disciplinary action at its most basic form.It loses effectiveness if overused, though, but i don't see any other way of keeping the animals in Purgatory in line.Everything else has been tried on them by the socities that sent them there, pain and fear are the only things they respond to anymore.

Ok, I understand the need for disciplinary action but there are better ways than that. Beating someone does not teach them anything other than the fear of getting caught and hatred for the beater. I'm not saying the prisoner should get guidance couseling to discuss his feelings but what about solitary confinment?

If the prisoner keeps acting out then maybe they can be kept there permanently or even killed if it's too much of a problem.

 I just don't see the need to beat him.

[Roamingmachine]

PTPR wrote...

Ok, I understand the need for disciplinary action but there are better ways than that. Beating someone does not teach them anything other than the fear of getting caught and hatred for the beater. I'm not saying the prisoner should get guidance couseling to discuss his feelings but what about solitary confinment?

If the prisoner keeps acting out then maybe they can be kept there permanently or even killed if it's too much of a problem.

 I just don't see the need to beat him.

Oh, i agree with you.Psychological torture is much more effective and you can use it as much as you want without it losing effectiveness.A gibbering, drooling wreck is also a much more terrifying example to make than someone beaten to a hamburger.Works all the way from Joe Wageslave to the worst psychopath too.But solution like this requires imagination, something that is in short supply with this particular warden (along with self-preservation instinct...).In the end the stick is the only thing he knows to be effective and the stick is what he shall use.

[Nightwriter]

PTPR wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

That analogy is a bit jarring. When a dog pees on my floor it doesn't know any better, it's an animal. A serial killer murdering or raping someone is not the same thing as a dog peeing on the floor.

The dog is an animal. I'm not comparing it to a muderer, I'm comparing the one who beats the dog

I am not trying to diminish what the muderer did. The dog pees on the floor, you don't like it. Even though you know it won't teach him anything, you still hit the dog, not based on morals but on your own emotions.

Your not basing your judgement on what is right or wrong, you're basing it of of how you feel.

Of coures I'm not. When my dog pees on my floor I never beat it. That's cruel.

I might beat a murderer for hurting someone. That's not cruel.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 14 août 2010 - 08:18 .

[MTN Dew Fanatic]

Double.

Modifié par MTN Dew Fanatic, 14 août 2010 - 10:13 .

[MTN Dew Fanatic]

Nightwriter wrote...

PTPR wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

That analogy is a bit jarring. When a dog pees on my floor it doesn't know any better, it's an animal. A serial killer murdering or raping someone is not the same thing as a dog peeing on the floor.

The dog is an animal. I'm not comparing it to a muderer, I'm comparing the one who beats the dog

I am not trying to diminish what the muderer did. The dog pees on the floor, you don't like it. Even though you know it won't teach him anything, you still hit the dog, not based on morals but on your own emotions.

Your not basing your judgement on what is right or wrong, you're basing it of of how you feel.

Of coures I'm not. When my dog pees on my floor I never beat it. That's cruel.

I might beat a murderer for hurting someone. That's not cruel.

I agree.

[Nightwriter]

You agree with me twice? Yay!

[PTPR]

Nightwriter wrote...

Of coures I'm not. When my dog pees on my floor I never beat it. That's cruel.

I might beat a murderer for hurting someone. That's not cruel.

I didn't say you did. Since my analogy isn't working I'll say this again:

You're not basing your judgement on what is right or wrong you're basing it on how you feel. I'm saying it's not right to beat a prisoner if they already have been punished. If they haven't been, there are better ways to handle it.

@roamingmachine- I'm glad we can agree on something.

[PTPR]

Sorry, double post.

Modifié par PTPR, 14 août 2010 - 11:13 .

[Nightwriter]

Oh, I can see what you're saying.

Well put it this way: Injustice itself - the very concept of "wrong" itself - is nothing more than a feeling, right? We basically put people in jail because of feelings. We put people to death because of feelings.

And since the criminal in question would have done nothing to me personally, you can't say I'd be beating him because of my personal feelings, either.

[PTPR]

Nightwriter wrote...

Oh, I can see what you're saying.

Well put it this way: Injustice itself - the very concept of "wrong" itself - is nothing more than a feeling, right? We basically put people in jail because of feelings. We put people to death because of feelings.

And since the criminal in question would have done nothing to me personally, you can't say I'd be beating him because of my personal feelings, either.

I think we put put people in jail because of chaos control. If no one was arrested, the world would become a pretty terrible place.

I do see what your saying too and  you're right. Of course I'm basing this off of my morals and others might have different perspective. I'm like to discuss things like this so I might come off rude and eccentric. 

Also, for the record I  dogs. Don't want to make it seem like I am comparing them to criminals.

[Nightwriter]

I love dogs too.

Well, I think about things like, if a man molests 30 children and then loses his sex drive in a freak accident, we're still going to prosecute him, aren't we? Because he did molest those children and he deserves to go to jail, regardless of the fact that he's not dangerous anymore. So the line between damage control and punishment is a fine one.

For the record, I stop the guards from beating the prisoner.

My only disagreement with people is that the beating should be stopped for the sake of the prisoner, rather than for the sake of the guards. That prisoner has few human rights in my eyes.

[AntiChri5]

Nightwriter wrote...

I love dogs too.

Well, I think about things like, if a man molests 30 children and then loses his sex drive in a freak accident, we're still going to prosecute him, aren't we? Because he did molest those children and he deserves to go to jail, regardless of the fact that he's not dangerous anymore. So the line between damage control and punishment is a fine one.

Frankly, im in favour of chemical castration for child molesters (its for their own good as well)

There is a punishment component to prisons but that is not, and cannot (in a civilised society) be the main component. That should always be seperating them from the general populace, and rehabilitating them.

Nightwriter wrote...

For the record, I stop the guards from beating the prisoner.

My only disagreement with people is that the beating should be stopped for the sake of the prisoner, rather than for the sake of the guards. That prisoner has few human rights in my eyes.

Do you see the prisoner as a lost cause?

No crime is so great that you can lose your right to be free from torture.

Is it justifiable to torture the psycho terrorist who has the magic codes that will stop the world from blowing up? Yes, i believe so.

[Nightwriter]

AntiChri5 wrote...

Frankly, im in favour of chemical castration for child molesters (its for their own good as well)

There is a punishment component to prisons but that is not, and cannot (in a civilised society) be the main component. That should always be seperating them from the general populace, and rehabilitating them.

Some people can't be rehabilitated though. And there's this monster inside of me that says rehabilitation is too good for some people.

What are we to do about this monster?

AntiChri5 wrote...

Do you see the prisoner as a lost cause?

Well I don't know that much about the prisoner, but it depends. I don't think everyone there is a lost cause.

Jack isn't a lost cause. The "Oh, that's just Bimmy" guy one cell over didn't seem like a total lost cause.

But Bimmy himself? Yes, he probably is.

AntiChri5 wrote...

No crime is so great that you can lose your right to be free from torture.

I disagree.

[philiposophy]

Do we ever find out what the guy getting beaten actually did?

[Kaiser Shepard]

Nightwriter wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

Frankly, im in favour of chemical castration for child molesters (its for their own good as well)

There is a punishment component to prisons but that is not, and cannot (in a civilised society) be the main component. That should always be seperating them from the general populace, and rehabilitating them.

Some people can't be rehabilitated though. And there's this monster inside of me that says rehabilitation is too good for some people.

What are we to do about this monster?

Embrace it, what else?

[Nightwriter]

My monster approves.

@ phil - do you mean, what did he do to get the beating, or what did he do to get put in the prison?

The answer to one is: He killed some person.

The answer to the other is: He killed some people.

[AntiChri5]

Nightwriter wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

Frankly, im in favour of chemical castration for child molesters (its for their own good as well)

There is a punishment component to prisons but that is not, and cannot (in a civilised society) be the main component. That should always be seperating them from the general populace, and rehabilitating them.

Some people can't be rehabilitated though. And there's this monster inside of me that says rehabilitation is too good for some people.

Of course some cant, so we lock them up for the rest of their lives,

Too good for them? Perhaps, but offering that opportunity is what makes us so much more than them.

Nightwriter wrote...

What are we to do about this monster?

Rehabilitate her.

~offers paragon cookies~

Modifié par AntiChri5, 15 août 2010 - 01:21 .

[philiposophy]

I meant what he did to end up on Purgatory. I just want to know if we get any details. Like if he raped his victims first or tortured them. Was he serial murderer or just a violent criminal who killed people who crossed him?



You said Jack isn't a lost cause but she's killed an awful lot of people without any good reason and caused an awful lot of damage, which would have caused pain to a lot of people's lives. Not just bad people but probably civilians considering one of her tales is about crashing a space station into a moon of the hanar. Why is this guy a lost cause in comparison to that?*



*assuming that's who "Bimmy" is, I haven't read the whole thread.

[PTPR]

Nightwriter wrote...

I love dogs too.

Well, I think about things like, if a man molests 30 children and then loses his sex drive in a freak accident, we're still going to prosecute him, aren't we? Because he did molest those children and he deserves to go to jail, regardless of the fact that he's not dangerous anymore. So the line between damage control and punishment is a fine one.

For the record, I stop the guards from beating the prisoner.

My only disagreement with people is that the beating should be stopped for the sake of the prisoner, rather than for the sake of the guards. That prisoner has few human rights in my eyes.

Personally, I believe taking away someone's freedom is a good punishment in itself, but that's just me.

I really could care less about the prisoner too. I'm just saying how the guards are hurting themselves by beating him.

Oh, and Border Collies FTW!

[Nightwriter]

AntiChri5 wrote...

Of course some cant, so we lock them up for the rest of their lives,

Too good for them? Perhaps, but offering that opportunity is what makes us so much more than them.

But why does it matter how I am in comparison to them? I behave independently of criminals and malcontents, I don't judge myself on the standards of murderers, why should I worry if I am more or less than them? Isn't that attributing more importance to them than they deserve?

I know I would never hurt anyone for my own sick pleasure, and I define what meaning I take from every action. Me.

AntiChri5 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

What are we to do about this monster?

Rehabilitate her.

~offers paragon cookies~

That's cheating.

You know perfectly well when I have cookies I love everyone.

That's cheating. You're a cheater. I can't even remember what I was arguing about now.

[AresXX7]

philiposophy wrote...

Do we ever find out what the guy getting beaten actually did?

he killed another prisoner, who was worth a lot of money to the warden


EDIT: NVM, read your next post after  making mine

Modifié par AriesXX7, 15 août 2010 - 01:36 .

[AntiChri5]

Nightwriter wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

Of course some cant, so we lock them up for the rest of their lives,

Too good for them? Perhaps, but offering that opportunity is what makes us so much more than them.

But why does it matter how I am in comparison to them? I behave independently of criminals and malcontents, I don't judge myself on the standards of murderers, why should I worry if I am more or less than them? Isn't that attributing more importance to them than they deserve?

I know I would never hurt anyone for my own sick pleasure, and I define what meaning I take from every action. Me.

It doesnt. We dont have to hold ourselves to a higher standard. But we do, to greater or lesser degrees.

Nightwriter wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

What are we to do about this monster?

Rehabilitate her.

~offers paragon cookies~

That's cheating.

You know perfectly well when I have cookies I love everyone.

That's cheating. You're a cheater. I can't even remember what I was arguing about now.

And so i claim another victory. 

[Seth Burns]

I let them continue beating the living **** out of the D-bag.

Simply put, the ***hole deserves it, doesn't he? Any criminal in Purgatory deserves that. Do I believe he should be beaten for the reasons why their beating him, (getting information) no, I don't. But he deserves it anyway.

Modifié par Seth Burns, 15 août 2010 - 01:37 .

[Mr.Caine]

I honestly am GRATEFUL most of you aren't in charge of any judicial system because some of the logic in this thread is terrifying. "These prisoners are monster...etc, deserve to be punished etc" Why do people get the entitlement they are some how better? All It takes is ONE mistake, ONE wrong decision to end up in Gen pop.

Modifié par Mr.Caine, 15 août 2010 - 01:38 .