The People of Today Are Hungry for A Lynching. Its not good.

[Ifreann]

As for doing experiments on such criminals, I'd say it's at least better than executing them. We might get something out of those experiments.

If it was good enough for Mengele, it's good enough for us, eh?

... what do you mean?

Josef Mengele, perhaps you heard of him. Experimented on Jews and other detainees in Auschwitz-Birkenau.

... comparing experiments on people of another religion to experiments on rapists and murderers is a bit of a false equivalence. It would be like saying "look at China, jailing people for their religious beliefs, surely it must be wrong to jail people for rape and murder!"

Your problem is that you fail to realise the not everyone convicted of rape or murder is actually a rapist or murderer. If you want to start stripping rights away from convicted criminals you have to accept that sooner or later it'll be an innocent person you're experimenting on.

[KenKenpachi]

Hmm, way I see it, its a no brainer. They arn't happy with the precived lack of justice from the goverment, and when a goverment won't give justice the people often will. And in short order it also can lead down a path of uprising and death of said goverment. In some of the issues I can agree with them 100%, as in my state if someone I loved was raped, at best I can hope they are in jail for 300 days. Is that Justice? And yes yes some of you will go thats not justice thats vengance. In my opinion the two go hand in hand.

[Der Teutoniker]

I have very little sympathy for people who break the law. Gross infringer's are far worse. I would not mind public executions for rapists and murderers. Pedophiles are not necessarily transgressors of the law (or specifically, anti-pedophilia law), and so should only be punished in relation to actual crimes they commit.

One of the main reasons that I support public hangings is that I feel like people who break the social contract severe enough deserve it, and because I think that we should make justice a public, and family affair once more. I understand that by supporting a death penalty I am in the minority, and that I support public forms puts me further into the minority, it is nonetheless my opinion.

Edit: not to say I would agree with injecting criminals with AIDS in order to attempt to cure AIDS, that is farther than even I would go.

[Greater Tomainia]

I just saw a group on facebook called "Rapists, Peadophiles ect. Kill the lot of them" It was probably the most heartless group I have ever seen on Facebook, and I thought how sad it is that more than 1,000 people on that group agree that it's a good idea to shoot mentally ill people, and that they dont feel pain.

The people of today all seem to be blood thirsty and have a lust for murdering mental patients. I saw a post on a discussion board of that group that said:

Peadophiles should be injected with aids and used to find the cure

Another said

Rapists and Peadophiles and Abusers should be put in a real life game of Saw

I'm scared for the morality of today.

I'm Sacred, for the People of Today.

Hate to be the one who sounds mean, but this is human nature. Violence and such is deep within the pysche of every person.

To some extent its been our own denial of such traits that leads to people talking so fervently about it, or actually performing it. Its like trying to teach a lion not to eat meat, you may do it but its never going to be normal. Humans are cruel creatures and that cruelty should be controlled and accepted, not bottled up and denied as being uncommon.

Always remember, humans are just animals who think they aren't.

[Benzei]

I gotta agree with those statements. I mean if a convict who is gonna be sentenced to death or lifetime should be put in experiments. I mean its not like they did anything for us, might aswell help society out if theyre gonna die anyway. Nationstates has some great issues about those things that IRL should adopt. The gladiator arena were convicts are forced to fight for entertainment of the law abiding population, forced to donate blood for hospital, experiments etc.

[Der Teutoniker]

The gladiator arena were convicts are forced to fight for entertainment of the law abiding population, forced to donate blood for hospital, experiments etc.

I don't disagree with gladiatorial contests over-much, but disease-testing shouldn't be allowed without their direct permission.

[Benzei]

The gladiator arena were convicts are forced to fight for entertainment of the law abiding population, forced to donate blood for hospital, experiments etc.

I don't disagree with gladiatorial contests over-much, but disease-testing shouldn't be allowed without their direct permission.

Why not? Theyre criminal scum who have done horrible things to deserve a death sentence. Thats the least they can do to help out society.

[Ifreann]

The gladiator arena were convicts are forced to fight for entertainment of the law abiding population, forced to donate blood for hospital, experiments etc.

I don't disagree with gladiatorial contests over-much, but disease-testing shouldn't be allowed without their direct permission.

Why not? Theyre criminal scum who have done horrible things to deserve a death sentence. Thats the least they can do to help out society.

Unless they were wrongfully convicted. But whatever, torture innocent people to death. They deserve it for being unlucky.

[Der Teutoniker]

Why not? Theyre criminal scum who have done horrible things to deserve a death sentence. Thats the least they can do to help out society.

Ongoing punishment doesn't seem right. I mean, if they refused gladiatorial contests, they could let themselves be killed. The same is not necessarily true with medical testing, which may lead to a very poor quality of life for years and years.

[Dyakovo]

As for doing experiments on such criminals, I'd say it's at least better than executing them. We might get something out of those experiments.

If it was good enough for Mengele, it's good enough for us, eh?

... what do you mean?

Josef Mengele, perhaps you heard of him. Experimented on Jews and other detainees in Auschwitz-Birkenau.

... comparing experiments on people of another religionbroke the law and were consider sub-human to experiments on rapists and murderersbroke the law and are consider sub-human is not a bit of a false equivalence.

fixed

[Tokos]

Unless they were wrongfully convicted. But whatever, torture innocent people to death. They deserve it for being unlucky.

This is not something a politician can ever actually say, due to the inevitable lynching they'd get for daring to suggest the justice system is imperfect. But it's still correct.

Biggest argument against the death penalty too, in fact.

[Hayteria]

As for doing experiments on such criminals, I'd say it's at least better than executing them. We might get something out of those experiments.

If it was good enough for Mengele, it's good enough for us, eh?

... what do you mean?

Josef Mengele, perhaps you heard of him. Experimented on Jews and other detainees in Auschwitz-Birkenau.

... comparing experiments on people of another religion to experiments on rapists and murderers is a bit of a false equivalence. It would be like saying "look at China, jailing people for their religious beliefs, surely it must be wrong to jail people for rape and murder!"

Your problem is that you fail to realise the not everyone convicted of rape or murder is actually a rapist or murderer. If you want to start stripping rights away from convicted criminals you have to accept that sooner or later it'll be an innocent person you're experimenting on.

Better than killing them, though. Note that my initial comment was referring to "better than executing them." That said, I don't think punishments ought to revolve around the risk of false conviction; that's always going to be an issue, but we shouldn't just dance around punishing them just because some of them are innocent. We should focus on trying to improve the accuracy of convictions.

[Hayteria]

As for doing experiments on such criminals, I'd say it's at least better than executing them. We might get something out of those experiments.

If it was good enough for Mengele, it's good enough for us, eh?

... what do you mean?

Josef Mengele, perhaps you heard of him. Experimented on Jews and other detainees in Auschwitz-Birkenau.

... comparing experiments on people of another religionbroke the law and were consider sub-human to experiments on rapists and murderersbroke the law and are consider sub-human is not a bit of a false equivalence.

fixed

There's a difference between what "breaks the law" in a totalitarian state like China and what "breaks the law" in the western world. Especially when the death penalty is typically used for crimes like murder, whereas theft "breaks the law" but doesn't get you executed...

[The Araucania]

Gotta admit, it's hypocritical.

"They did something nasty. Lets do something even worse to them. That makes us good humans."

Makes me sick.

on accord

[Korex]

One point that doesn't seem to have been made yet is that if we imposed the death penalty, or even medical experimentation, and it was made public knowledge that this was the penalty for certain crimes then by committing those crimes the criminal is giving consent to be punished in that way. If you know what is going to happen to you if you do something you are accepting that it will happen. While I have limits on what I would support it's really the criminals choice to be punished.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

One point that doesn't seem to have been made yet is that if we imposed the death penalty, or even medical experimentation, and it was made public knowledge that this was the penalty for certain crimes then by committing those crimes the criminal is giving consent to be punished in that way. If you know what is going to happen to you if you do something you are accepting that it will happen. While I have limits on what I would support it's really the criminals choice to be punished.

Or we got the wrong guy.

I always love the presumption that a conviction is a proof.

[Korex]

One point that doesn't seem to have been made yet is that if we imposed the death penalty, or even medical experimentation, and it was made public knowledge that this was the penalty for certain crimes then by committing those crimes the criminal is giving consent to be punished in that way. If you know what is going to happen to you if you do something you are accepting that it will happen. While I have limits on what I would support it's really the criminals choice to be punished.

Or we got the wrong guy.

I always love the presumption that a conviction is a proof.

We can't base the law on the small possibility that a person was wrongly convicted. If we do that we wouldn't be able to punish anyone at all just because they might be innocent.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

We can't base the law on the small possibility that a person was wrongly convicted. If we do that we wouldn't be able to punish anyone at all just because they might be innocent.

You'd be surprised just how big the possibility of being wrong is.

We shouldn't punish. We should incarcerate. Extra punishment beyond incarceration doesn't really serve any rational purpose.

[Phenia]

Unless they were wrongfully convicted. But whatever, torture innocent people to death. They deserve it for being unlucky.

It's not "innocent until proven guilty and even then still innocent." If you're not going to do anything to convicts you wouldn't do to the unconvicted why bother with the system at all?

[Skibereen]

I just saw a group on facebook called "Rapists, Peadophiles ect. Kill the lot of them" It was probably the most heartless group I have ever seen on Facebook, and I thought how sad it is that more than 1,000 people on that group agree that it's a good idea to shoot mentally ill people, and that they dont feel pain.

The people of today all seem to be blood thirsty and have a lust for murdering mental patients. I saw a post on a discussion board of that group that said:

Peadophiles should be injected with aids and used to find the cure

Another said

Rapists and Peadophiles and Abusers should be put in a real life game of Saw

I'm scared for the morality of today.

I'm Sacred, for the People of Today.

1001, I just joined.
Though I advocate the bullet behind ear method...humane enough for you.

[Skibereen]

Rape is a pretty terrible, offensive thing. Lotta anger wells up inside when a friend or loved one gets raped. Just sayin'.

The punishment is irrelevant. Are we good people if we torture someone to death for doing something bad? I think not.

Only per your definition of "good" which is completely subjective to your own opinion and bias like every other person.
They are completely entitled to sympathize with the victims and be apathetic towards the victimizers as you are completely entitled to sympathize with the victimizer and be apathetic towards the victims. Welcome to Earth.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

It's not "innocent until proven guilty and even then still innocent." If you're not going to do anything to convicts you wouldn't do to the unconvicted why bother with the system at all?

There's a big difference between incarceration and medical experiments.

[The Imperial Navy]

Rape is a pretty terrible, offensive thing. Lotta anger wells up inside when a friend or loved one gets raped. Just sayin'.

The punishment is irrelevant. Are we good people if we torture someone to death for doing something bad? I think not.

Only per your definition of "good" which is completely subjective to your own opinion and bias like every other person.
They are completely entitled to sympathize with the victims and be apathetic towards the victimizers as you are completely entitled to sympathize with the victimizer and be apathetic towards the victims. Welcome to Earth.

How about this way then. Breaking the law to deal with a lawbreaker is a bad idea.

[Phenia]

It's not "innocent until proven guilty and even then still innocent." If you're not going to do anything to convicts you wouldn't do to the unconvicted why bother with the system at all?

There's a big difference between incarceration and medical experiments.

Yes, but they are both nonetheless things you would not do to someone who is in fact innocent. The point being if "they might be innocent even though convicted" stops you from one, why should it not also stop you from the other?

Like we could have opt-in prisons where you only get incarcerated if you want.

[Skibereen]

Rape is a pretty terrible, offensive thing. Lotta anger wells up inside when a friend or loved one gets raped. Just sayin'.

The punishment is irrelevant. Are we good people if we torture someone to death for doing something bad? I think not.

Only per your definition of "good" which is completely subjective to your own opinion and bias like every other person.
They are completely entitled to sympathize with the victims and be apathetic towards the victimizers as you are completely entitled to sympathize with the victimizer and be apathetic towards the victims. Welcome to Earth.

How about this way then. Breaking the law to deal with a lawbreaker is a bad idea.

Change the laws.
Advocating meeting violence with violence isnt criminal or innately immoral.
And it really depends--tell me you intend to rape my wife, and will gleefully go to jail for killing you--"you" being a general "you" and not you you.