| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 6:29 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
 |
|
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 09:18:06 -0700, Peter Franks
<none@none.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:37:36 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
Subject yourself to the the social order,
and it will care for your every need.
right there is a fallacy in your predication.
You really don't know what you are talking about, and your attempts at
applying fallacies is similarly founded in ignorance.
|
Your reply is simply "prejudicial statement"---offers
no credible evidence to support it.
| Quote: |
Take a moment and read the following or any other description of Social
Order, and then participate in the discussion as an informed individual.
|
That site can say anything it chooses.
It's been proven erroneous, false, and misleading.
It is not an "informed individual" that continues a
nonsense set of "arguments"--most of which require the
acceptance of a wide range of arguments as if they were
fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 6:34 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 09:29:08 -0700, Peter Franks
<none@none.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:52:46 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
You see, the problem with this whole permit business is that it
negatively affects the people that it is designed to protect, while the
offenders proceed unhindered.
How can it "negatively affect" a law abiding citizen if
all they have to do is apply, and/or fulfill the legal
requirements set down by elected officials and
legislatures?
Let's ask and answer the question in another context:
Suppose you had to have a permit to speak; and each permit was only
applied to one particular topic.
|
There you go again setting up silly venues and
scenarious that cannot be argued.
You're requiring the acceptance of a fallacy argument,
or set of parameters that isn't conducive to a debate.
| Quote: |
Do you see yet? The whole presumptive point of permit laws doesn't
serve its promulgated purpose in the least -- quite the opposite.
|
The permit laws are designed to regulate the majority
of society. Those outside that law are subject to
penalty
The penalty for any given broken law is set by
society---not some idiotic philosophic remedy that
wouldn't pass a giggle test.
| Quote: |
If legislative bodies were interested in solving the issue regarding
infringement of rights by the law breaker, they should facilitate the
affecture of the penalty.
|
If you're not sufficiently versed in the historical
failure of that kind of nonsense penal thinking, then
you need remedial education. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 6:37 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 09:25:31 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
<crwlr@verizon.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
What keeps the violent criminal from attacking his victim?
The promise of of punishment is supposed to keep the criminals at bay. The
problem is, there is no punishment. At worst, they get a lifetime membership
in the gym, with three hots and a cot and endless hours of recreation.
I'm a huge proponent of Capital Punishment for some, and harsh punsiment for
the rest.
|
So was stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot.
One of the main "rights" you have is "freedom", just
below "life" I would imagine
Even you'd probably agree that death for crimes less
than capital murder wouldn't pass a laugh test.
So if you take away the second most cherished
"right"---you deprive an individual of a consideralble
thing
Actually, all you're doing is describing revenge,
retribution, and other calculated punishments that make
you feel good---but not much else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Peter Franks
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:36 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
| Quote: |
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 09:25:31 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
crwlr@verizon.net> wrote:
What keeps the violent criminal from attacking his victim?
The promise of of punishment is supposed to keep the criminals at bay. The
problem is, there is no punishment. At worst, they get a lifetime membership
in the gym, with three hots and a cot and endless hours of recreation.
I'm a huge proponent of Capital Punishment for some, and harsh punsiment for
the rest.
So was stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot.
One of the main "rights" you have is "freedom", just
below "life" I would imagine
Even you'd probably agree that death for crimes less
than capital murder wouldn't pass a laugh test.
So if you take away the second most cherished
"right"---you deprive an individual of a consideralble
thing
Actually, all you're doing is describing revenge,
retribution, and other calculated punishments that make
you feel good---but not much else.
|
The person that willingly and maliciously infringes the rights of
another FORFEITS their rights. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:52 pm Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:36:55 -0700, Peter Franks
<none@none.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Actually, all you're doing is describing revenge,
retribution, and other calculated punishments that make
you feel good---but not much else.
The person that willingly and maliciously infringes the rights of
another FORFEITS their rights.
|
Didn't you claim that rights cannot be forfeited?
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior---- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeff Strickland
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:16 pm Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
<Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:2j2s745g5e0d879r6l9kvduc7bj4hnkre0@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
|
Well, longer sentences and capital punishment also keep bad guys out of my
misery. So, I feel superior, and actually am superior. That is a scenario
that has no downside from where I'm sitting.
There was a study referred to recently in an Op/Ed piece in my local paper
(I can't recall who did the piece or who did the study) where the jist of
the article was that California's Three Strikes Law actually is working. The
person writing the piece voted against the 3 Strikes when the matter went to
the ballot in 1994, because the concerns was that prison populations would
go up several fold and we would need to build 20 new prisons in the state at
a direct result of the law.
After 14 years under 3 Strikes, the prison population has not gone up in
proportion to the increase in the state population, and we have only built
one new prison. 3 Strikes is working.
The author was a columnist from the SF Chronicle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Peter Franks
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:47 pm Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
| Quote: |
On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:36:55 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
Actually, all you're doing is describing revenge,
retribution, and other calculated punishments that make
you feel good---but not much else.
The person that willingly and maliciously infringes the rights of
another FORFEITS their rights.
Didn't you claim that rights cannot be forfeited?
|
Nope, I've never made that claim.
| Quote: |
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
|
However, shorter sentences, light punishment, do not have historical
backing to suggest they do anything other than make criminals free----
Apparently you can't see that I'm not advocating cruel and unusual
punishment, but rather what is effective and warranted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:29 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:16:39 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
<crwlr@verizon.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:2j2s745g5e0d879r6l9kvduc7bj4hnkre0@4ax.com...
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
Well, longer sentences and capital punishment also keep bad guys out of my
misery. So, I feel superior, and actually am superior. That is a scenario
that has no downside from where I'm sitting.
|
Well, didn't I say longer sentences make you feel
better?
| Quote: |
There was a study referred to recently in an Op/Ed piece in my local paper
(I can't recall who did the piece or who did the study) where the jist of
the article was that California's Three Strikes Law actually is working. The
person writing the piece voted against the 3 Strikes when the matter went to
the ballot in 1994, because the concerns was that prison populations would
go up several fold and we would need to build 20 new prisons in the state at
a direct result of the law.
After 14 years under 3 Strikes, the prison population has not gone up in
proportion to the increase in the state population, and we have only built
one new prison. 3 Strikes is working.
|
Parse that a minute
If "3 strikes is working", then why all the whining
about criminals being set free?
I have no doubt that enforcement of "3 strikes" will
incarcerate repeat offenders---but if "no new jails are
built"--they only have finite amount of space
available.
That's why criminals are released. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:30 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:47:45 -0700, Peter Franks
<none@none.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
However, shorter sentences, light punishment, do not have historical
backing to suggest they do anything other than make criminals free----
|
So, then your solution is to make yourself feel better? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Peter Franks
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:48 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
| Quote: |
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:47:45 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
However, shorter sentences, light punishment, do not have historical
backing to suggest they do anything other than make criminals free----
So, then your solution is to make yourself feel better?
|
Nope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:29 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:48:10 -0700, Peter Franks
<none@none.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:47:45 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
However, shorter sentences, light punishment, do not have historical
backing to suggest they do anything other than make criminals free----
So, then your solution is to make yourself feel better?
Nope.
|
You just said that whether or not long, overkill
sentences produced any desirable result, the end result
was that they were "set free"
If long sentences (which do nothing) produce nothing,
and you like 'em, that only serves to make you feel
better. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeff Strickland
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 5:41 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
<Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:pcts74po5333kq9l5v60fi9bs7f1ji701b@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:16:39 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
crwlr@verizon.net> wrote:
Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:2j2s745g5e0d879r6l9kvduc7bj4hnkre0@4ax.com...
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
Well, longer sentences and capital punishment also keep bad guys out of my
misery. So, I feel superior, and actually am superior. That is a scenario
that has no downside from where I'm sitting.
Well, didn't I say longer sentences make you feel
better?
There was a study referred to recently in an Op/Ed piece in my local paper
(I can't recall who did the piece or who did the study) where the jist of
the article was that California's Three Strikes Law actually is working.
The
person writing the piece voted against the 3 Strikes when the matter went
to
the ballot in 1994, because the concerns was that prison populations would
go up several fold and we would need to build 20 new prisons in the state
at
a direct result of the law.
After 14 years under 3 Strikes, the prison population has not gone up in
proportion to the increase in the state population, and we have only built
one new prison. 3 Strikes is working.
Parse that a minute
If "3 strikes is working", then why all the whining
about criminals being set free?
I have no doubt that enforcement of "3 strikes" will
incarcerate repeat offenders---but if "no new jails are
built"--they only have finite amount of space
available.
That's why criminals are released.
|
Well, the population of the state has increased by several million while the
prison populatin has only gone up something like 35,000. 3 Strikes was
supposed to demand 20 new prisons by now, it has not caused any.
Just because criminals get jailed here does not mean they are adequately
confined everywhere. And, we let violent offenders out twice before we put
them away for life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Peter Franks
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 12:50 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
| Quote: |
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:48:10 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:47:45 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
However, shorter sentences, light punishment, do not have historical
backing to suggest they do anything other than make criminals free----
So, then your solution is to make yourself feel better?
Nope.
You just said that whether or not long, overkill
sentences produced any desirable result, the end result
was that they were "set free"
If long sentences (which do nothing) produce nothing,
and you like 'em, that only serves to make you feel
better.
|
I prefer a restitutive system. Sentence length becomes largely irrelevant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 2:24 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:50:58 -0700, Peter Franks
<none@none.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:48:10 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:47:45 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
However, shorter sentences, light punishment, do not have historical
backing to suggest they do anything other than make criminals free----
So, then your solution is to make yourself feel better?
Nope.
You just said that whether or not long, overkill
sentences produced any desirable result, the end result
was that they were "set free"
If long sentences (which do nothing) produce nothing,
and you like 'em, that only serves to make you feel
better.
I prefer a restitutive system. Sentence length becomes largely irrelevant.
|
Don't you have to be "out" to make restitution? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Jeff Strickland
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:27 am Post subject: Re: Laws abridge rights? |
|
|
<Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:43ev74tkin45ae95170atet7h0nrk2i3um@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:50:58 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:48:10 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
Nicklas@Click.com wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:47:45 -0700, Peter Franks
none@none.com> wrote:
However, longer sentences, capital punishment, do not
have historical backing to suggest they do anything
other than make idiots feel superior----
However, shorter sentences, light punishment, do not have historical
backing to suggest they do anything other than make criminals
free----
So, then your solution is to make yourself feel better?
Nope.
You just said that whether or not long, overkill
sentences produced any desirable result, the end result
was that they were "set free"
If long sentences (which do nothing) produce nothing,
and you like 'em, that only serves to make you feel
better.
I prefer a restitutive system. Sentence length becomes largely
irrelevant.
Don't you have to be "out" to make restitution?
|
You don't have to be out, you just have to have something of value that they
can take from you to satisfy the restitution obligation.
The problem with the restitution model is that criminals often haven't got
the means or assets to cover the obligation. I like the harsh punishment
model of prison life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
142 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
