8 year old "raped" and "buried alive" in FLORIDA ....

[a_decent_1]

Umm,

I gotta improve my grammer then, Ironworks is a good place to improve grammer [img]smile.gif[/img]

And i think (on a second thought) that the person should be Left on the street with Both the hands Cut.

Let him know what Suffering is.

[ 05-26-2005, 02:53 AM: Message edited by: a_decent_1 ]

[Khazadman Risen]

I say put them in a large pit and hand out rifles to the victims and/or their families, along with all the ammo they wish to use.

[pritchke]

I say put them in cages with wood floors, hanging over large fire pits and them light the fires and let them burn in agony. Eventually the floor will burn away and they will fall into the fire and die.

Well not really but since every one was tossing out ideas, I read that one in Uther I believe.

A better idea would be to insert some type of electric shock device in there private part. Every time they start to feel a little frisky it gives them a major zap kind of like a dog collar this will also prevent them from procreating and it would take care of that viagra loop hole in the system as well.


[ 05-25-2005, 12:27 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[shamrock_uk]

Blimey pritchke, you're a man for all occasions!

[Azred]

No system of deterring crime has ever been successfully implemented, because no one can deter crime. The best a society can do is to clean up afterwards and mete out some sort of punishment/justice to the offender.
Public executions, however, will deter some crime, as a certain percentage of people who might have committed a crime won't once they see someone else executed for committing a crime. Limited deterrent, so to speak.

Ancient China used to take convicted criminals and put them on the front line of a war.

The single greatest problem vis-a-vis sex offenders is that the repeat offense rate is extremely high, over 98%. Greta van Susteren, now a member of Fox News, once stated that in every case where she defended a sex offender the defendent was always a repeat offender--she never defended a first-time sex offender.
The rate of repetition is so high because they don't view what they do as wrong--the classic definition of "psycopath". Of course, technically sociopaths are worse because they know what they do is wrong and don't care. In any case, you cannot rehabilitate them.
Therefore, the only logical course of action when dealing with sex offenders is to remove them from society completely. The choices are limited: 1) prison, which is usually a temporary repreive and is a tax burden to society; 2) exile, which no one does anymore even though there are many really good locations in the South Pacific (why not Bikini Atoll? [img]graemlins/beigesmilewinkgrin.gif[/img] ); or 3) execution, and not a lengthy process of appeals and delays, but driving them into a field and putting a bullet in their brain.
Personally, I would allow option 1 for minor crimes and/or first-time criminals, option 2 for many hard/violent crimes or repeat criminals, and option 3 for sex offenders and the most violent of crimes/criminals.

I know that those who oppose the death penalty alwasy ask the question "what if you wrongfully execute someone who is innocent?". To them I pose this question: what percentage of convicted murderers, whether or not they have been executed, have later turned out to be innocent? I doubt the answer is over 5%; a 95% success rate is pretty damned good.

What ever happened to the old process of declaring someone an "outlaw", which meant that since they chose to break/ignore the laws of society they could find so shelter under those laws. That is to say, the repeat criminal had voluntarily waived his civil and/or human rights.

[Timber Loftis]

No system of deterring crime has ever been successfully implemented,. . . Public executions, however, will deter some crime

You belie yourself, Azred, which is it? Obviously, the illegality of an act as well as harsher punishments for illegal acts will deter *some* crime, of course not all.

a_decent_1, kudos to you for seeing IWF as a way to improve your grammar. We're not real sticklers 'round these parts, but a sentence every now or then is appreciated.

Punishment is a goal, although it should be a just punishment, not a punishment out of revenge. Only where revenge and jusitce meet should it be considered approporiate.

Aragorn, I'd like to highlight the irony in this post of yours. If revenge is a just goal, then justice will meet it, especially since the legislature decides what is "just" in crime & punishment situations. The central question is not where revenge and justice meet, but rather whether revenge is a just cause, of course.

[a_decent_1]

a_decent_1, kudos to you for seeing IWF as a way to improve your grammar. We're not real sticklers 'round these parts, but a sentence every now or then is appreciated.

Thanx man,
I try to learn with each day, Thats how i am. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[shamrock_uk]

Originally posted by Azred: I know that those who oppose the death penalty alwasy ask the question "what if you wrongfully execute someone who is innocent?". To them I pose this question: what percentage of convicted murderers, whether or not they have been executed, have later turned out to be innocent? I doubt the answer is over 5%; a 95% success rate is pretty damned good.[/font]

Not sure about murders specifically, but a guy was just cleared yesterday after 25 years in prison and three appeal attempts. Judge ruled key evidence should never have been submitted to the jury. Now that sucks, but it would suck even more with a rope around your neck [img]smile.gif[/img]

Originally posted by Azred: What ever happened to the old process of declaring someone an "outlaw", which meant that since they chose to break/ignore the laws of society they could find so shelter under those laws.

The rise of the European nation-state. Got to have a monopoly on the use of force or they feel threatened by the huddled masses

But hey, that's exactly what I was debating with Aragorn in that other thread - nice to know I'm in good company [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

[ 05-26-2005, 05:52 AM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[Sigmar]

Originally posted by Azred: What ever happened to the old process of declaring someone an "outlaw", which meant that since they chose to break/ignore the laws of society they could find so shelter under those laws. That is to say, the repeat criminal had voluntarily waived his civil and/or human rights.

Whatever did happen to that? Seriously.

These individual deserve no human rights.

Anywho, what should be done to such people? Kill them, in a way that satisfies the victim's families.

[Jorath Calar]

...This conversation has come up many times in the past on these forums, and we are no closer at solving the matter.

WTF! (sorry, just keeping up with the thread [img]smile.gif[/img] )
Larry, this is crpg forum, people come here to talk about computergames with likeminded people... since when are we solving the worlds problems?

Seriously though my country has the same problem, sexoffenders and childmolesters and rapists getting ridiclously small sentences or even getting away even if it's proven. It sickens me (and everyone else I know) and one of my friend said once she was thinking about creating a "lynch mob" that would wait for these cretins and give them the justice they deserve when they are out... she was drunk but had a point, nothing like angry mob justice...