Wut...?

Originally posted by trev33
and do you think said psychological treatment should be conducted in a jail or in another institution specially designed to treat these people? if the latter would you be happy to see a person freed after they've been 'cured' but not necessarily served the same amount of time than say the mobster has for his crime. assuming they were both similar murder charges.

Is your aim to punish those driven to murder because of circumstances they have no control over?

If, unknown to me, there was a micro-chip in my brain which altered my brian chemistry to the extent I could not control it and was a puppet to the desire to kill, would you have me serve a jail term once the chip was removed?

Originally posted by trev33
and do you think said psychological treatment should be conducted in a jail or in another institution specially designed to treat these people? if the latter would you be happy to see a person freed after they've been 'cured' but not necessarily served the same amount of time than say the mobster has for his crime. assuming they were both similar murder charges.

Yes, I would agree to see their charges reduced to some form of manslaughter for example (so minimum years equal to that form of manslaughter) with release conditional on them being 'cured'.

You don't think there's any difference between a mobster who kills for profit and someone who kills due to some psychotic urge?

Originally posted by Palynka
You don't think there's any difference between a mobster who kills for profit and someone who kills due to some psychotic urge?

yes, of course there is.

so lets say that that the subject is deemed to be cured, his sentence reduced and after a while set free. how free will this people be? i'm talking about various checkups, possibly a chip installed to check their whereabouts etc.

and what if they re-offend, is it back to the institution to be 'cured' again or will they be trailed and sentenced like a 'sane' human being although they might not be?

Originally posted by Starrman
Is your aim to punish those driven to murder because of circumstances they have no control over?

If, unknown to me, there was a micro-chip in my brain which altered my brian chemistry to the extent I could not control it and was a puppet to the desire to kill, would you have me serve a jail term once the chip was removed?

no.

in that unlikely senario and it was proven to be factual then no. good luck trying to prove it was the chips fault though 😵

Originally posted by trev33
yes, of course there is.

so lets say that that the subject is deemed to be cured, his sentence reduced and after a while set free. how free will this people be? i'm talking about various checkups, possibly a chip installed to check their whereabouts etc.

and what if they re-offend, is it back to the institution to be 'cured' again or will they be trailed and sentenced like a 'sane' human being although they might not be?

I don't see how continuing this is relevant. What's your point?

Originally posted by trev33
no.

in that unlikely senario and it was proven to be factual then no. good luck trying to prove it was the chips fault though 😵

Edit: Scrap the first point, I see you're not for death sentence, my mistake.

Instead, if it is not my fault, why would you not show me pity?

Originally posted by Palynka
I don't see how continuing this is relevant. What's your point?

just checking how many chances you get in paprika's world.

Originally posted by trev33
just checking how many chances you get in paprika's world.

This isn't baseball.

Originally posted by Starrman
So there should be no death sentence for mentally ill criminals?

And secondly, if it is not my fault, why would you not show me pity?

there shouldn't be a death penalty for anyone regardless of mental health.

some cases i might and others not. if you knew what you were doing but didn't for whatever reason consider it morally wrong then no, i won't pity you and whatever illness you have.

Originally posted by trev33
if you knew what you were doing but didn't for whatever reason consider it morally wrong then no, i won't pity you and whatever illness you have.

So if I committed the act against my will, but didn't consider the act wrong anyway I deserve no pity. But if I commit the act against my will and consider the act wrong I deserve pity?

Going back to the microchip example, If I consider murder allowable, but am forced to murder irrespective of this you are condemning me. The thought is what is abhorrent irrespective of the act? Would you punish people for thinking crime allowable irrespective of them committing it?

Originally posted by Starrman
So if I committed the act against my will, but didn't consider the act wrong anyway I deserve no pity. But if I commit the act against my will and consider the act wrong I deserve pity?

Going back to the microchip example, If I consider murder allowable, but am forced to murder irrespective of this you are condemning me. The thought is what is abhorren ...[text shortened]... act? Would you punish people for thinking crime allowable irrespective of them committing it?

i don't believe that's want i said and it's not as black and white as that, the level of 'illness' has to be taken into account, the past history of the subject and the situation if which they committed the crime. but as a vague generalization if a person knew what they were doing was wrong in the act of doing it then no, i would feel no pity or compassion towards them.

no, i'm sure most people have thought about doing something illegal at some point it's how we act of these thoughts that we should be judged.

Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
Why? Because you think you know the rules God plays by? Our Christian God, I assume you're Christian, is simply another invention of man to explain the unexplainable and both soothe and fan the flames of mans fear. What makes countless other Gods and Goddesses any less valid. How do you know that my prayers to Hecate are any less valid than your v ...[text shortened]... all. Plus, it's been 2000 years since anyone heard from him.

I haven't blown anything.

Thanks for this.

Everyone needs their faith renewed from time to time, and you've just made me understand how fortunate I am to be close to my God in a way you will never in a million years comprehend.

As a side note, thanks for also letting me know that humans continue to evolve. This one has been bothering me lately and thanks for the confirmation.

By the way, I do feel better now, knowing we don't agree on everything.

Originally posted by Anonymousnumber1
and so you can either continue to masturbate into the face of vitriol
or you can ignore the smegma of society and continue living your life

Ahem, do you, perchance, have Vitriol's digits (phone number) ?

UNCLE GRANNY.

Originally posted by Palynka
Page 8. Look it up.

By George, i've got it !!!!!!!!

"There is more to deterrence than punishment. Punishment may stop some person that wants to commit murder (static deterrence), but a society that teaches that violence is never a solution will have less individuals wanting to commit murder (dynamic deterrence)."

So, the states that have No death penalty have fewer murderers Because those states Teach that violence is never a solution, whereas those states With a death penalty and higher number of murderers Don't teach that violence is never a solution ?

You, of course, have proof of such teachings and non-teachings ? Otherwise i say, "Bull poopies" and i might even add a few "popper doodles" to boot.

GRANNY.

Originally posted by smw6869
You, of course, have proof of such teachings and non-teachings ? Otherwise i say, "Bull poopies" and i might even add a few "popper doodles" to boot.

😕

The teaching is that a non-primitive society is not willing to kill for justice. That you cannot learn from this, doesn't mean others can't.