uh yeah. This is why we should execute people who we deem unable to be rehabilitated into society. That said, I don't trust the current system to pass judgment on anyone. The whole thing is rotten and needs to be refreshed.
And that's where things go wrong. Without universal agreement, "we" will always be subjective, and it gets really fucking scary with those statements when you absolutely know your enemies would justify themselves with the exact same notion against you.
We have people who are serving life sentences in prison. That is functionally deeming someone unfit to rejoin society. This kind of judgment is already being passed on people, we just don't have the balls to be humane and kill them.
I readily give you your point that people would abuse this to persecute their enemies. The fact that our society is so divided takes many solutions off the table, as they only function in a more cohesive society. Instead we're just gonna careen down the road to anarchy and/or tyranny because the populace is divided against itself.
Exactly. the laws suck ass, we need them changed. the guy was an irresponsible asshole but it shouldn't have been illegal to posess a gun to begin with.
It just requires a very clear standard and visible enforcement.
We used to have that.
If people know that the punishment for murder, rape, kidnapping, aggravated assault with a weapon, or armed robbery is to be immediately marched out after conviction and strung up in the town square...
People will generally do a good job of steering clear of those behaviors.
Ambiguous enforcement begets dubious behavior. Make stark examples, and the occasions when you need to make them will be rare (eventually).
The thing is, our communities used to be the visible enforcement, and the visible standard. Much like everything else, we outsourced it. When your neighbor is also an enforcer of social norms, you're less likely to squirt a cream filled dildo in his face.
We are very community based animals. The most destructive forces are those that destroy the foundations of our society. The family is the bedrock, but the people we interact with are the cornerstones. Modern society has devastated both.
The thing is, our communities used to be the visible enforcement, and the visible standard.
That kind of thinking legitimizes the leftist perception of an oppressive, bigoted culture.
The Saxons used to appoint their law enforcers (shire reeves, origin of sheriff) by elevating able commoners held in esteem by the community and given the assent of the landholding elite. But when the Normans appeared on the scene they found this system to be far too corrupt and inconsistent. So their addition was the bailiff, which was controlled centrally by the crown, trained and held to a consistent standard, and largely resembles the court we have today.
The Britons initially hated this system for being different but by the reign of King John the stabilizing effect of having a reliable judiciary free of local influence (either the whims of barons or the seething common mob) was generally regarded as a very good thing to be preserved and improved.
Law is an artificial thing, something that we have invented wholecloth. I think to a degree it HAS to be controlled centrally in order for it to actually be impartial, otherwise every community will enforce its own much narrower view of what is acceptable.
we should execute people who we deem unable to be rehabilitated into society
My solution is both more and less cruel but not as permanent so in case further evidence is discovered the individual can be brought back and compensated
absolute solitary confinement and reversible surgical blindness to significantly decrease the chances of them ever causing a problem again
implant a drug dispenser in their spine that can render them unconscious for things like medical exams, treatments and in case they act out
give them the equivalent of Alexa (with no external connection) and a library of every recorded music and every audio book ever made.
give them the resources to learn braille by touch and the ability to request physical copies of books in braille
provide regular medical exams and non-heroic treatment to keep them alive
provide a button in their cell that will flood it with nitrogen after a 5 minute delay (along with a method to cancel the countdown) and the last thing they hear a human say is instructions on how to use that button
Could you re-draft this? I'm seeing several problems.
You've taught all felons marketable skills for working with the blind. Is that the intent..? Put all ex-felons to work as aides for the blind?
I think this would be more expensive than our current silly system. Even substituting out all four surgeries, I think the cost would still be too high.
What happens if they're already blind?
If the last thing they hear a human say is the suicide instructions, how are the medical exams handled without communication? Logistically, how do you learn braille without help? Both of those things seem much harder if you can't hear any speech.
heh I don't know how much I want to elaborate but since it sounds psycho enough as it is but since we are running with it...
not all felons, only as a substitute for capital punishment and life without parole - so only the ones who are found to be wrongly convicted if new evidence is discovered would be issues with re-integration. For those I assume there would be a compensation that would be substantial enough that they really didn't have a motivation to re-offend unless they were truly unable to control themselves
Is there a high number of blind people committing capital crimes? the blindness and solitary isn't meant as punishment, though it will suck, but to ensure that the convicted was highly unlikely to cause problems during their sentence.
For medical exams and dental work they would be conducted the same way vets examine animals that are potentially dangerous.
How do they learn braille without help? They have a lot of time on their hands, verbal insturctions could be part of their media library along with education tools.
Ah, a replacement for sentences where re-integration is not planned. At the least, it sounds frightening and that would be a potential motivator to dissuade some criminals. I do like the idea of seperating such offenders from the ones that can rejoin society, as a prisoner with no hopes is likely to make everyone around them miserable on purpose.
Is there a high number of blind people committing capital crimes?
I doubt it, but I wouldn't be surprised at a newly blind guy getting up to something crazy. Maybe not on a comic book villain level, but I imagine it being a traumatic change that could distort a person's values. Most guys wouldn't have henchmen available to facilitate crazy plans.
I was assuming the blindness to be meant as punishment. Why bother with it at all? Just putting them in isolation sounds sufficient. Give them light and normal books, take away the Alexa. Drug their food when you want to give them a checkup. You wouldn't even need them to hear instructions for the suicide button, you could have a sign.
uh yeah. This is why we should execute people who we deem unable to be rehabilitated into society. That said, I don't trust the current system to pass judgment on anyone. The whole thing is rotten and needs to be refreshed.
And that's where things go wrong. Without universal agreement, "we" will always be subjective, and it gets really fucking scary with those statements when you absolutely know your enemies would justify themselves with the exact same notion against you.
We have people who are serving life sentences in prison. That is functionally deeming someone unfit to rejoin society. This kind of judgment is already being passed on people, we just don't have the balls to be humane and kill them.
I readily give you your point that people would abuse this to persecute their enemies. The fact that our society is so divided takes many solutions off the table, as they only function in a more cohesive society. Instead we're just gonna careen down the road to anarchy and/or tyranny because the populace is divided against itself.
The only people that get away with executions are leftists and leftist governments.
That's why you should control the inputs, rather than trying to sort the outputs. Garbage in, garbage out.
Exactly. the laws suck ass, we need them changed. the guy was an irresponsible asshole but it shouldn't have been illegal to posess a gun to begin with.
Laws always take away liberty. That's their point.
The people are the problem, not the law.
It just requires a very clear standard and visible enforcement.
We used to have that.
If people know that the punishment for murder, rape, kidnapping, aggravated assault with a weapon, or armed robbery is to be immediately marched out after conviction and strung up in the town square...
People will generally do a good job of steering clear of those behaviors.
Ambiguous enforcement begets dubious behavior. Make stark examples, and the occasions when you need to make them will be rare (eventually).
The thing is, our communities used to be the visible enforcement, and the visible standard. Much like everything else, we outsourced it. When your neighbor is also an enforcer of social norms, you're less likely to squirt a cream filled dildo in his face.
We are very community based animals. The most destructive forces are those that destroy the foundations of our society. The family is the bedrock, but the people we interact with are the cornerstones. Modern society has devastated both.
That kind of thinking legitimizes the leftist perception of an oppressive, bigoted culture.
The Saxons used to appoint their law enforcers (shire reeves, origin of sheriff) by elevating able commoners held in esteem by the community and given the assent of the landholding elite. But when the Normans appeared on the scene they found this system to be far too corrupt and inconsistent. So their addition was the bailiff, which was controlled centrally by the crown, trained and held to a consistent standard, and largely resembles the court we have today.
The Britons initially hated this system for being different but by the reign of King John the stabilizing effect of having a reliable judiciary free of local influence (either the whims of barons or the seething common mob) was generally regarded as a very good thing to be preserved and improved.
Law is an artificial thing, something that we have invented wholecloth. I think to a degree it HAS to be controlled centrally in order for it to actually be impartial, otherwise every community will enforce its own much narrower view of what is acceptable.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW MORE?
My solution is both more and less cruel but not as permanent so in case further evidence is discovered the individual can be brought back and compensated
No, I'd class this approach as evil. You're just maiming and torturing someone.
this reads like someone's fetish novel wtf
Ok buffalo bill
Could you re-draft this? I'm seeing several problems.
You've taught all felons marketable skills for working with the blind. Is that the intent..? Put all ex-felons to work as aides for the blind?
I think this would be more expensive than our current silly system. Even substituting out all four surgeries, I think the cost would still be too high.
What happens if they're already blind?
If the last thing they hear a human say is the suicide instructions, how are the medical exams handled without communication? Logistically, how do you learn braille without help? Both of those things seem much harder if you can't hear any speech.
heh I don't know how much I want to elaborate but since it sounds psycho enough as it is but since we are running with it...
not all felons, only as a substitute for capital punishment and life without parole - so only the ones who are found to be wrongly convicted if new evidence is discovered would be issues with re-integration. For those I assume there would be a compensation that would be substantial enough that they really didn't have a motivation to re-offend unless they were truly unable to control themselves
Is there a high number of blind people committing capital crimes? the blindness and solitary isn't meant as punishment, though it will suck, but to ensure that the convicted was highly unlikely to cause problems during their sentence.
For medical exams and dental work they would be conducted the same way vets examine animals that are potentially dangerous.
How do they learn braille without help? They have a lot of time on their hands, verbal insturctions could be part of their media library along with education tools.
Ah, a replacement for sentences where re-integration is not planned. At the least, it sounds frightening and that would be a potential motivator to dissuade some criminals. I do like the idea of seperating such offenders from the ones that can rejoin society, as a prisoner with no hopes is likely to make everyone around them miserable on purpose.
I doubt it, but I wouldn't be surprised at a newly blind guy getting up to something crazy. Maybe not on a comic book villain level, but I imagine it being a traumatic change that could distort a person's values. Most guys wouldn't have henchmen available to facilitate crazy plans.
I was assuming the blindness to be meant as punishment. Why bother with it at all? Just putting them in isolation sounds sufficient. Give them light and normal books, take away the Alexa. Drug their food when you want to give them a checkup. You wouldn't even need them to hear instructions for the suicide button, you could have a sign.