Should the death penalty be allowed?
- Thread starter Bunraku
- Start date
SentinelOfLight
Banned
Unless I miss my guess, he was joking about the hacking-thing.
david starling
Well-known member
Sentinel, if you watched some of those Carlin videos, what categories do they fall into on your chart of Virtues, Vanities, and Vices? (His Chart is basically Earth/Fire, with Gemini Moon and Leo Asc.)
Last edited:
SentinelOfLight
Banned
My Creed is a structure of conduct, not a scale to measure people by, dude. LOL! (Thin distinction, I know.)
I did, however, watch the skits, and I'd say Carlin was satirizing the general public's vices with very tongue-in-cheek, virtuous intent. I think he was pointing out the fact that our culture has become so dogmatic that it's absurd that we seem to care at all what we subject our children to, in terms of media violence. He was going so overboard it was impossible to take any of it seriously, which was no doubt his intention. Americans are f*cked up, man... We either go way too far in favor of punishing each other for things that need fixing, not punishing, or we puss out anytime somebody has an opinion we don't agree with. There has to be a reconciliation of these two extremes. But I think it's gotta start with the learned few who have a clearer picture of just how big the picture is.
david starling
Well-known member
He definitely was good at lampooning taboos and rituals that most take for granted. Pretty outrageous on the face of it, but with compassionate intent. He was a champion of freedom of thought. Owed a lot to Lenny Bruce, who was destroyed for doing the same thing during an earlier era. It occurs to me that we're all under the penalty of death according to the dominant Paradigm.
Last edited:
SentinelOfLight
Banned
Yes, we are. Laws are irrelevant when you're the one who elects the officials who make and enforce those laws. "The People" are more like "The Fishes in a Barrel".
david starling
Well-known member
wan
Well-known member
I am not sure what you are trying to get at. But to answer your question, no tigers should not be allowed to live among us. We can either put them in zoos or let them roam free in "free" areas such as African savannahs.
Last edited:
The dog is considered to be the man's best friend. But when it viciously attacks someone, do we lock it away or do we put it down?
Last edited:
david starling
Well-known member
wan
Well-known member
I think that with some of them the environment/s is not a factor. Some people are simply born ruthless or without a conscience. It's in their genes.
david starling
Well-known member
wan
Well-known member
Locking them away seems like a waste of our time, resources and man-power. I say just kill them, if the crimes they commit are truly egregious (like murder or rape).
david starling
Well-known member
That will support the culture of violence, ensuring more violent crimes will be committed than if we say "no" to killing.Executions are VERY expensive, btw. And if someone innocent is wrongly convicted of a death penalty crime, it's not possible to release them once they've been executed.
Last edited:
SentinelOfLight
Banned
And they no doubt feel like killing you would lead to their own longevity, as well. That's exactly the point. The right answers are usually not easily arrived at, in situations like this. To say that your life inherently has more value than another's is to invite them to challenge that claim. Your life, quite simply, has no value at all. Neither does theirs. Or mine. Value is an abstract created by human minds, it isn't a concept of nature. And as with any abstract, it is malleable to human perspective. Your perspective is that murder is acceptable under certain circumstances. The people you wish to murder feel exactly the same way, however. You only justify their murder by murdering them back.
Additionally, to compare a human to any baser animal is counter-intuitive, since an animal cannot be reasoned with. You might argue that some humans cannot be reasoned with, but that is entirely untrue. You simply have to have an understanding of how to bypass their biases. It's seldom easily achieved, but it is possible, nevertheless. To take the easy, murderous route is to say that doing the right thing isn't worth your time, which is also something your murderous brethren agree with you on. Your perspective isn't so different from those you demonize.
And as far as prison goes, that is the one thing we can agree on, at least in part; the mega-corporations that own and profit from the prison institutions are very good at scaring people into consenting to allow them to practice their slave-trade. But the fact remains that while there, these people are immersed in violence, paranoia and drug-abuse. There has only recently been a reasonable increase in rehabilitative programs, despite the constant empty promises that they're looking into how to treat inmates so they're less apt to return, and yet the problem isn't taken seriously enough. People like yourself would rather kill anyone whose life has gone to **** or stick them in a hole and forget about it rather than face the fact that callous, unfeeling people like yourself are the root cause of the existence of such criminals in the first place. Are some people born with an overactive medulla oblongata? Of course. But environment plays just as large a part in reducing the person's likelihood to commit a crime as to make them more apt to.
You're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem, dude. Promoting murder doesn't make people less apt to commit murder, it only shows them that there are other angry, inconsiderate people out there, too. If you want more people to become criminals, keep showing them you don't care what they've gone through. If you're lucky, maybe you won't meet someone you could've shown some compassion to in a dark alley while walking your wife and kids home.
Bunraku
Well-known member
Again:
Do you know how the court system works?
Check out a massive list of people who had been proven guilty by the court only for them to had been found innocent after their execution.
And this blanket statement:
So, what if an old lady runs over a child by accident? Does she deserve death? Or if a doctor inadvertently kills someone by failing surgery as an example?
Do you know how the court system works?
Check out a massive list of people who had been proven guilty by the court only for them to had been found innocent after their execution.
And this blanket statement:
So, what if an old lady runs over a child by accident? Does she deserve death? Or if a doctor inadvertently kills someone by failing surgery as an example?
