First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Two Thieves Are Arrested for Identical Crimes...
24725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Urban South
Offline
Posted 8/1/13

Wadce wrote:
On topic though, if we shouldn't differentiate penalties based on reason, how come we have so many different degrees of murder? Should someone who killed someone accidentally get the same punishment as someone who calculated out, planned, and executed a murder?

Someone who accidentally killed another person through carelessness is considered less likely to kill again than someone who hunted and murdered another person because they found it fun and exciting. Or at least I think that's the intent behind the gradations of legal consequences for killing others.

Or possibly, people dislike punishing people who resemble themselves, and everyone has occasionally been careless without very bad things happening, but they could have. On the other hand, most people have not experienced being sociopathic murderers, and so are less forgiving towards this kind of killer.

Either way, neither scenario is applicable to the OP, because the OP is about stealing and starvation - very different from manslaughter and homicide, or rape, since you seem to want to discuss it.
24725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Urban South
Offline
Posted 8/1/13

jackodawhacko wrote:
Lesson of the day :: If you're going to do something illegal, don't fxcking get caught. Less you wanna end up like my friend lester over here.

http://blip.tv/matsalleh/punishment-in-iran-453987

NSFW OR FOR THE FAINT OF HEART.

I dunno about this one. I've taken apart a bunch of people and I never got through bone that easily. Usually I had to use a hacksaw or lock cutters. The only way they could have done that so quickly with a knife is if they broke the bone before hand and then cut around it, but the arm wasn't hanging at an odd angle.
210 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
16 / M / Collinsville, Ill...
Offline
Posted 8/1/13 , edited 8/1/13
Well personally I can sympathize with Criminal A, but a crime is a crime. He knew that if he was caught stealing that he'd get punished regardless of the circumstances. So no. He shouldn't get a reduction to his sentence as he was fully aware of what he was doing.
16610 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Offline
Posted 8/1/13
Hahaha, what a question. I think Criminal B should get a lighter sentence, because if he's starving he couldn't have been in his right mind when he decided to steal for himself.
27140 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 8/2/13

mhibicke wrote:

Either way, neither scenario is applicable to the OP, because the OP is about stealing and starvation - very different from manslaughter and homicide, or rape, since you seem to want to discuss it.



Sogno- wrote:

I said they should serve the same time because, regardless of reasons behind the act, stealing is stealing.

What do you think?


The point that I am making is that If stealing is stealing, then the logical conclusion is that killing is killing.

Following this line of thought would lead us to punishing our soldiers who had to kill at war, people who kill in self defense, as well as people who kill by accident (car, sleep, whatever).

The fact is, that. shouldn't. happen. Therefore, my argument is that the two thieves should have different sentences because the circumstances do matter.

For example, Thief A gets community service distributing food to the needy, while Thief B gets jail time.

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.