First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply Oh Canada...
27179 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

MysticGon wrote:

Sure, I know my sibling wouldn't kill my parents out of pure malice. I know it's not the same as a gang member ordering a hit on their rival and his family. But the result is the same. A person ends up dead as the result of another person's intentional actions. [...]


You understand it's not the same but you believe they should be weighed the same? Do you think the establishing of malicious intent is so clear cut as to be simply black-and-white?



28146 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/17 , edited 2/12/17

PrinceJudar wrote:


MysticGon wrote:

Sure, I know my sibling wouldn't kill my parents out of pure malice. I know it's not the same as a gang member ordering a hit on their rival and his family. But the result is the same. A person ends up dead as the result of another person's intentional actions. [...]


You understand it's not the same but you believe they should be weighed the same? Do you think the establishing of malicious intent is so clear cut as to be simply black-and-white?





Of course not. You have passion killings like if you found your wife getting her chimney swept but another man. Or if your neighbor was molesting your child and so on. You have to establish why that person killed and use evidence to do it. But I believe even those deserve life. To refer back to your words, we don't want there to be vigilantes. The law is there for a reason.
15090 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

MysticGon wrote:
Yeah not to get too hung up on my analogy but yeah there are stringent rules sex offenders. They are heavily enforced by the populace and courts alike. The sex offender registry, approved sections where they can live away from areas frequented by kids. Random drop ins by P.O.s and scheduled check ins. Electronic tracking for the the worst offenders. We live in the 21st century.


Yeah, but there is obviously a line. We take those measures to ensure we give people the rights that they deserve (and yes, even criminals deserve rights). There is always going to be some sacrifice of personal safety for rights and people will disagree where exactly that line is.

To bring it back to the case from the OP, we have an individual who has went through the steps. They have gone to trial, they have went through probation and they have been cleared as rehabilitated. I think you could certainly argue for some heavier degree of monitoring, but to say such an individual deserves to spend the rest of their life in jail (or some psychiatric equivalent) seems to me to be acting at the extreme end of the spectrum. I don't believe we would see any significant public health gains from such a system while also inflating our prison systems and the costs passed down to the taxpayers in addition to taking away the lives of thousands of people who the system believes are rehabilitated. Yes, there is some twinge of "injustice" felt in not enforcing Hammurabi's code, but I think a forgiving society is much more ideal, both in societal outcomes (our treatment of criminals and mental health and prisoners) and in the other objective factors such as costs and prison populations.
25738 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Offline
Posted 2/12/17
Right, letting people out of jail because the murder was probably just a one-time thing under special circumstances involving a disquieted mind. Yeah, so's killing the judge of that case. Injustice like that is enough to make anyone lose their head.

What our society really needs to do is improve prison conditions, improve speed and effectiveness of rehabilitation, and help them get jobs and integrate back into society afterward. It would be the humane thing to do, rather than ruin their lives over that one little mistake of killing someone. Everyone should be able to make a mistake like that once in their lifetime (maybe twice).

People really think like that. Can you believe it? Maybe even some people in this thread, who were nodding as they read the above paragraph! Wow. The kind of people who probably say becoming sane = release from prison, but becoming insane is fine because there's no significant link between mental illness and crime rate.

Not trying to offend anyone, but it's pretty obvious that a lot of people are bending way too far backwards to show sympathy to folks with mental health issues. Just give them the same humane treatment as anyone else, please, which might be life in prison in some cases.
15090 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

Kavalion wrote:

Right, letting people out of jail because the murder was probably just a one-time thing under special circumstances involving a disquieted mind. Yeah, so's killing the judge of that case. Injustice like that is enough to make anyone lose their head.

What our society really needs to do is improve prison conditions, improve speed and effectiveness of rehabilitation, and help them get jobs and integrate back into society afterward. It would be the humane thing to do, rather than ruin their lives over that one little mistake of killing someone. Everyone should be able to make a mistake like that once in their lifetime (maybe twice).

People really think like that. Can you believe it? Maybe even some people in this thread, who were nodding as they read the above paragraph! Wow. The kind of people who probably say becoming sane = release from prison, but becoming insane is fine because there's no significant link between mental illness and crime rate.

Not trying to offend anyone, but it's pretty obvious that a lot of people are bending way too far backwards to show sympathy to folks with mental health issues. Just give them the same humane treatment as anyone else, please, which might be life in prison in some cases.


If you want to pick a fight, just quote me bruh
30098 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 2/12/17
lmao
17710 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

sundin13 wrote:


FlyinDumpling wrote:
I'm all for rehabilitation, but the last line really bothered me. What exactly will a person like this be rehabilitated for? consciously making a bad decision?
I mean, thats what rehabilitation is for. Finding the root cause of issues, providing therapy, talking with people and trying to help them develop a more healthy worldview. Obviously neither I nor you have any intimate knowledge of this individual so it wouldn't be possible to say for certain one way or the other, but in theory nothing makes it impossible to rehabilitate such a person.
Well theoretically, every person who commits a crime can be sent to a psychiatric ward, but not all people who commit crimes are mentally insane.
27179 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 2/12/17 , edited 2/12/17

Kavalion wrote:

Right, letting people out of jail because the murder was probably just a one-time thing under special circumstances involving a disquieted mind. Yeah, so's killing the judge of that case. Injustice like that is enough to make anyone lose their head.

What our society really needs to do is improve prison conditions, improve speed and effectiveness of rehabilitation, and help them get jobs and integrate back into society afterward. It would be the humane thing to do, rather than ruin their lives over that one little mistake of killing someone. Everyone should be able to make a mistake like that once in their lifetime (maybe twice).

People really think like that. Can you believe it? Maybe even some people in this thread, who were nodding as they read the above paragraph! Wow. The kind of people who probably say becoming sane = release from prison, but becoming insane is fine because there's no significant link between mental illness and crime rate.

Not trying to offend anyone, but it's pretty obvious that a lot of people are bending way too far backwards to show sympathy to folks with mental health issues. Just give them the same humane treatment as anyone else, please, which might be life in prison in some cases.


A psychotic episode is a little bit different from simple a mental health issue--it's incredibly severe. Killing is no small negligence, but it's somewhat similar to situations where self defense is imperfect (in that the person felt it was warranted although it was not reasonable) or occasions where it occurs in the heat of the moment without any prior intent (where lack of control may be compromised--ex. adequate provocation). Not every person that kills another will be sentenced to a life in prison, but that doesn't undermine the severity of the situation. The Criminal Justice System attempts to weigh the factors at hand--including intent, state of mind, details of the scene and determines to what degree the person was accountable for the result (not that the result is less in degree).

However, the way it operates is that such a person is not released on the basis of recollected sanity, but instead if there is a criminal threat posed towards the public. This entails that it has been determined that his state of mental health no longer poses a significant risk to the public. Were they too quick to label him safe? Time will be more telling of how rigorous their decision was.

17710 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 2/12/17 , edited 2/12/17

Ryulightorb wrote:

The fact they could make that bad decision means there is something wrong with them being able to identify and fix that something is what you would rehabilitate them for.
Mentally ill people or people who addictions can't make decisions that are fully their own. Something is impeding their free will and they get rehabilitated to restore that. Rehabilitation justice doesn't have to assume all criminals need therapy, and it shouldn't. You don't need to be mentally ill to rob a bank, or hold people as hostages. We still live in a world where there are bad people who will do bad things for a motive.
23871 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

MysticGon wrote:


PrinceJudar wrote:


MysticGon wrote:

Sure, I know my sibling wouldn't kill my parents out of pure malice. I know it's not the same as a gang member ordering a hit on their rival and his family. But the result is the same. A person ends up dead as the result of another person's intentional actions. [...]


You understand it's not the same but you believe they should be weighed the same? Do you think the establishing of malicious intent is so clear cut as to be simply black-and-white?





Of course not. You have passion killings like if you found your wife getting her chimney swept but another man. Or if your neighbor was molesting your child and so on. You have to establish why that person killed and use evidence to do it. But I believe even those deserve life. To refer back to your words, we don't want there to be vigilantes. The law is there for a reason.


What a dismal, merciless view. I honestly do not know how I can respond.
21831 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
53 / M / In
Online
Posted 2/12/17


you don't say much but speak volumes

*clapping*
29543 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

FlyinDumpling wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

The fact they could make that bad decision means there is something wrong with them being able to identify and fix that something is what you would rehabilitate them for.
Mentally ill people or people who addictions can't make decisions that are fully their own. Something is impeding their free will and they get rehabilitated to restore that. Rehabilitation justice doesn't have to assume all criminals need therapy, and it shouldn't. You don't need to be mentally ill to rob a bank, or hold people as hostages. We still live in a world where there are bad people who will do bad things for a motive.


Free will is a concept people's choices are all calculated chemically in the brain one chemical reaction off or wrong meds etc can lead to a normal person murdering someone.

We like to believe we have complete free will but most of our choices are made for us already unconsciously.
I know I was on the wrong medication once and nearly killed my mother.

Even someone who has killed for a motive can be fixed and rehabilitated
28146 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/17 , edited 2/12/17

sundin13 wrote:


MysticGon wrote:
Yeah not to get too hung up on my analogy but yeah there are stringent rules sex offenders. They are heavily enforced by the populace and courts alike. The sex offender registry, approved sections where they can live away from areas frequented by kids. Random drop ins by P.O.s and scheduled check ins. Electronic tracking for the the worst offenders. We live in the 21st century.


Yeah, but there is obviously a line. We take those measures to ensure we give people the rights that they deserve (and yes, even criminals deserve rights). There is always going to be some sacrifice of personal safety for rights and people will disagree where exactly that line is.

To bring it back to the case from the OP, we have an individual who has went through the steps. They have gone to trial, they have went through probation and they have been cleared as rehabilitated. I think you could certainly argue for some heavier degree of monitoring, but to say such an individual deserves to spend the rest of their life in jail (or some psychiatric equivalent) seems to me to be acting at the extreme end of the spectrum. I don't believe we would see any significant public health gains from such a system while also inflating our prison systems and the costs passed down to the taxpayers in addition to taking away the lives of thousands of people who the system believes are rehabilitated. Yes, there is some twinge of "injustice" felt in not enforcing Hammurabi's code, but I think a forgiving society is much more ideal, both in societal outcomes (our treatment of criminals and mental health and prisoners) and in the other objective factors such as costs and prison populations.


And that's exactly what we are doing right now. In a perfectly civilized way. Thank you.

As far as your points go I'll agree to disagree. Not punishing drug users with jail and using the space to seclude violent murderers is something I would gladly pay for as a taxpayer.



25738 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

PrinceJudar wrote:
This entails that it has been determined that his state of mental health no longer poses a significant risk to the public. Were they too quick to label him safe?


Why does it matter? He's being punished, not rated on his likeliness of committing crime. A lot of murderers no longer need/want to kill immediately afterward.
33 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / Canada
Offline
Posted 2/12/17

Kavalion wrote:


PrinceJudar wrote:
This entails that it has been determined that his state of mental health no longer poses a significant risk to the public. Were they too quick to label him safe?


Why does it matter? He's being punished, not rated on his likeliness of committing crime. A lot of murderers no longer need/want to kill immediately afterward.


You seem to be operating on a fundamental misunderstanding as to what the criminal justice system is intended to do. If rehabilitation is possible, it is, and should be, the number one priority.

It's not the bad-boy corner, where you go when you do a bad thing and your punishment is indiscriminate. It's a complicated system that has the ultimate goal keeping citizens safe.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.