|
| Thread: British Fritzl (!) jailed |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
posted November 26, 2008 10:19 PM |
|
|
Quote:
although a very different one than the one that made him murder!
Not quite. In fact I think it's closing to it with each revenge you have -- he might do it for revenge too (but not killing revenge, maybe because for example his 'victim' stole from him or something).
So since I know a few stuff about that I'd guess you become more like him with each take... like drugs you know? 
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted November 26, 2008 10:26 PM |
|
|
Quote:
There is nothing that can be done to truly cancel that debt. However, it is desirable to get as close to repaying it as possible (if that's what the victim and/or his family wants). The closest thing he can do is to be killed. He took a life. Therefore a life is taken from him.
I agree with this point. Good point Mvass. 
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 26, 2008 10:28 PM |
|
|
Yes, perhaps I get emotional benefits from revenge. So? What's wrong with that? I get emotional harm when people damage me, so why should I not get emotional benefits if I harm them (to an equal or lesser extent, of course) in return? (Assuming that it's nothing that merits the attention of the law, of course.)
Would you like being stolen from? Then don't steal. Would you like to get killed? Then don't kill.
Quote:
he might do it for revenge too (but not killing revenge, maybe because for example his 'victim' stole from him or something)
Thus, he did wrong because the punishment he inflicted was greater than the thing that he's getting revenge for (if it was something real in the first place) and because he was a vigilante.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 26, 2008 10:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Thus, he did wrong because the punishment he inflicted was greater than the thing that he's getting revenge for (if it was something real in the first place) and because he was a vigilante.
I wasn't talking if he did wrong or not. I was talking if he had the same mentality as you. And it's pretty close (I mean revenge)
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 26, 2008 10:47 PM |
|
|
But it is the action, not the mentality, that ultimately matters. (And here we go into a debate about utilitarianism vs. deontology).
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
doomnezeu
Supreme Hero
Miaumiaumiau
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 01:52 AM |
|
|
Quote:
But it is the action, not the mentality, that ultimately matters.
I beg to differ. They are SO linked together.
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 02:02 AM |
|
|
Often, but not always. In the case that you're referring to, they aren't.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 08:32 AM |
|
|
Quote:
There is nothing that can be done to truly cancel that debt. However, it is desirable to get as close to repaying it as possible (if that's what the victim and/or his family wants). The closest thing he can do is to be killed. He took a life. Therefore a life is taken from him...
I know that if I had a daughter and she was killed, I'd want the guy dead. It's an emotional benefit (although a very different one than the one that made him murder! [assuming that an emotional benefit is what made him murder]).
First thing is, the bold print to say is just folly. All sentences that begin with IF I HAD (WAS) are plain stupid to bring up in a discussion: If I had only a week to live, If I was living in some slum in Kalkutta, If I was one of 99 wives in some Arabian harem, you should just KNOW that you NEVER know except when it is reality. I don't think this is debatable. While everyone may imagine how it was if they had a burger now on their plate (you was in the situation already), the more massive things that may happen in life and haven't happened to you just yet look quite different from the safety of idle wondering than when you are actually in the situation with no way out except living (or dying) with it. The plain truth is you just don't know what you were doing if you had a daughter and that daughter was raped and killed by someone. Killing the guy wouldn't bring your daughter back, leaving you with nothing but emptyness.
As a note, if you read the actual article, in this case, if somehow directly affected, it would seem to me you had a couple of reasons to be pissed about the actions of the police and the authorities as well - in fact, in this case it's rather likely, that if you kill the evildoer THAT is what would be left: a feeling of anger for police, authorities and probably society as a whole since they did nothing to stop it, even though it seems there has been opportunity.
Secondly. Of course you cannot truly cancel the debt. First thing to realize is that no moral debt will ever be cancelled out fully. Every violation leaves scars. If someone breaks into your house and steals something, even if the stolen goods are brought back, there was stolen a bit more which is the integrity of your home. No amount of additional money can make up for that fundamental loss. The more drastic the criminal action was, the more drastic are the consequences and the losses beside the obvious
If a daughter is essentially held prisoner by her own father and has been raped for 30 years, bearing several children, there doesn't seem to be any way to make up for that, no matter what and no matter how.
HOWEVER, in this situation the evildoer leaves society the burden of his doings, in this case two abused women and 7 children, possibly a lot more, and society now has the task to somehow take care of these people and try to make sure that his doings don't result in more harm, later. Since this should have highest priority, the fate of the evildoer should depend on what would be best for the victims. Moreover, to take care of those people will COST society a lot of money and professional skill - it would be in the duty of the evildoer to raise as much funds as possible somehow which is quite difficult when he is dead.
Helping society to understand why he was doing what he did, what made him develop to the un-human he became, with the aim to identify the necessary conditions for such a development in order to prevent them from developing in the future, might be one way to make up for the debt. Lab-rat is another one, donator as well. I'm sure there are many more ways.
Additionally, when speaking about the death penalty we have to consider the fact that people have been killed who were innocent. Imagine the debt SOCIETY ows all those people! Worse, killing the wrong man has left the right man still on the loose, failing the victims as well.
That debt would have to be made up for as well, giving society a task, imo, to make sure such things just don't happen.
|
|
VokialBG
Honorable
Legendary Hero
First in line
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 08:49 AM |
|
Edited by VokialBG at 08:50, 27 Nov 2008.
|
If we are talking for the best penalty... hang him, it is free...
Or even better - castrate him like a dog! (Isn't this the best solution?)
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 09:01 AM |
|
|
What would THAT accomplish?
Edit: Sometimes I think that this obsession to PUNISH an evildoer, to teach him, to burn the evil out, is just an inability to care for what really matters: grief about the victims and the mountain of a task to help them - which is often disregarded. It seems all so important to punish the evildoer that the victims seem to become irrelevant beside it.
That looks just wrong, doesn't it?
If you kill an evildoer, punish him, castrate him, whatever, the victims are STILL there, demanding attention, demanding from society to help them, just by being there. However, society would like to do away with it, I suppose: eradicate the evildoer from the face of the Earth and be done with it, forget it, bury it, draw a line.
That doesn't work, though.
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 09:20 AM |
|
|
Just execute him and be done with it. There is no redeeming a man like that. Hell, calling him a man is a stretch.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 09:25 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Just execute him and be done with it.
Didn't I know it?
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 09:26 AM |
|
|
What? That I'd rather terminate those who rape, murder, and are otherwise a threat to society than waste money trying to rehabilitate them?
You want people to give you one good reason not to kill him, yet can you give me a good reason to keep him alive, Joker?
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 09:38 AM |
|
|
Because no one gets happier if he is executed etc?
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 09:41 AM |
|
|
I wonder about this solution:
In cases of heavy crimes such as murder, rape, etc, the guilty person can be sentenced to "Being thrown at the mercy of the victims", who can choose any kind of punishment they can see fit.
But I would reason there should none the less be a minimum. There ARE people who are too soft and would forgive the most vilest of men, and there ARE people who are simply too harsh that they don't even fit in a civilized society. How do you deal with those? It's not an easy subject.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 09:47 AM |
|
|
Quote:
What? That I'd rather terminate those who rape, murder, and are otherwise a threat to society than waste money trying to rehabilitate them?
That you want "to be done with it". I edited the post before, using exactly that phrase. No matter what you do to him, you ARE NOT done with it, though, since there are the victims to be taken care of.
Quote:
You want people to give you one good reason not to kill him, yet can you give me a good reason to keep him alive, Joker?
Of course I can. If you kill him you rob the victims one way to get over it - asking for the why, trying to understand, giving the victims some hold over the evildoer, so that they can come to terms with it . Because coming to terms with it they must one way or another, or do you believe they will just start a new life and be happy with it?
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 09:50 AM |
|
|
I think it would be very hard for the victim of a rape such as this to be able to confront the man that did it to them. If you had been raped for many many years, and abused and all this other horrible stuff, would you want to see the man that did it to you and ask him why? I know for a fact that I would want nothing to do with the man once he is taken away.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 10:23 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I think it would be very hard for the victim of a rape such as this to be able to confront the man that did it to them. If you had been raped for many many years, and abused and all this other horrible stuff, would you want to see the man that did it to you and ask him why? I know for a fact that I would want nothing to do with the man once he is taken away.
That is the second time today, that someone claims to know for a fact what he would do, IF..., with the IF involving something completely unimaginable.
Shouldn't you leave that to those that actually have been a victim and the experts for that kind of thing, the psychologists and therapists necessary to get this done? I mean, OF COURSE it would be very hard for them - what wouldn't after such a time?
But the point is, that obviously the mental rehabilitation of THE VICTIMS should have priority, not the punishment of the evildoer, which makes punishment a variable dependant on what is good for the victims.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 04:25 PM |
|
|
Quote:
That is the second time today, that someone claims to know for a fact what he would do, IF..., with the IF involving something completely unimaginable.
Actually it's pretty funny because most 'benevolent' people actually lose their altruistic attitude after something bad happens to them (e.g. someone killed the benevolent person's daughter/son/relative/someone you love) - but they sure like to talk from 'behind the scene' before like how we should be 'kind' to the evildoers.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 04:39 PM |
|
|
I am not benevolent, in case you mean me.
I HAVE a daughter. If someone killed her, do you think I'd feel better if her killer was executed? "Yeah, well, my daughter is dead, but at least they burned her killer." Great.
|
| |
|
|
