Should Human Rights be a privilege? - General

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;32773347]or try to help those people[/QUOTE] I've already said I don't support helping those people because they don't deserve it. If they seek help before hand because they feel they're going to commit murder then by all means. After they do it though, they don't deserve anything but the end of their life because they chose it.

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32773318]Of innocents? No, not at all. Of people that are convicted murderers with no doubt of their guilt? Yes, if you were trying to make it more affordable to execute them; what does it matter if they are executed in mass or individually. (Assuming you were to agree with my opinion that murderers of innocents should be executed).[/QUOTE] wow well that's pretty awful of you you're a pretty awful person.

[QUOTE=Kalibos;32773407]wow well that's pretty awful of you you're a pretty awful person.[/QUOTE] Why would you attack me just because I support the execution of murderers that torture and kill innocent people? It sounds a lot more like I'm trying to protect everyone that is innocent. Doesn't sound too awful to me. You kill someone you lose any privilege to humane treatment, so I don't care if they're executed in mass by a row of rifles or whatever method you prefer. They brought it upon themselves, they chose it. I'm appalled you would want to live with people like that in our world and give them a chance to do it again, despite any 32% reduction rate in recidivism from therapy. Execution=100% reduction in recidivism among murderers.

you support mass executions lol that's pretty awful no matter how you spin it

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32773394]I've already said I don't support helping those people because they don't deserve it. If they seek help before hand because they feel they're going to commit murder then by all means. After they do it though, they don't deserve anything but the end of their life because they chose it.[/QUOTE] They deserve life, killing more is pointless if those can be helped

[QUOTE=Kalibos;32773459]you support mass executions lol that's pretty awful no matter how you spin it[/QUOTE] So it sounds better that I support individual execution? I don't see how it sounds any better. In mass execution at least they'd be going out with other people maybe they could form support groups out on the field who knows. They might prefer to be put down with a buddy, but in reality who cares; they're going to be put to death and they don't deserve a say in it. Go ahead and think I'm awful for helping protect society, but that's a bit weird of you. [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=SIRIUS;32773482]They deserve life, killing more is pointless if those can be helped[/QUOTE] That's your opinion. I don't think they deserve life and I don't see it as pointless especially when you look at the information I posted earlier about how many of those criminals commit a similar crime after let out.

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32773497]So it sounds better that I support individual execution? I don't see how it sounds any better. In mass execution at least they'd be going out with other people maybe they could form support groups out on the field who knows. They might prefer to be put down with a buddy, but in reality who cares; they're going to be put to death and they don't deserve a say in it. Go ahead and think I'm awful for helping protect society, but that's a bit weird of you. [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] That's your opinion. I don't think they deserve life and I don't see it as pointless especially when you look at the information I posted earlier about how many of those criminals commit a similar crime after let out.[/QUOTE] THATS WHY YOU HELP THEM!

individual execution is also fucked up but it's more "mainstream" as far as putting people to death goes. you're pretty far out there. reading your posts I am continuously widening my eyes in disbelief as to how you can think the way you do. your head is an interesting place.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;32773529]THATS WHY YOU HELP THEM![/QUOTE] Someone already posted statistics of when they are helped and it reduces the recidivism by about 32% IIRC. So you can take 32% reduction in recidivism or 100%. Clearly helping them does not work for even the majority of them so it does more good to execute them all, including those that could have been helped (even though they don't deserve it) than let the other 68% go out and commit more murders that could be even more grotesque than the first. [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Kalibos;32773548]individual execution is also fucked up but it's more "mainstream" as far as putting people to death goes. you're pretty far out there. reading your posts I am continuously widening my eyes in disbelief as to how you can think the way you do. your head is an interesting place.[/QUOTE] Well, I'm glad I can provide you with interesting new outlooks that I think you are trying to say you haven't heard before. However, I think you are seeing yourself by this statement that while mass executions does sound worse, you can see that it kind of isn't, it just sounds like it is because mass murders brings connotations of innocents being murdered. In reality though, it doesn't change the fact that the murderer would be executed, just that another murderer would be next to him(/her, lets be fair here women kill too).

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32773550]Someone already posted statistics of when they are helped and it reduces the recidivism by about 32% IIRC. So you can take 32% reduction in recidivism or 100%. Clearly helping them does not work for even the majority of them so it does more good to execute them all, including those that could have been helped (even though they don't deserve it) than let the other 68% go out and commit more murders that could be even more grotesque than the first. [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] Well, I'm glad I can provide you with interesting new outlooks that I think you are trying to say you haven't heard before. However, I think you are seeing yourself by this statement that while mass executions does sound worse, you can see that it kind of isn't, it just sounds like it is because mass murders brings connotations of innocents being murdered.[/QUOTE] yes and i'm sure those "helping" do a GREAT job too [editline]14th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. America;32773550]Someone already posted statistics of when they are helped and it reduces the recidivism by about 32% IIRC. So you can take 32% reduction in recidivism or 100%. Clearly helping them does not work for even the majority of them so it does more good to execute them all, including those that could have been helped (even though they don't deserve it) than let the other 68% go out and commit more murders that could be even more grotesque than the first. [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] Well, I'm glad I can provide you with interesting new outlooks that I think you are trying to say you haven't heard before. However, I think you are seeing yourself by this statement that while mass executions does sound worse, you can see that it kind of isn't, it just sounds like it is because mass murders brings connotations of innocents being murdered. In reality though, it doesn't change the fact that the murderer would be executed, just that another murderer would be next to him(/her, lets be fair here women kill too).[/QUOTE] we are all innocent, none of us are

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;32773585]yes and i'm sure those "helping" do a GREAT job too[/QUOTE] I'm sure they do, a 32% reduction in recidivism is a pretty big number to reduce repeat crimes. Just not as big as 100%. [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=SIRIUS;32773585] we are all innocent, none of us are[/QUOTE] Huh?

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32773598]I'm sure they do, a 32% reduction in recidivism is a pretty big number to reduce repeat crimes. Just not as big as 100%.[/QUOTE] people have reasons for what they do, if they were to REALLY help, if they were to FIX problems it would be 100% the problem is you are more concerned about numbers than whether you are killing or not [editline]14th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. America;32773598]I'm sure they do, a 32% reduction in recidivism is a pretty big number to reduce repeat crimes. Just not as big as 100%. [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] Huh?[/QUOTE]what?

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;32773635]people have reasons for what they do, if they were to REALLY help, if they were to FIX problems it would be 100% the problem is you are more concerned about numbers than whether you are killing or not[/QUOTE] Yeah and some of those reasons are that they wanted to kill someone because they find pleasure in it or they wanted a feeling of superiority by torturing some poor kid and taking their life. I'm sure you'd really love to "fix" that poor person because its sad they need something like that.. The fix is to execute them, or remove parts of their brain to stop those needs but then they're vegetables and you might as well have executed them. You have too much faith in patting people on the back and saying it's ok. We can't even stop manic depression through therapy or eating disorders with a 100% success rate and you think we can help people that want to inflict pain more efficiently? [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=SIRIUS;32773635] what?[/QUOTE] I didn't know what you were trying to say by "we are all innocent, none of us are". It makes no sense.

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32773692]Yeah and some of those reasons are that they wanted to kill someone because they find pleasure in it or they wanted a feeling of superiority by torturing some poor kid and taking their life. I'm sure you'd really love to "fix" that poor person because its sad they need something like that.. The fix is to execute them, or remove parts of their brain to stop those needs but then they're vegetables and you might as well have executed them. You have too much faith in patting people on the back and saying it's ok. We can't even stop manic depression through therapy or eating disorders with a 100% success rate and you think we can help people that want to inflict pain more efficiently? [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] I didn't know what you were trying to say by "we are all innocent, none of us are". It makes no sense.[/QUOTE] finding why they need those feelings, finding what gives them that immense lack, and fix it... it would change there lives

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;32773726]finding why they need those feelings, finding what gives them that immense lack, and fix it... it would change there lives[/QUOTE] Yeah, let's change their lives they completely earned help by murdering people. Let's also turn a blind eye that they killed someone just because "oh, they weren't in their right mind how sad". We have outreach programs to help people with unstable minds already, but once they've committed a murder they need to just be executed, they don't deserve to be helped or given a chance. They took any chance from someone else that was innocent and you seem to think that's something ok that you can just work past, no biggie.

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32773766]Yeah, let's change their lives they completely earned help by murdering people. Let's also turn a blind eye that they killed someone just because "oh, they weren't in their right mind how sad". We have outreach programs to help people with unstable minds already, but once they've committed a murder they need to just be executed, they don't deserve to be helped or given a chance. They took any chance from someone else that was innocent and you seem to think that's something ok that you can just work past, no biggie.[/QUOTE] turning a blind eye is killing those who killed, it doesn't solve the problems that created the circumstance and it doesn't help the family for more than a day or so. fixing the problem at it's source to not only help the guilty but prevent that situation is true humanity. p.s. they earned it by being born you arrogant sod.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;32773801]turning a blind eye is killing those who killed, it doesn't solve the problems that created the circumstance and it doesn't help the family for more than a day or so. fixing the problem at it's source to not only help the guilty but prevent that situation is true humanity. p.s. they earned it by being born you arrogant sod.[/QUOTE] Actually no, killing them is acknowledging what they did. Turning a blind eye is doing what you're saying by not punishing them and just helping them instead so they benefit entirely from killing an innocent. It doesn't matter what caused the circumstance, the fact is you can punish them for what they did and remove any possibility of any other future situation causing them to do the same thing. I don't see how it would only help the family for a day or so, considering their family member will be dead forever and can always think back that the murderer was aptly punished for what they have to go through. They didn't earn anything by being born, that implies it's a right; which it is not. They deserve help if they seek it before killing someone, not after. True humanity is protecting the innocent, not babying the guilty. Also, I haven't called you a pansy tree hugger for your opinion so I don't see why I'm an arrogant sod because I don't want to let killers back into our society and hope they've changed.

Actually the risk of recidivism in murderers is very low indeed. [IMG]http://i52.tinypic.com/123qtxv.png[/IMG] (note: all homicide offenders). Only 7.2% actually commuted another violent offence and believe it or not [b]NONE[/b] of them committed a new homicide. [url=http://hsx.sagepub.com.ezproxy.waikato.ac.nz/content/15/2/154.full.pdf]Source.[/url] In fact the kind of people you describe are [i]incredibly rare[/i], according to the [url=http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder/serial-murder-1#one]FBI[/url] less than 1% of murders are due to serial killers. The simple fact is most murderers will not re-offend.

[QUOTE=flyschy;32773972]Actually the risk of recidivism in murderers is very low indeed. [IMG]http://i52.tinypic.com/123qtxv.png[/IMG] (note: all homicide offenders). Only 7.2% actually commuted another violent offence and believe it or not [b]NONE[/b] of them committed a new homicide. [url=http://hsx.sagepub.com.ezproxy.waikato.ac.nz/content/15/2/154.full.pdf]Source.[/url] In fact the kind of people you describe are [i]incredibly rare[/i], according to the [url=http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder/serial-murder-1#one]FBI[/url] less than 1% of murders are due to serial killers. The simple fact is most murderers will not re-offend.[/QUOTE] We must have conflicting evidence then as my source shows 26% recidivism in manslaughter and 35% in murder, as well as 56% in assault that results in a felony (generally implying that there was sever damage not just a slap). [url]http://www.sgc.wa.gov/PUBS/Recidivism/Adult_Recidivism_Cy04.pdf[/url] So while the rates are not ludicrously high in recidivism (there is also an upward trend in recidivism from 2000-2004, the date of this study) the fact of the matter is that there is still recidivism of these crimes. However, my opinion is not only based on recidivism. If there was a 0% recidivism rate I would stand by opinion and still opt for the execution to equal out their actions and punish them as they deserve. Also, serial killers are people that kill specific types of people. I'm just talking about killers in general.

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32774134]We must have conflicting evidence then as my source shows 26% recidivism in manslaughter and 35% in murder, as well as 56% in assault that results in a felony (generally implying that there was sever damage not just a slap). [url]http://www.sgc.wa.gov/PUBS/Recidivism/Adult_Recidivism_Cy04.pdf[/url] So while the rates are not ludicrously high in recidivism (there is also an upward trend in recidivism from 2000-2004, the date of this study) the fact of the matter is that there is still recidivism of these crimes. However, my opinion is not only based on recidivism. [/QUOTE] Please learn to interpret data properly. From your source. [quote]Murder, robbery and sex offenders were the least likely to have current criminal behavior that was the same type as that committed in the past.[/quote] Only 4% of murder convictions had previously committed murder. [IMG]http://i56.tinypic.com/x4i06s.png[/IMG] So it agrees with what I said. The vast majority of homicides are committed by first time offenders.

[QUOTE=flyschy;32774467]Please learn to interpret data properly. From your source. Only 4% of murder convictions had previously committed murder. [IMG]http://i56.tinypic.com/x4i06s.png[/IMG] So it agrees with what I said. The vast majority of homicides are committed by first time offenders.[/QUOTE] Did you not read what I said? I said the rates were surprisingly low compared to what I thought but that is not the basis for my opinion so, while it doesn't support my opinion in a massive way it doesn't change my argument. Although, even though there are not massive numbers of repeats there still are, which I would like to prevent.

retribution is not an effective form of punishment and does not help fight crime. punishment for crimes is best to rehabilitate, or in cases where rehabilitation is not effective, imprisonment, in order to protect those would be further harmed by that person's actions. punishment for punishment's sake(eye for an eye) degrades our humanity. furthermore i think society goes about crime the entirely wrong way. in solving any problem, [I]preventative[/I] measures are for more effective than [I]reactionary[/I] measures. Work to stop a crime from happening, decreasing the chance of someone wanting to commit a crime, etc. is more effective than punishing an individual after they have done the crime. Human rights are called rights for a reason, and no one should have their's taken away, taking the rights of a human who has killed others, further degrades our humanity. Only lock up killers/terrorists to protect the rest of society.

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32774797]Did you not read what I said? I said the rates were surprisingly low compared to what I thought but that is not the basis for my opinion so, while it doesn't support my opinion in a massive way it doesn't change my argument. Although, even though there are not massive numbers of repeats there still are, which I would like to prevent.[/QUOTE] I read it but I didn't feel like banging my head against a brick wall any further. As already stated by me and others, there is no justification to use the death penalty above the vastly superior option of life imprisonment for that purpose. If you still want to support the dehumanization and state sponsored genocide of prisoners (what you are describing NOT what the death penalty is today) then go ahead. You are clearly beyond reason and blind to the humanity of the people you would condemn to death.

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32773550]Someone already posted statistics of when they are helped and it reduces the recidivism by about 32% IIRC. So you can take 32% reduction in recidivism or 100%. Clearly helping them does not work for even the majority of them so it does more good to execute them all, including those that could have been helped (even though they don't deserve it) than let the other 68% go out and commit more murders that could be even more grotesque than the first.[/QUOTE] Unless you believe the justice system is perfect in determining guilt, any kind of mass execution of those convicted of murder would result in innocent deaths.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32775336]Unless you believe the justice system is perfect in determining guilt, any kind of mass execution of those convicted of murder would result in innocent deaths.[/QUOTE] Shh, Megafan. Don't try to bring logic into it; he's just going to go on about how it's a 'hypothetical debate'. [editline]14th October 2011[/editline] Which apparently means that he gets to decide the parameters of this discussion, and coincidentally rules that anything that is inconvenient to his arguments is 'irrelevant' and 'off topic'.

[QUOTE=Mr. America;32769983]I don't see how you think they deserved their lives, they should have been executed. Your source may say 80-99% of people had good experiences and I'm sure they do, but it's not comparing [b]the amount of satisfaction gained through the equal punishment of the perpetrator.[/b] Life is not inherently good because some people clearly use their lives to harm others. However, life should be given as much potential to be good as possible until it takes life from someone else for no reason. Of course I have things I've regretted and reconciled with, but I didn't murder people. Again, I am deciding why people should feel that way because it's my opinion; not universal law. I am stating what I think, not the law and reality of the world, as there are people like you who show that not everyone feels how I do. I also, obviously, do not think you have a proper view on the subject as shown by our opposing views.[/QUOTE] This shit bugs me. This REALLY bugs me. You act like everyone wants that, wants to spill blood or make the world more violent(Taking a violent person out of the world WITH violence doesn't result in less violence than before). It's fucking sick you assume it's a natural desire to wish death upon people who have done wrong.

Rights and responsibilities. If you can't fill the responsibilities, why should you have the right?

[QUOTE=BestBuyInBRICK;32770357]Yeah because there isn't a fucking way to explain it. It's just how I think. I think sick fucks should be held accountable for their actions. OHH BUT WHY? Because in my opinion it's the right thing. OH BUT WHY?? Yeah you can keep fucking asking that all you want but you aren't going to get any sort of answer you're going to agree with. It's like asking the dirt why it's composed of what it's composed of. Like what are you expecting?[/QUOTE] So you just lack the ability to actually think this through and understand the emotional and "moral" reasons driving this. Cool, and why are we arguing with you then? [editline]14th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=BestBuyInBRICK;32772105]I consider bloodshed of the unjust, just.[/QUOTE] Then let me say, when you have the blood of the unjust on me, tell me if it feels any different than that of a "normal" persons blood. Protip, it won't. [editline]14th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Man Without Hat;32775465]Rights and responsibilities. If you can't fill the responsibilities, why should you have the right?[/QUOTE] I don't recall when I was born saying to anyone that I would fulfill responsibilities. I guess disabled people who can't contribute shouldn't have rights, or hobo's. I mean, shit, it's YOUR definition. [editline]14th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. America;32773497]So it sounds better that I support individual execution? I don't see how it sounds any better. In mass execution at least they'd be going out with other people maybe they could form support groups out on the field who knows. They might prefer to be put down with a buddy, but in reality who cares; they're going to be put to death and they don't deserve a say in it. Go ahead and think I'm awful for helping protect society, but that's a bit weird of you. [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] That's your opinion. I don't think they deserve life and I don't see it as pointless especially when you look at the information I posted earlier about how many of those criminals commit a similar crime after let out.[/QUOTE] How are you helping by killing them, essentially not helping them at all. They ARE part of society. They are people, and not all murderers re-offend(not even most for fucks sakes), not all are proud about what they did, not all are actually "okay" with it. You know how the fuck I know this? Because I know you're just ASSUMING bullshit in order to make this mental gymnastic bullshit work in your head. I grew up around a law firm, my dad, a criminal defense lawyer and a former DA, has met more killers than you could wrap your head around. He knows first hand not all of them, not even a large number of them are "okay" with what they did. It's really fucking stupid of you to assume all murderers have no sympathy or problem with what they did. You're also giving a [b]very[/b] clear message to the rest of society. you're not sending the message "don't kill" by the way. You're sending the message that "it's okay if we do it, but not if you do". Which personally, I'm sure only harms society. [editline]14th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. America;32774797]Did you not read what I said? I said the rates were surprisingly low compared to what I thought but that is not the basis for my opinion so, while it doesn't support my opinion in a massive way it doesn't change my argument. Although, even though there are not massive numbers of repeats there still are, which I would like to prevent.[/QUOTE] In other words "oh, a hole in my argument, let me ignore this." [editline]14th October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. America;32773692]Yeah and some of those reasons are that they wanted to kill someone because they find pleasure in it or they wanted a feeling of superiority by torturing some poor kid and taking their life. I'm sure you'd really love to "fix" that poor person because its sad they need something like that.. The fix is to execute them, or remove parts of their brain to stop those needs but then they're vegetables and you might as well have executed them. You have too much faith in patting people on the back and saying it's ok. We can't even stop manic depression through therapy or eating disorders with a 100% success rate and you think we can help people that want to inflict pain more efficiently? [editline]13th October 2011[/editline] I didn't know what you were trying to say by "we are all innocent, none of us are". It makes no sense.[/QUOTE] This isn't a fix. It's nonsense. You're assuming on every level that every murder is committed for pleasure, which is simply not true and suggests that you think all crime is of a pathological nature, which is absolute horseshit. It's like you're 16 and just found out about this thing that lets you "justify" the whole sale murder of hundreds of thousands of people without considering the effects this might have. I remember being there, I remember that I got a whole shitload of sense smacked into me on this site and others when the real world came kicking.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;32775468]I don't recall when I was born saying to anyone that I would fulfill responsibilities. I guess disabled people who can't contribute shouldn't have rights, or hobo's. [/QUOTE] And since when did I specify what the responsibilities were? Disabled people can fulfil their responsibility to abide by our laws, can't they? [editline]14th October 2011[/editline] You should really think about what you're saying it before you say it.

Mr. America, you seem to think all murderers are psychopaths. This just isn't true. There are plenty of people who kill when they are mentally competent and sane, because of the circumstances they are in. For example: What about a domestic abuse victim who has been beaten for several years, and finally snaps? What about a juvenile who kills a parent who has been abusing the other parent? What about someone who kills their rapist? What about a person who helps their grandparent commit suicide, because euthanasia is not legal? What about a medical practitioner who actively withholds treatment for someone with a terminal illness with their consent? What about a sleep-deprived parent who leaves their baby in the back seat of their car on a hot day, and forgets? What about a juvenile who deals illegal drugs as a source of income for their family giving someone a dodgy pill that kills them? What about a person who accidentally kills someone, perhaps out of negligence, but is not guilty of pre-meditated murder? What about someone who plans the murder of a murderer who, for some reason, has not been convicted by the courts? What about a soldier? Mass murderers and serial killers statistically make up relatively little of all murders, but so much of your argument is dependent on your 'hypothetical situation' of a terrorist who has killed 50 'innocent' people. This situation is fairly unrealistic. On a related note, how innocent do people have to be for their murder to mean something? Can they rape? Murder? Deal drugs? What?