• Mass-murderer Anders Behring Breivik threatens to hunger-strike himself to death due to stricter pri
    359 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Kyle902;48798984]And here you go dodging the goddamned question again. If thats not it then by the life of us tell us what the fuck you think it accomplishes? Stop dodging the damned question because doing so [B]gives us the impression that the answer is that you simply enjoy the thought of it[/B].[/QUOTE] I will clarify the part in bold. I[B] do not enjoy it, I just believe that it's a necessary thing in extreme cases. [/B]And I've said several times that death penalty will serve as a reminder of what happens when you murder someone and it removes the person from existence. [editline]1st October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48799006]Okay, so you DON'T understand what empathy is then if that's your reply to my statement[/QUOTE] Once again, I don't need to have empathy for murderers in order to be a person with empathy.
Also again, you said "if you take the life of someone, you're not allowed to live/exist with others" which is actually fine, but again, where and why does the torture come in? Because it deters crime? Show me a study? Or do some studying yourself, dig up some murder rates back in the "good ol' days" and compare it to modern days in relation to population differences etc., etc. and see where we stand? Even then, it wouldn't be a certain rule that torturing criminals=less criminals, even if the data suggested that. Times also change.
[QUOTE=SwedishSpy;48799024]I will clarify the part in bold. I[B] do not enjoy it, I just believe that it's a necessary thing in extreme cases. [/B]And I've said several times that death penalty will serve as a reminder of what happens when you murder someone and it removes the person from existence.[/QUOTE] [B]WHY IS IT NECESSARY[/B] Something being necessary means we need to do it, and we've been doing GREAT for the last 20 years without torture, so, [B]WHY IS IT NECESSARY[/B]
[QUOTE=Bat-shit;48799000]I'm assuming you're a teenager. [editline]1st October 2015[/editline] This is fine, but.. where does the torture come in now? Just because why not?[/QUOTE] I'm not a teenager.
[QUOTE=SwedishSpy;48799024] Once again, I don't need to have empathy for murderers in order to be a person with empathy.[/QUOTE] Uh you don't fucking get it. You can't put yourself in the shoes of a person facing death but you're throwing a fucking hissy fit over being called insane for literally saying a large number of people deserve to die no matter what.
[QUOTE=SwedishSpy;48799024]I will clarify the part in bold. I[B] do not enjoy it, I just believe that it's a necessary thing in extreme cases. [/B]And I've said several times that death penalty will serve as a reminder of what happens when you murder someone and it removes the person from existence.[/QUOTE] Holy fuck I was right you'd be a fucking amazing politician Now actually provide an answer that has fucking substance thats not "its necessary because reasons" Also the death penalty does absolutely nothing you think it does. All it does is remove another person from existence. But naturally you think of that person as subhuman do to your complete absence of empathy. Empathy isn't "I feel sorry for someone" Empathy is looking at the person in the electric chair across from you, the person whos death you so vehemently advocate, and understanding that if the circumstances of your life went a slightly different way you could've ended up in that chair. Think of the phrase "living a day in their shoes" and perhaps that will give you some minute understanding of empathy.
You've confused sympathy and pity with empathy
[QUOTE=SwedishSpy;48798996]So I need to know a murderer on a personal level in order to make the conclusion that his ability to murder people makes him subhuman?[/QUOTE] Empathy is being able to understand how someone else perceives the world from their point of view. You are clearly unable to do that because you automatically bin all people of a certain subgroup into a trashcan that you label "subhuman", without considering the various nuances that could have lead them to committing their respective crimes.
[QUOTE=SwedishSpy;48799045]I'm not a teenager.[/QUOTE] fine, it wasn't even that important. you can find criminal torture advocates from all age groups, notably teenagers. [editline]1st October 2015[/editline] anyway, prove me torturing criminals is necessary, like in deterring further crime for example just prove me that. prove everyone, prove yourself.
I don't have any more time for this since I misjudged how many negative reactions my opinion would generate. So I give up. I have to sleep because I have things to do tomorrow. Inb4 more name calling and insults about me quitting the debate. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Meme reply" - Craptasket))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=SwedishSpy;48799201]I don't have any more time for this since I misjudged how many negative reactions my opinion would generate. So I give up. I have to sleep because I have things to do tomorrow. Inb4 more name calling and insults about me quitting the debate.[/QUOTE] I would appreciate it if you could take the time to come back to this thread to continue this discussion.
[QUOTE=Kyle902;48794220]So? The point of locking him up is so that he's not a threat to other people, not to torture him.[/QUOTE] Sadly most people don't understand this, considering facepunch applauds the vigilante murder of a pedophile
[QUOTE=SwedishSpy;48799201]I don't have any more time for this since I misjudged how many negative reactions my opinion would generate. So I give up. I have to sleep because I have things to do tomorrow. Inb4 more name calling and insults about me quitting the debate.[/QUOTE] So in other words you concede that you enjoy the though of torture. Got it
Let him die.
[QUOTE=SwedishSpy;48799201]I don't have any more time for this since I misjudged how many negative reactions my opinion would generate. So I give up. I have to sleep because I have things to do tomorrow. Inb4 more name calling and insults about me quitting the debate.[/QUOTE] no, but I doubt you, let alone anyone, can come up with a good argument for torturing criminals lmao where would you even begin? seriously, I gave it some reading, and while there are no studies about the effectiveness of torturing criminals when deterring future crimes (just forget about torturing people already), it appears that the death penalty itself (or the lack of it) has little influence on global murder patterns, which are really complex btw., and have much more to do with economic, social and cultural factors. So, good luck making sense out of the mess of murder & mathematics, and then suggesting some sensible means of mitigating murder rates around the world. Good luck with that indeed..
You know, if all y'all bleeding heart liberals would slow down, and get in line so SwedishSpy could reply to one post at a time, he might be able to answer more of your questions. And maybe knock off all the amateur shrink shit too. It's juvenile and stupid.
Go ahead. All the responses to him can be challenged by anyone.
[QUOTE=viper shtf;48800153]You know, if all y'all bleeding heart liberals would slow down, and get in line so SwedishSpy could reply to one post at a time, he might be able to answer more of your questions. And maybe knock off all the amateur shrink shit too. It's juvenile and stupid.[/QUOTE] We're bleeding heart liberals for thinking that all humans deserve a basic level of respect, which entails not being subject to cruel and unusual punishment? That's a new one.
Perhaps there is immense energy to be harvested from hooking people (criminals) into torture machines that generate power.
[QUOTE=viper shtf;48800153]You know, if all y'all [B]bleeding heart liberals[/B] would slow down, and get in line so SwedishSpy could reply to one post at a time, he might be able to answer more of your questions. And maybe knock off all the amateur shrink shit too. It's juvenile and stupid.[/QUOTE] Go back to Tumblr.
[QUOTE=viper shtf;48800153]You know, if all y'all bleeding heart liberals would slow down, and get in line so SwedishSpy could reply to one post at a time, he might be able to answer more of your questions. And maybe knock off all the amateur shrink shit too. It's juvenile and stupid.[/QUOTE] Lol we're bleeding heart liberals for not advocating cruel and unusual punishment?
[QUOTE=viper shtf;48800153]You know, if all y'all bleeding heart liberals would slow down, and get in line so SwedishSpy could reply to one post at a time, he might be able to answer more of your questions. And maybe knock off all the amateur shrink shit too. It's juvenile and stupid.[/QUOTE] How about you answer the questions yourself if you support a similar view?
I'm anti death penalty but seriously some of you guys are extremely left.
[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;48798530]If you seriously believe there may even be inception of doubts in his actions, you are better off never touching legal system or anything similar.[/QUOTE] If you seriously believe that's what I wrote, you need to read my post again. I absolutely believe Breivik is guilty, and should be punished to the full extent of the law. SwedishSpy just seems to be under the impression that if you try [i]really[/i] hard, you won't make any mistakes, and there will be no doubt ever, and thus no innocent people executed. He's obviously wrong, and I just picked the most extreme example.
The problem with the death penalty from an completely objective logical standpoint is that: It's expensive. It's very expensive. And it's very expensive for a reason, appeals are a process to make sure that yes, this is the right criminal who committed the act that we're about to KILL and yes, they "dur deserve to die". These processes cost a lot of money in legal fees because everyone has a right to a defense attorney in criminal cases. Innocent people get killed. Many people have been wrongly killed for crimes they did not commit, and in no way is a perfect system where this doesn't happen is achievable. If you accept the death penalty, you have to accept that someone who did nothing wrong will die on occasion. It doesn't work. The death penalty has no effect on crime rates, does not act as a deterrent. "Showing that it is not acceptable" is purely from an idealistic standpoint, not one based on facts. [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/22/us/absence-executions-special-report-states-with-no-death-penalty-share-lower.html?pagewanted=all[/url] [url]http://www.forbes.com/sites/elizabethlopatto/2014/04/29/how-many-innocent-people-are-sentenced-to-death/[/url] [url]http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2014/05/01/considering-the-death-penalty-your-tax-dollars-at-work/[/url]
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;48793983]But if he goes on a hunger strike he should just be force fed.[/QUOTE] Fucking really? If he wants to torture himself to death on his own will by way of hunger strike, let him and let him be counted as a suicide statistic. What you're suggesting is something he will never be able to consent to.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;48793983] But if he goes on a hunger strike he should just be force fed.[/QUOTE] I say let him have his little hunger strike. Then again I have zero sympathy for a psychopath that murdered that many people for no reason. I honestly don't believe he's got it in him to actually starve himself to death. If he does, oh well, one less mass murderer clogging up the planet, if he doesn't we get to mock him.
-snip- im a bad man
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;48801082]Fucking really? If he wants to torture himself to death on his own will by way of hunger strike, let him and let him be counted as a suicide statistic. What you're suggesting is something he will never be able to consent to.[/QUOTE] At some point he'll be too weak to feed himself, and he won't be able to eat regular food. At that point I can imagine (though I don't know the laws regarding this) he will be force fed no matter what he wants. No one who's in prison consents to being there - as a prisoner there are areas where your consent doesn't matter. Hunger strikes shouldn't be a tool for an inmate to get what they want. On the other hand, if an inmate (or anyone else not in prison for that matter) legitimately wants to kill themselves, I think euthanisia should be an option for them. If we want to be humane, and let people end themselves while in prison, why take the half-measure of accepting people starving themselves to death? That isn't a humane way to die.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48798896]How poor is your reading comprehension? Because, if you read what I said, you'd realize I never said "I'm not calling you any names". I justified WHY i'm calling him names, mainly because he fits a definition of that "name". God damn, try harder next time.[/QUOTE] The implication was that you act childish as fuck, with borderline ad hominem attacks to get your point. He is not insane just because you say so. [editline]1st October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=SwedishSpy;48799024]I will clarify the part in bold. I[B] do not enjoy it, I just believe that it's a necessary thing in extreme cases. [/B]And I've said several times that death penalty will serve as a reminder of what happens when you murder someone and it removes the person from existence. [editline]1st October 2015[/editline] Once again, I don't need to have empathy for murderers in order to be a person with empathy.[/QUOTE] Give me a good example when torture is a good idea and why would that be. Genuinely curious. [editline]1st October 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=GoDong-DK;48801006]If you seriously believe that's what I wrote, you need to read my post again. I absolutely believe Breivik is guilty, and should be punished to the full extent of the law. SwedishSpy just seems to be under the impression that if you try [i]really[/i] hard, you won't make any mistakes, and there will be no doubt ever, and thus no innocent people executed. He's obviously wrong, and I just picked the most extreme example.[/QUOTE] You dont need extreme examples to prove that point; your moronic example is almost taken from a bad sci fi flick.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.