Romanian Communist prison commander gets 20-year final jail sentence for crimes against humanity - Polidicks

I don't know if the government should spent much time actively hunting down people for 50 year old crimes, but when they happen to get their hands on such a criminal they absolutely should bring them to trial.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49719632]So if Hitler had fled to Argentina (like some conspiracy theorists allege) and he lived comfortably there into his 90s before being caught, would he be let off scot-free on account of his advanced age?[/QUOTE] You don't understand my point. I don't care what happens to the old man. Fuck him. I care about adherence to the limitations of justice systems. You find old Hitler? Put a bullet in him. Don't put on a big show trial. You lack the jurisdiction. Revenge is perfectly fine in some cases, just don't mix it in with your justice system. Retributive justice is dangerous. [editline]11th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49719371]this literally isn't true where do people get this really weird idea of criminal justice from you do realise that criminal justice is a split between rehabilitation and retribution [editline]11th February 2016[/editline] illegal where? [editline]11th February 2016[/editline] you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about what crimes against humanity actually are ('this was a guy doing his job' is a defence that does not work in the context of crimes against humanity. you're not charging a guy for how well or badly he did his job, you're charging him for lacking the moral character to stand against the atrocities he was committing) (also milgram is patently inapplicable to acts such as this and other atrocities, as specified right in the wikipedia article. note: orders from [I]scientific[/I] authority figures in the [I]context of an experiment where the subject is assured there would be no repercussions or consequence[/I] are powerful) [editline]11th February 2016[/editline] what zillamaster posted is LITERALLY the definition of justice you think you're taking a moral stance on this - you're not, you've just got a critical misinterpretation of justice in posting "he'll get the punishment he deserves", zillamaster is literally saying "he'll receive justice" [editline]11th February 2016[/editline] what you guys are describing is some sort of extremist form of rehabilitative justice that doesn't exist[/QUOTE] "Crimes against humanity" isn't a thing. There is no real international justice system. But please, go ahead, explain crimes against humanity to me. Explain how laws exist without enforcement.explain how laws exist without adhereance to the legal process.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49719709]in this instance, it is the sense that this man committed crimes of such disgusting moral distortion, that he must suffer punishment as a result otherwise [B]he did morally perverse actions but evaded punishment - despite people knowing that he did it. Is that justice?[/B][/QUOTE] I mean my post was in reply to Zilla thinking him dying in a prison infirmary was some kind of thing he deserved rather than any kind of tirade on what is and isn't justice. Finding him dying in prison satisfactory is really strange to me, and finding that a deserving punishment is dumb. If you start following that you have to start going into the whole eye for an eye thing. He caused people to suffer horrific things in prison, are we better for thinking it's fine if he dies in prison? If he's trialed, found guilty, all that stuff. Then yeah. I find justice to have been served. In this situation I always find it a bit tough since I don't think age should let you get away with it but 91 just seems such a waste of time and resources. I don't know if we are misunderstanding each other. I just found that particular post silly. But I am still torn on what's happening in the OP. I want to see criminals get caught but I just don't really know on these kinds of cases.

[QUOTE=GunFox;49720012]You don't understand my point. I don't care what happens to the old man. Fuck him. I care about adherence to the limitations of justice systems. You find old Hitler? Put a bullet in him. Don't put on a big show trial. You lack the jurisdiction. Revenge is perfectly fine in some cases, just don't mix it in with your justice system. Retributive justice is dangerous. [editline]11th February 2016[/editline] "Crimes against humanity" isn't a thing. There is no real international justice system. But please, go ahead, explain crimes against humanity to me. Explain how laws exist without enforcement.explain how laws exist without adhereance to the legal process.[/QUOTE] [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimes_against_humanity[/URL] [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court[/URL] [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_criminal_law[/URL] [URL]https://www.hrw.org/topic/international-justice/international-criminal-court[/URL] i don't have to explain to you how laws exist without enforcement, or what crimes against humanity are, because it's already been done in the above (sure there's dispute over what a crime against humanity is because it's a broad definition, but there's a dispute over what a lot of broad laws cover) [editline]11th February 2016[/editline] i mean, what point are you trying to make here? "crimes against humanity" are a thing which is tried for, regardless of definition go ahead and claim it's not a "real international justice system", but that's entirely your opinion on the subject and nothing more you also didn't respond to anything else in my post [editline]11th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Tomo Takino;49720084]I mean my post was in reply to Zilla thinking him dying in a prison infirmary was some kind of thing he deserved rather than any kind of tirade on what is and isn't justice. Finding him dying in prison satisfactory is really strange to me, and finding that a deserving punishment is dumb. If you start following that you have to start going into the whole eye for an eye thing. He caused people to suffer horrific things in prison, are we better for thinking it's fine if he dies in prison? If he's trialed, found guilty, all that stuff. Then yeah. I find justice to have been served. In this situation I always find it a bit tough since I don't think age should let you get away with it but 91 just seems such a waste of time and resources. I don't know if we are misunderstanding each other. I just found that particular post silly. But I am still torn on what's happening in the OP. I want to see criminals get caught but I just don't really know on these kinds of cases.[/QUOTE] what the man has done deserves punishment what punishment that is, is in the eye of the beholder, but there is definitely a moral impetus there you can say that zilla was being overzealous nobody is any better or worse for having an opinion on this, it's a divisive subject

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49719371]this literally isn't true where do people get this really weird idea of criminal justice from you do realise that criminal justice is a split between rehabilitation and retribution [/QUOTE] Neither of those are revenge though what a terrible defense of it being revenge, you literally admit it excludes revenge

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49722934]Neither of those are revenge though what a terrible defense of it being revenge, you literally admit it excludes revenge[/QUOTE] What about denounciation? Is that just not a thing anymore?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49722934]Neither of those are revenge though what a terrible defense of it being revenge, you literally admit it excludes revenge[/QUOTE] vengeance ˈvɛn(d)ʒ(ə)ns/Submit noun punishment inflicted or retribution exacted for an injury or wrong. "voters are ready to wreak vengeance on all politicians" [B]synonyms: revenge[/B], avengement, [B]retribution, retributive justice[/B], retaliation, requital, reprisal; More Vengeance (ˈvɛndʒəns) n [B]1. the act of or desire for taking revenge; retributive punishment[/B] 2. with a vengeance (intensifier): the 70's have returned with a vengeance. [C13: from Old French, from venger to avenge, from Latin vindicāre to punish; see vindicate] revenge rɪˈvɛn(d)ʒ/Submit noun 1. the action of hurting or harming someone in return for an injury or wrong suffered at their hands. "other spurned wives have taken public revenge on their husbands" [B]synonyms: vengeance, retribution, retaliation[/B], reprisal, requital, recrimination, an eye for an eye (and a tooth for a tooth), tit for tat, measure for measure, getting even, redress, satisfaction, repayment, payback; More revenge and retribution are synonyms for fucks sake retributive justice is literally the act of taking revenge for a wrong-doing (see also: vengeance, which is used for the definition of retribution) your post makes no sense at all [editline]12th February 2016[/editline] please look at the dictionary definition for retribution and understand that revenge is typically used in personal cases, and retribution used in situations with groups - but other than that, the words mean exactly the same thing

[QUOTE=GunFox;49720012]You find old Hitler? Put a bullet in him. Don't put on a big show trial. You lack the jurisdiction. Revenge is perfectly fine in some cases, just don't mix it in with your justice system. Retributive justice is dangerous.[/QUOTE] I think that putting a bullet in some mass-murder like that instead of putting them on trial gives the wrong idea for how we should handle mass-murderers.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49725793]I think that putting a bullet in some mass-murder like that instead of putting them on trial gives the wrong idea for how we should handle mass-murderers.[/QUOTE] I think pulling rules entirely out of your ass damages the justice system. Many of you are entirely okay with just making up rules and disregarding jurisdiction and all the principles put forth by modern criminal justice systems. That is evidence enough that we have a problem already.

[QUOTE=GunFox;49725799]Many of you are entirely okay with just making up rules and disregarding jurisdiction and all the principles put forth by modern criminal justice systems. That is evidence enough that we have a problem already.[/QUOTE] since when did i say i was ok with that? i genuinely believe in international justice and jurisdiction that should ultimately hold even the most powerful people to account in the end. not even the chinese premier or us president should be free from scrutiny for any crimes they may have committed

[QUOTE=GunFox;49725799]I think pulling rules entirely out of your ass damages the justice system. Many of you are entirely okay with just making up rules and disregarding jurisdiction and all the principles put forth by modern criminal justice systems. That is evidence enough that we have a problem already.[/QUOTE] you just suggested extra-judicial execution, and in the next breath complain about creating rules and disregarding jurisdiction.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;49725809]you just suggested extra-judicial execution, and in the next breath complain about creating rules and disregarding jurisdiction.[/QUOTE] Understand that my issue isn't one of morality, it is one of procedure. Cloaking what is ultimately unilateral government action in the guise of "justice" is dangerous because it alters our perception of what a justice system should, and can, do. If you don't like him, and are going to take tyrannical action anyhow, do it openly. A functional justice system is, in a very real sense, the backbone of any democratic government. If it is diseased or twisted, you are pretty screwed. [QUOTE=Sobotnik;49725806]since when did i say i was ok with that? i genuinely believe in international justice and jurisdiction that should ultimately hold even the most powerful people to account in the end. not even the chinese premier or us president should be free from scrutiny for any crimes they may have committed[/QUOTE] ICC didn't exist until half a century after the crime was committed. Even assuming the ICC was something other than complete and utter bullshit, it still wouldn't have the jurisdictional authority necessary on account of not existing.

[QUOTE=GunFox;49725820]Understand that my issue isn't one of morality, it is one of procedure. Cloaking what is ultimately unilateral government action in the guise of "justice" is dangerous because it alters our perception of what a justice system should, and can, do. A functional justice system is, in a very real sense, the backbone of any democratic government. If it is diseased or twisted, you are pretty screwed. ICC didn't exist until half a century after the crime was committed. Even assuming the ICC was something other than complete and utter bullshit, it still wouldn't have the jurisdictional authority necessary on account of not existing.[/QUOTE] what's even worse than having a justice system that allows for revenge, is justifying extra-judicial killing by claiming you don't want to taint the justice system one at least allows for judicial oversight, the other one is just killing as i've said before, you will not find a justice system that does not incorporate some aspect of retribution in the system

A punitive sentence is not only for revenge. It serves as an example to any onlookers, to show that this crime is not okay. You [B]will[/B] be punished for these actions. To refuse to enforce this law would be to justify the crime. Plus, do you really want to institutionalize ageism?

DUNT THRO TH CUTE OLD PEEPL IN JALE!!111 Fucking lame ass argument that age somehow changes the fact that you're fucking murdering, abusive scum. Crime doesn't have an expiry date. If anything, the fact that this guy's lived a full life to the ripe old age of 91 is even more reason to throw the cunt in jail. He's not been punished for the crimes he's committed.

Some of you anti punishment types would probably gain from reading this [url]http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=41[/url] [editline]12th February 2016[/editline] To help you understand why exactly punishment and rehabilitation exist in the legal system.

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;49726405]Some of you anti punishment types would probably gain from reading this [url]http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=41[/url] [editline]12th February 2016[/editline] To help you understand why exactly punishment and rehabilitation exist in the legal system.[/QUOTE] You seem to think the people here have an issue understanding why punishment and rehabilitation exists in the system. But that's not entirely true. The issue was people seem to want to enact retribution on this chap / punish him when it will server no purpose what so ever. You can quote out "General deterrence" as stated as an example in the link you provided. But you've got to be kidding if you think that's going to resolve anything with this case.

[QUOTE=graymic;49726482]You seem to think the people here have an issue understanding why punishment and rehabilitation exists in the system. But that's not entirely true. The issue was people seem to want to enact retribution on this chap / punish him when it will server no purpose what so ever. You can quote out "General deterrence" as stated as an example in the link you provided. But you've got to be kidding if you think that's going to resolve anything with this case.[/QUOTE] I feel like this does serve to denounce the actions.

[QUOTE=graymic;49726482]You seem to think the people here have an issue understanding why punishment and rehabilitation exists in the system. But that's not entirely true. The issue was people seem to want to enact retribution on this chap / punish him when it will server no purpose what so ever. You can quote out "General deterrence" as stated as an example in the link you provided. But you've got to be kidding if you think that's going to resolve anything with this case.[/QUOTE] it sounds like you didn't read part 5 and 6 of that comic he linked in the 3Rs section [img]http://lawcomic.net/guide/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/retrtib.png[/img] i've linked the first part of it