Life extension technology? Let's give it to prisoners to make them suffer! - Polidicks

do you not think that fantasising about torturing and killing people for "justice" is kind of a bad thing as well i mean, if our answer to inhumanity is even more inhumanity, then what exactly is the point plus i'd imagine if you convince someone who's killed someone that killing people is wrong (and i mean actually really make them realise) then living with the fact that they killed a person isn't gonna be all peachy for them anyway

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44237879]We'll agree to disagree then, and they're not in the minority. [editline]15th March 2014[/editline] You're making alot of baseless assumptions about me, considering you know nothing about me. and it's not eye to eye, existing vs not existing?[/QUOTE] This essentially reads as, "I'm too stuck in my barbaric ways to admit I'm both wrong and probably a psychopath."

That's not justice, that's torture. Plus it's not even considering the astronomical costs of caring for a prisoner and providing the space for that amount of time.

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44237879]We'll agree to disagree then, and they're not in the minority. [editline]15th March 2014[/editline] You're making alot of baseless assumptions about me, considering you know nothing about me. and it's not eye to eye, existing vs not existing?[/QUOTE] The only assumption I've consciously made of you is that you've never been molested as a child like Sandman claims he/she (internet's confusing, so I'll assume either gender) was. I'm going to make another assumption and say that, if you actually had been molested as a child too, you would have mentioned it fairly quickly in reply to Sandman, in order to even things out rather than referring to sick shit on the deep web. One thing I know for certain is, when Sandman said he/she knew more than you on the topic due to being an actual victim, you immediately replied by calling them wrong and saying you've seen horrible things on the internet. Not the strongest counterargument, by any stretch. As for the "eye for an eye" thing, it's a piece of an old adage that says, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." It literally means that, if everyone who got an eye taken out by another person did it right back to the person responsible, everyone in question would be blind as a result. Figuratively, it means doling out a punishment equal to the pain/injury you received against someone who hurt you solves nothing. In other words, revenge does nothing but make more pain, and is the worst option of many.

[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;44237939]do you not think that fantasising about torturing and killing people for "justice" is kind of a bad thing as well i mean, if our answer to inhumanity is even more inhumanity, then what exactly is the point plus i'd imagine if you convince someone who's killed someone that killing people is wrong (and i mean actually really make them realise) then living with the fact that they killed a person isn't gonna be all peachy for them anyway[/QUOTE] I'm going to back out of this now, but you're missing the crucial part that is the victim is DEAD he doesn't EXIST anymore, it doesn't matter if the killer is sorry and aware of he did (which you can never be sure about), it doesn't matter if any more good can come out of this. In the end, 1 person gets to live and be rehabilitated, and the victim gets nothing. I'm done. [editline]15th March 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=draugur;44237960]This essentially reads as, "I'm too stuck in my barbaric ways to admit I'm both wrong and probably a psychopath."[/QUOTE] Not accepting that everyone deserves rehabilitation = psychopath It's okay, this was expected.

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44237995]I'm going to back out of this now, but you're missing the crucial part that is the victim is DEAD he doesn't EXIST anymore, it doesn't matter if the killer is sorry and aware of he did (which you can never be sure about), it doesn't matter if any more good can come out of this. In the end, 1 person gets to live and be rehabilitated, and the victim gets nothing. I'm done.[/QUOTE] So you're saying because one human is no longer capable of being alive, we should kill another human to make things an even number? Look asshat, as much as I like things ending in even numbers, this is one place where nearly everyone except for weirdo's like you can agree that the smaller the number of people dead, the better.

[QUOTE=draugur;44238012]So you're saying because one human is no longer capable of being alive, we should kill another human to make things an even number? Look asshat, as much as I like things ending in even numbers, this is one place where nearly everyone except for weirdo's like you can agree that the smaller the number of people dead, the better.[/QUOTE] I never said to kill him, where did I say that?

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44237995] Not accepting that everyone deserves rehabilitation = psychopath It's okay, this was expected.[/QUOTE] It is human nature to make mistakes, and as such it is a human right to be able to right your wrongs. Even Christianity has it right, only god is capable of judging you for your sin.

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44238018]I never said to kill him, where did I say that?[/QUOTE] Pardon me, might be wrong on this, but: [QUOTE=Shreddinger;44237808]You obviously didn't see what I have seen, these people can't be rehabilitated, [U][B]killing them is a fucking privilege for them[/B][/U] The offenders that is, not the victims[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=TurboSax;44238035]Pardon me, might be wrong on this, but:[/QUOTE] Killing him would personally make me feel better, but it's not correct course of action.

I might be wrong but it seems that where you fall on the vengeance vs. rehabilitation thing depends on whether or not you believe in evil. If you believe that some people are just evil it's understandable that you wouldn't have any sympathy for them. If you believe that everyone is more or less neutral from the start and everyone's actions are strongly influenced by every event that person did/had done to them up to that point, you'll be more apt to go with the rehabilitation angle. The notion of evil is a fundamentally religious one but one that has so deeply permeated society that you don't have to be religious to believe it

[QUOTE=Zeke129;44238102]I might be wrong but it seems that where you fall on the vengeance vs. rehabilitation thing depends on whether or not you believe in evil. If you believe that some people are just evil it's understandable that you wouldn't have any sympathy for them. If you believe that everyone is more or less neutral from the start and everyone's actions are strongly influenced by every event that person did/had done to them up to that point, you'll be more apt to go with the rehabilitation angle. The notion of evil is a fundamentally religious one but one that has so deeply permeated society that you don't have to be religious to believe it[/QUOTE] I don't believe that people are inherently evil, I'm just saying that not everyone deserves rehabilitation. No one takes Justice into account, all I'm seeing here is Vengeance vs Rehabilitation. A person rapes, tortures and kills an other human being, that person ceases to exist. and now people are like well, the victim is dead, there's nothing you can do, better rehabilitate the killer :v: How is this just?

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44238043]Killing him would personally make me feel better, but it's not correct course of action.[/QUOTE] And yet, consigning someone to either figurative death by being trapped in prison for years, if not for the rest of their lives, only to come out if they ever do into a world that's content to let them die in the street is fine? And letting them be sentenced to literal death by corporal punishment is just dandy? Listen, I understand why you'd think people need to be given nothing except punishment for crimes. It's a highly pervasive attitude these days. However, if you really think about it, these people face punishment anyways, even if rehabilitated fully. If you take a murderer and spend some time rehabilitating him so he understands the causes, effects and morality of his actions, chances are he's gonna feel horrifically bad for killing someone. Any sane person will, upon realizing the true impact and meaning of their lethal actions, feel like a goddamned monster. And that feeling will never fully go away for a sane person, it'll be ever-present and eat at them for their entire lives. However, via rehabilitation, there is real, tangible hope for these people. Time and time again, rehabilitated murderers wind up going into fields that involve improving or even completely saving lives, usually as a sort of personal repentance for their crimes. If you give it thought, you'll see that, in that situation you'd not only feel horrible once the reality of your actions hit you, but you'd want to make up for it any way you possibly could. As for people who kill remorselessly and feel nothing for it, these people often have some sort of mental disorder of a very high severity. The source of the illness varies, sometimes from a horrific childhood, sometimes from chemical imbalances that began at birth or due to disorders, sometimes from adulthood trauma which thoroughly snaps their sanity. No matter where it comes from though, these sorts of people are seriously fucked in the head, and typically cannot understand what killing is, why it's wrong, or that other human beings are sentient individuals like they are. By clamoring for death or life imprisonment for criminals, you're essentially flipping the bird to desperate people who went for a lethal option due to no other perceived choices or due to a misunderstanding of the consequences of their actions. That, and you're saying that we should just imprison/execute the mentally diseased, even though none of their psychosis is their own fault, and never could be. And if you ask me, that's just goddamned sick. I dearly hope you change your opinion, because none of this "revenge justice" shit that's beat into everyone's heads is good. Not one tiny little bit of it.

[QUOTE=Talishmar;44235840]I wonder how this would work as a deterrent, if death penalty doesn't[/QUOTE] with the way lawmakers seem to treat the prison system, it wouldn't supprise me though if they consider using mind-altering drugs to administer a sentence so severe that it psychologically destroys someone, i for one believe the prison system should be about reform but we've created a police state where the prisons exist to house the undesirables and mentally ill instead

see: I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream

[QUOTE=WaRRioRTF;44235366]Digitally upload someone to make them suffer, watch them somehow pull magic, hack the system, get out into the internet and spread everywhere with the single goal of eliminating humanity.[/QUOTE] That sounds like a BADASS plot to a cyberpunk-themed game.

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44237808]You obviously didn't see what I have seen, these people can't be rehabilitated, killing them is a fucking privilege for them The offenders that is, not the victims[/QUOTE] And what if the offender turns out to actually not be guilty? That means another life wasted.

[QUOTE=Amakir;44238268]And what if the offender turns out to actually not be guilty? That means another life wasted.[/QUOTE] Video evidence of the incident, undeniable proof.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;44238102]I might be wrong but it seems that where you fall on the vengeance vs. rehabilitation thing depends on whether or not you believe in evil. If you believe that some people are just evil it's understandable that you wouldn't have any sympathy for them. If you believe that everyone is more or less neutral from the start and everyone's actions are strongly influenced by every event that person did/had done to them up to that point, you'll be more apt to go with the rehabilitation angle. The notion of evil is a fundamentally religious one but one that has so deeply permeated society that you don't have to be religious to believe it[/QUOTE] Based on all of the evidence I've ever seen, and all of the interactions I've had with people on any and all parts of the moral spectrum, I feel "evil" is nothing but a title that was made to justify blind hatred of people who simply could not be understood at the time, due to not advanced enough medical sciences. I don't blame anyone in past eras for thinking someone was just plain evil and that was that. Mental illness was anything from unheard of to barely recognized until the last few centuries, and the concept of a nice person being turned shitty by an awful environment and desperation is to this day a very alien one. I understand fully why people in the past might have wrongly thought a man with a mental disease was possessed or simply evil. However, in this day and age, every "evil" person I've ever seen was either a victim of circumstance or someone with serious mental illness. Thieves all seem to be united in desperation and self-interest brought on by a world that hates them and screws them constantly in their eyes, murderers all seem to be men/women with no other options or no comprehension of their actions, sexual predators all seem to be either unable to rein in their desires or ignorant of the consequences of their advances. Every single "sane" bad person I've ever seen, heard of and met cannot just be described as "inherently evil". Every single one has a deeper cause or motive, sometimes belonging to themselves or to another. Every single one is broken in some manner by the world and allowing that psychological wound to fester until it breaks them entirely. Every single one thinks their actions are justifiable, good, necessary or unavoidable until it's proven otherwise. And every single insane "evil" person is utterly broken by their own body and mind malfunctioning. The degree of illness varies, as does their ability to hide it in order to avoid needless but still possible ruin and shame. But the state of being unable to understand, unable to control themselves, or unable to even perceive the world in any way a sane person would is universal among them all. I don't believe in "evil", despite understanding its roots. I do, however, believe in broken people and broken minds.

[QUOTE=TurboSax;44238324]Based on all of the evidence I've ever seen, and all of the interactions I've had with people on any and all parts of the moral spectrum, I feel "evil" is nothing but a title that was made to justify blind hatred of people who simply could not be understood at the time, due to not advanced enough medical sciences. I don't blame anyone in past eras for thinking someone was just plain evil and that was that. Mental illness was anything from unheard of to barely recognized until the last few centuries, and the concept of a nice person being turned shitty by an awful environment and desperation is to this day a very alien one. I understand fully why people in the past might have wrongly thought a man with a mental disease was possessed or simply evil. However, in this day and age, every "evil" person I've ever seen was either a victim of circumstance or someone with serious mental illness. Thieves all seem to be united in desperation and self-interest brought on by a world that hates them and screws them constantly in their eyes, murderers all seem to be men/women with no other options or no comprehension of their actions, sexual predators all seem to be either unable to rein in their desires or ignorant of the consequences of their advances. Every single bad person I've ever seen, heard of and met cannot just be described as "inherently evil". Every single one has a deeper cause or motive, sometimes belonging to themselves or to another. Every single "sane" one is broken in some manner by the world and allowing that psychological wound to fester until it breaks them entirely. Every single one thinks their actions are justifiable, good, necessary or unavoidable until it's proven otherwise. I don't believe in "evil", despite understanding its roots. I do, however, believe in broken people and broken minds.[/QUOTE] Is it completely certain that the only thing that can get a human being to willingly kill an other human being is a broken mind?

[QUOTE=seanocaster;44238219]see: I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream[/QUOTE] it's kind of telling that the daily mail takes some of its views from a globally genocidal and sadistic AI construct responsible for the unending torture and mutilation of the decaying remnants of the human race [editline]14th March[/editline] [I] "Jerking It To I Have no Mouth and I Must Scream: The Nick Griffin Story"[/I]

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44238356]Is it completely certain that the only thing that can get a human being to willingly kill an other human being is a broken mind?[/QUOTE] It's not certain, no. People will go out and kill for their nation, but even they come back mentally scarred by the experience of committing such acts. I suppose you could chalk up their naivete and ignorance of just how horrifying it feels for a sane man to kill another. Outside of war however, in the day to day civilian life where murder is never fully acceptable and there are many better options, nothing short of desperation, a lack of any other options or mental illness can drive someone to kill another human being in my opinion.

This is some "I have no mouth, and I must scream" shit

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44238319]Video evidence of the incident, undeniable proof.[/QUOTE] Because we all know that you can get undeniable video evidence for every crime right?

Guys, I just thought of something. There could be GOOD implications of this! Think: If you get a 45 year sentence at the age of 25 your life is pretty much over; when you get out of prison, if you even life to, the high points and possibilities of your life is gone. All you've got left is to get an apartment somewhere and die. It's almost like a second punishment and I personally find it sort of unfair and cruel. But using this technology, someone could serve their 20, 45, 100 year sentence for whatever fuck awful thing they did and then come out of it at the age they were imprisoned (+ 8 hours for the simulation to take place), and a better person for it, ready to live their life steered straight by their punishment. It would also help the prison system by getting people in and out literally 100000X quicker. As long as this (theoretical) technology werent abused, it could be great.

[QUOTE=Amakir;44238432]Because we all know that you can get undeniable video evidence for every crime right?[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, I'm obviously not fit to deal with this kind of stuff, I'm getting my emotions involved which I obviously shouldn't, I'll let the people that know what they're doing and stay neutral do this. [editline]15th March 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=ShadowSocks8;44238449]Guys, I just thought of something. There could be GOOD implications of this! Think: If you get a 45 year sentence at the age of 25 your life is pretty much over; when you get out of prison, if you even life to, the high points and possibilities of your life is gone. All you've got left is to get an apartment somewhere and die. It's almost like a second punishment and I personally find it sort of unfair and cruel. But using this technology, someone could serve their 20, 45, 100 year sentence for whatever fuck awful thing they did and then come out of it at the age they were imprisoned (+ 8 hours for the simulation to take place), and a better person for it, ready to live their life steered straight by their punishment. It would also help the prison system by getting people in and out literally 100000X quicker. As long as this (theoretical) technology werent abused, it could be great.[/QUOTE] Yeah that's pretty cool, also if they were wrongly imprisoned, this would mean that they didn't waste most of their life ...

[QUOTE=ShadowSocks8;44238449]Guys, I just thought of something. There could be GOOD implications of this! Think: If you get a 45 year sentence at the age of 25 your life is pretty much over; when you get out of prison, if you even life to, the high points and possibilities of your life is gone. All you've got left is to get an apartment somewhere and die. It's almost like a second punishment and I personally find it sort of unfair and cruel. But using this technology, someone could serve their 20, 45, 100 year sentence for whatever fuck awful thing they did and then come out of it at the age they were imprisoned (+ 8 hours for the simulation to take place), and a better person for it, ready to live their life steered straight by their punishment. It would also help the prison system by getting people in and out literally 100000X quicker. As long as this (theoretical) technology werent abused, it could be great.[/QUOTE] This is totally ignoring the effects that knowing you were doomed to a futile existence for the next (apparent) XX years could have on someone. I mean, it could be argued that it'd be worse than solitary. The only human interaction you get is fake, and you [I]know[/I] it.

[QUOTE=ShadowSocks8;44238449]Guys, I just thought of something. There could be GOOD implications of this! Think: If you get a 45 year sentence at the age of 25 your life is pretty much over; when you get out of prison, if you even life to, the high points and possibilities of your life is gone. All you've got left is to get an apartment somewhere and die. It's almost like a second punishment and I personally find it sort of unfair and cruel. But using this technology, someone could serve their 20, 45, 100 year sentence for whatever fuck awful thing they did and then come out of it at the age they were imprisoned (+ 8 hours for the simulation to take place), and a better person for it, ready to live their life steered straight by their punishment. It would also help the prison system by getting people in and out literally 100000X quicker. As long as this (theoretical) technology werent abused, it could be great.[/QUOTE] You could takes things a step further in a good direction by literally rehabilitating them in their own minds. And I don't mean forcing them to sit in there for mental years or torturing them, I mean having the realities of their crimes laid out before them and helping them understand and change. You could possibly even rehabilitate them with the help of a real person, who was in their mind or connected somehow, and who would have nearly forever to fix the person in question and technically infinite resources since it'd be in the realm of the mind. Think about the kind of amazing future that'd bring about. You get desperate and steal/kill a man/etc., and the cops catch and apprehend you. Then, you're put into this sort of mental realm using the technology proposed. Either your own mind (with or without help), a computer or a connected person then does its/their best to help you come to grips with your crime, and to learn how/why to never do it again. Finally, after what could be anywhere from hours to years in your mind depending on how long it takes you, but after only a mere few hours/minutes/seconds in reality, you're brought back to reality. You're evaluated, checked to ensure you understand after the treatment and will avoid committing the crime again, and finally released with possible supervision for some time to ensure no regression. Crime would likely drop like a goddamn rock if this came to pass. Of course, there'd still be the situations, environments and problems which make people turn to such criminal activities, but that's not what this is proposed to fix. If anything, this would be a stopgap on the long, long road to eliminating inequality and poverty.

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;44235766]Well this doesn't actually extend life ..., this will potentially make someone feel like their punishment is an eternity. So they took it completely out of context. However, for unspeakable crimes, this does seem like it would be befitting. Sadly it will get abused, there's nothing we can do as this will mostly likely be developed behind closed doors, even if it's banned. Take that person that raped and tortured that heroin-addicted hooker, and put a camera for her so that she's forced to watch her own torture. Surely that kind of person deserves this.[/QUOTE] ok real talk who the hell are you to decide what he [I]deserves[/I]? You and anybody else supporting this or playing the [I]they deserved it[/I] game are acting like God and aren't doing it for the betterment of society but your own fucked up sense of morality that isn't any better than theirs. If torturing him for a thousand years undid the damage he did to his victim I'd be all for it. He would DESERVE it then. But it doesn't. If you guys didn't know, the severity of a punishment has no effect on how much of a deterrent it is. Read this: [url]http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=67[/url]

[quote]Another scenario the group looked at was uploading mind to a digital realm Running it a million times faster than normal would enable the uploaded criminal to serve a 1,000 year sentence in eight-and-a-half hours[/quote] if this was somehow possible it'd be a legitimately good idea if they used it with regular sentences (not a thousand year ones). i mean, you could have a guy serve a 20 year sentence and be reintegrated into society without actually aging 20 years