An eye for an eye makes everyone blind? Give me a fucking break

[Bajaratt]

It is fact that there are more violent men then women. Why is that? It is not because males have a more horrible childhood, nor that they are raised all that different then females. It is because females have a more stable mind. In the same way, we have more male geniuses than female geniuses. Our species is the master at adapting to our environment, and in order to do that more effective, we need to learn. Due to that, the males in the species have a more varied mind. Its been well known that you're born with a criminal defect, due to various reasons I'll explain later. In the same way, you can be born a genius. Females have a smaller chance then males at being born a criminal or a genius. Hence, males bring the development of our species forward faster then females do. However, it also means males can bring about the destructions of others and themselves to a greater extent then females.

In order to become a serious criminal like the guy in the article, it requires several things. With simply a bad childhood, you don't become a criminal, as was stated in an example earlier. However, without a bad childhood you can still become a criminal. You can't blame the parents for having a criminal child. If someone is naturally born a criminal, if they also have a bad childhood, they'll have a larger chance of growing up to be a criminal as described in the article.

So we should just test kids at an early age, if they have this "criminal gene" then they'll just be locked up for the rest of their life because they're going to become a criminal?

There are two big reasons(there's others, but most are tied to one of these) why men are more violent than women, one is cultural, the other is natural. Naturally, men have a lot more testosterone in their system to women; one effect of testosterone is heightened aggression, and hence violence. Most cultures depict men as needing to be the strongest or most violent in order to win a woman; while it's not taken as literal anymore, it's still being perpetuated today.

Most criminals are addicted to risk taking. They get a kick out of it, and it is what makes them going. Its the same as with people that do mountain climbing, speeding, para shooting etc. They get a kick out of it. In the case of pedophiles, they have a stronger sexual drive, a kind of sexual addiction. They also have worse self-esteem, in some cases due to their upbringing. In most cases, they don't want to do it, but they can't stop. They're kind of like bullies. A lot of people get a kick out of having sex outdoors, due to the suspense of the possibility of getting caught. In the same way, some sex offenders stick with masturbating, say, in front of a lone woman on a train. They risk getting caught by someone else, and they put someone else in a situation where they are afraid and uncomfortable, giving them a further kick.

I can buy they enjoy risk taking, what I don't buy is that they're helpless against such behaviors.

I can assure you that a sexual offender would, in a majority of cases, prefer not having their strong sexual drive and lack of ability to control it. They would, in the majority of cases, prefer getting sterilized. Its not something they can control.

Bullshit.

Sterilizing them would, first of, remove another sexual offender, thus helping the nation as a whole. It would also help the sex offender himself, and gives them a chance to get their life together again. Registering as a sex offender doesn't help the criminal, and will only put their entire community towards them. Its not a solution to the problem. Sterilizing them is, and helps rather then destoys. The movie "Little Children" is a good example of what I'm talking about.

so you're saying that no one should know that someone who just moved in the neighborhood has a history of molesting kids? Yes it puts the community against them, but so what? They did something incredibly wrong and now they should have to live with the consequences.

Your whole post sounds like bullshit to me. You're saying the criminals are the actual victims, that they can't fight their genes and they don't want to commit crimes, but they're forced to. That's beyond ignorant, beyond stupid, I'm not sure there's even a word for how naive that is. I'd love to know where you're getting your "facts," because they're preposterous.

 

[Elemmire]

Actually, Uzor... you'd be surprised. Some time ago there was a study where an individual would come in and there'd be another (an actor so no real anything but not to the other's knowledge) who would have to memorize 10 words in about a minute or something. Anyways, if they missed a word (which the actor would on purpose) the individual was to shock them (the volts ranged from 200 to 450 I do believe). Anyways, as the actor missed the word, the individual would shock them. The actor continue to miss words and so the person would shock them. The individual doing the shocking would hear screams from the other.. and keep going up in voltage. It's really interesting.. anyways.. the interesting thing, women were the ones that actually could see a smile/pleasure from causing pain (or so they believed) to others. So, in fact, women are not necessarily the most stable minded or anything to that sort

However, there is also a study showing men are more based on justice and strict laws where as women (not all and same goes for men ) are more likely to look at the situation. Hence, why now we have issues where someone steals and it depends why they steal. There was a case sometime back, I forget what exactly, where a man stole some medical supplies for his wife. The Jury was I think.. 8 to 3 in voting him innocent. I tell you now, it was 8 women and 3 men. It is true the man stole but they figured cause he stole medicine for his wife, it was ok. Hehe.. It's interesting really

And, I will say this, our society is more and more becoming very.. hmm.. well it's causing a downward spiral where people are not responsible for their actions. Where we used to judge someone as "bad" and they'd be "punished" (where the person is free and treated as being responsible for their own actions) we now have "sick" and they are "treated" in which case it's not their fault. Our society has really started to degrade, I think. Too often people are told that they are "not at fault" and that "it was how you were raised" or "your environment" or other crap... it really is driving society into a state where they won't take responsibility for their actions or even think of the consequences of them. It's sick to me.. bah :\

And no.. I see it that everyone is responsible for their own actions.. though I'm not a religious person, the quote from Kingdom of Heaven "A king may move a man, a father may claim a son. But remember that, even when those who move you be kings or men of power, your soul is in your keeping alone. When you stand before God you cannot say "but I was told by others to do thus" or that "virtue was not convinient at the time". This will not suffice. Remember that." I like this quote cause it does have the "an individual is responsible for their actions" kinda thing. I know there's a huge debate in sociology of "how much is really our fault, how much responsibility is ours" and, while it's true that the environment can shape a person, I have seen the same environments effect different people differently. One person I know who used to get beat up, picked on, etc has become quite a deviant to society.. another I know, an old friend, whose mother actually tried to kill him (twice, mind you), whose father was deaf and got laid off from his job (so money was always tight and communication was hard), and he used to get jumped when heading home from high school well that guy is amazing. He's a hard worker, he's very moral and treats people kindly and with respect. He really seems a good person. Why is it that two people can have bad lives and one comes out good and the other isn't? That's the same reason why I believe there is a genetic reason to why people become what they are and why some who are so... horrible to society probably have a genetic defect and should be exterminated from it but.. again.. I really could never practice what I preach XD

 

[Garvin]

The death penalty is all well and good, and definitely deserved by some felons, but the legal system is far too imperfect for us to be doing anything of the sort. Even though it's clear-cut in this case, we don't always have that luxury.
The only three solutions would be a perfect justice system (Impossible), extremely strict requirements for the death penalty (Still has potential for issues, but significantly reduced), or remove it altogether. Cheaper that way too...

 

[Sneakypants]

I prefer 2 eyes for the 1 eye taken.

...And a single bullet to the head is cheap.

 

[Draude]

Psychopathy is a mental illness. One can be born with it.

 

[Sneakypants]

They can also die with it.

 

[Uzor]

So we should just test kids at an early age, if they have this "criminal gene" then they'll just be locked up for the rest of their life because they're going to become a criminal?

You obviously completely missunderstood me. I were just explaining how the mind works, and that childhood and upbringing really doesn't matter all that much.

There are two big reasons(there's others, but most are tied to one of these) why men are more violent than women, one is cultural, the other is natural. Naturally, men have a lot more testosterone in their system to women; one effect of testosterone is heightened aggression, and hence violence. Most cultures depict men as needing to be the strongest or most violent in order to win a woman; while it's not taken as literal anymore, it's still being perpetuated today.

Cultural really doesn't play that large of a role. The cultural part mostly affects opinions, morals and ethics. Doesn't do anything about their aggresivity. While yes, the "natural" part do play a role, like, say, impressing women, but that's more of a cultural part, and what's accepted off of them.

However, that's not the whole deal. Depending on the amount of testosterone and estrogen they get while in the womb, it affects their brain. A large amount of estrogene can often make males born gay with a more female behavior. More estrogen while in the womb affects their "empathy/sympathy" level. More estrogen means a child will have an easier time reading people's feelings. More testosterone on the other hand, means a child will be faster, more aggressive, and like to be competitive. Basically, the hormone levels while in the womb developes the brain in different ways. There is no criminal gene, its just the way the brain have developed.

I can buy they enjoy risk taking, what I don't buy is that they're helpless against such behaviors.

They're not helpless against aggresivity. Sexuality, however, is a very strong instinct. Instincts are basically a behavior that you're born with, that can't be trained away. However, you can hinder an instinct from happening, such as breathing, if you're intelligent. We're actually undergoing testing about this in Sweden. Offering sexual offenders sterilization. And guess what? A lot of people wanted it because they regretted what they did, and it actually prevented them from repeating their crimes. So yes, I do think that's a much better solution.

so you're saying that no one should know that someone who just moved in the neighborhood has a history of molesting kids? Yes it puts the community against them, but so what? They did something incredibly wrong and now they should have to live with the consequences.

Yes, that's what I think. It is true, what they did was wrong. Sterilizing them, and then let them serve their time, and then let them free is, I think, only right. Never giving them a chance to get back in life only results in negativity. If everyone, wherever he moves, is against him, ti completely prevents him from even living. It can make the person angry, thus provoking him in to a life of crime again. He's not simply going to change and live a normal life with everyone against him. That's not how it works.

Your whole post sounds like bullshit to me. You're saying the criminals are the actual victims, that they can't fight their genes and they don't want to commit crimes, but they're forced to. That's beyond ignorant, beyond stupid, I'm not sure there's even a word for how naive that is. I'd love to know where you're getting your "facts," because they're preposterous.

No. I never once said the criminals are the actual victims. First I explained how the brain works, and why they are criminals. Later on I just said that they deserve a second chance if its a crime that CAN be solved, such as sexual offenses. However, murder etc. can rarely be fixed, no matter how much shrinks can say its possible to fix it, because its hardwired in their brain. Serial murderers can not be fixed by simple treatment, simply because you can't change the way the brain works, unless you remove parts of it. Serial killers should be locked in for life. Death penalty is just the easy way out for them. They have nothing to lose, hence why they do it. They don't really care about being caught. Giving them a death penalty is just freeing them from a life they probably don't care about anyway. Making them live their life behind bars, without much interaction from others and bore to death is a much better punishment for them, and would discourage it further then giving them the death penalty.

America uses death penalty because, in their opinion, it discourages people from committing serious crimes. Obviously it doesn't work, since America have among the highest homicide numbers in the world. As an example, the resent school shootings. If he were caught before he shot himself, would giving him the death penalty affect him, the criminal, in a negative manner? The answer is no. The whole point with a punishment is to give them a punishment, not give them the easy way out.

 

[Uzor]

Forgot ele's post... Making a new post since I'm in Dynamis and it'll take some time to write, in case someone else posts.

Actually, Uzor... you'd be surprised. Some time ago there was a study where an individual would come in and there'd be another (an actor so no real anything but not to the other's knowledge) who would have to memorize 10 words in about a minute or something. Anyways, if they missed a word (which the actor would on purpose) the individual was to shock them (the volts ranged from 200 to 450 I do believe). Anyways, as the actor missed the word, the individual would shock them. The actor continue to miss words and so the person would shock them. The individual doing the shocking would hear screams from the other.. and keep going up in voltage. It's really interesting.. anyways.. the interesting thing, women were the ones that actually could see a smile/pleasure from causing pain (or so they believed) to others. So, in fact, women are not necessarily the most stable minded or anything to that sort

Didn't understand that part =/

However, there is also a study showing men are more based on justice and strict laws where as women (not all and same goes for men ) are more likely to look at the situation. Hence, why now we have issues where someone steals and it depends why they steal. There was a case sometime back, I forget what exactly, where a man stole some medical supplies for his wife. The Jury was I think.. 8 to 3 in voting him innocent. I tell you now, it was 8 women and 3 men. It is true the man stole but they figured cause he stole medicine for his wife, it was ok. Hehe.. It's interesting really

That's because women have more sympathy. Men are stricter at following laws, while women can see shades of a crime depending on the situation. As an example, if its a crime against a child, most women, due to having a natural protective instinct against kids, they'd be outraged most of the time. While men would react in a similar way, not as serious as women would. The 8 women thought it was more OK to do it, because the offense itself involved love, and they could see themselves in the same situation. While men possesses the same ability, it is not as strong as women's, due to men not being developed with as much estrogen as women while in the womb, causing their brain to develop differently.

And, I will say this, our society is more and more becoming very.. hmm.. well it's causing a downward spiral where people are not responsible for their actions. Where we used to judge someone as "bad" and they'd be "punished" (where the person is free and treated as being responsible for their own actions) we now have "sick" and they are "treated" in which case it's not their fault. Our society has really started to degrade, I think. Too often people are told that they are "not at fault" and that "it was how you were raised" or "your environment" or other crap... it really is driving society into a state where they won't take responsibility for their actions or even think of the consequences of them. It's sick to me.. bah :\

While yes, it is true to some extent what you say. And its true, some of it can be considered a disease. Some of it is untreatable, though. Experts think they are just that, experts, and think everything fits in to the same category, no exceptions. Hence why pretty much every teenager that's bored of school or hyperactive gets labled with A.D.H.D, even though it might just be the way they are, or the fact that school is, indeed, boring. In the same way, every expert considers everything a criminal might have as a disease that can be treated, and they know, in their own opinion, that they can treat it. You can't put everything in the same box and label it as such.

And no.. I see it that everyone is responsible for their own actions.. though I'm not a religious person, the quote from Kingdom of Heaven "A king may move a man, a father may claim a son. But remember that, even when those who move you be kings or men of power, your soul is in your keeping alone. When you stand before God you cannot say "but I was told by others to do thus" or that "virtue was not convinient at the time". This will not suffice. Remember that." I like this quote cause it does have the "an individual is responsible for their actions" kinda thing. I know there's a huge debate in sociology of "how much is really our fault, how much responsibility is ours" and, while it's true that the environment can shape a person, I have seen the same environments effect different people differently. One person I know who used to get beat up, picked on, etc has become quite a deviant to society.. another I know, an old friend, whose mother actually tried to kill him (twice, mind you), whose father was deaf and got laid off from his job (so money was always tight and communication was hard), and he used to get jumped when heading home from high school well that guy is amazing. He's a hard worker, he's very moral and treats people kindly and with respect. He really seems a good person. Why is it that two people can have bad lives and one comes out good and the other isn't? That's the same reason why I believe there is a genetic reason to why people become what they are and why some who are so... horrible to society probably have a genetic defect and should be exterminated from it but.. again.. I really could never practice what I preach XD

Offcourse everyone is reponsible for their own actions. That's not what I'm saying. The begining of my post was simply just an explanation as to why they commit their crimes, and what causes a criminal behavior. Everyone have aggressivty in them, but most people can contain it due to having better sympathy and empathy. While it may sound like I'm defending them and saying they can't help themselves, I'm not. I'm simply saying why they act the way they do. Not that the way they act is right.

 

[Raesylil]

Repeated sex offenders should have this done to them >.> You can call me violent but if you violate another, woman or child (or man), you deserve to go through humiliation, shame and pain.

Prince Humperdink: First things first, to the death.

Wesley: No, to the pain.

Prince Humperdink: I don't think I'm quite familiar with that phrase.

Wesley: I'll explain and I'll use small words so that you'll be sure to understand, you warthog nosed buffoon.

Prince Humperdink: That may be the first time in my life a man has dared insult me.

Wesley: It won't be the last. To the pain means the first thing you will lose will be your feet below the ankles. Then your hands at the wrists. Next your nose.

Prince Humperdink: And then my tongue I suppose, I killed you too quickly the last time. A mistake I don't mean to duplicate tonight.

Wesley: I wasn't finished. The next thing you will lose will be your left eye followed by your right.

Prince Humperdink: And then my ears, I understand, now let's get on with it.

Wesley: WRONG. Your ears you keep and I'll tell you why. So that every shriek of every child at seeing your hideousness will be yours to cherish. Every babe that weeps at your approach, every woman who cries out "Dear God! What is that thing," will echo in your perfect ears. That is what to the pain means. It means I leave you in anguish, wallowing in freakish misery forever.

Prince Humperdink: I think you're bluffing.

Wesley: It's possible, Pig, I might be bluffing. It's concievable, you miserable, vomitous mass, that I'm only lying here because I lack the strength to stand. But then again...perhaps I have the strength after all.

 

[Bajaratt]

You obviously completely missunderstood me. I were just explaining how the mind works, and that childhood and upbringing really doesn't matter all that much.

You're an idiot if you think that environment has no bearing on how they develop.

You are indicating a criminal gene, when you say things like:

If someone is naturally born a criminal

The only way to be "naturally born" a criminal is to have a criminal gene, everything about you is regulated through your genes. Any other reason to become a criminal is due to environment.

Cultural really doesn't play that large of a role. The cultural part mostly affects opinions, morals and ethics. Doesn't do anything about their aggresivity. While yes, the "natural" part do play a role, like, say, impressing women, but that's more of a cultural part, and what's accepted off of them.

And here's you not understanding what culture is and completely ignoring the effects of environment. Apparently to you people just magically become criminals for no reason.

They're not helpless against aggresivity. Sexuality, however, is a very strong instinct. Instincts are basically a behavior that you're born with, that can't be trained away. However, you can hinder an instinct from happening, such as breathing, if you're intelligent. We're actually undergoing testing about this in Sweden. Offering sexual offenders sterilization. And guess what? A lot of people wanted it because they regretted what they did, and it actually prevented them from repeating their crimes. So yes, I do think that's a much better solution.

You're blatantly contradicting yourself from earlier.

Most criminals are addicted to risk taking.

they don't want to do it, but they can't stop.

So you went from not being able to stop themselves to having control. What's going on in sweden doesn't necessarily work for the rest of the world. I haven't heard about any sex offenders in the US voluntarily chemically castrating themselves; or at least not enough to make any kind of news.

Yes, that's what I think. It is true, what they did was wrong. Sterilizing them, and then let them serve their time, and then let them free is, I think, only right. Never giving them a chance to get back in life only results in negativity. If everyone, wherever he moves, is against him, ti completely prevents him from even living. It can make the person angry, thus provoking him in to a life of crime again. He's not simply going to change and live a normal life with everyone against him. That's not how it works.

This is naive beyond belief. If the rest of the world doesn't take in every criminal like their best friend, then the criminal will just commit more crimes? This is idealistic to the point of stupidity.

No. I never once said the criminals are the actual victims.

No, but you implied the hell out of it. You said that they were criminals due to things beyond their control(impossible to control behaviors and being born criminals); that makes them a victim, because they're not responsible for what they're doing.

However, murder etc. can rarely be fixed, no matter how much shrinks can say its possible to fix it, because its hardwired in their brain.

So you can completely forget about a child rapist, but a murder is completely unforgivable and will never be able to not murder anyone again?

Death penalty is just the easy way out for them. They have nothing to lose, hence why they do it. They don't really care about being caught. Giving them a death penalty is just freeing them from a life they probably don't care about anyway. Making them live their life behind bars, without much interaction from others and bore to death is a much better punishment for them, and would discourage it further then giving them the death penalty.

HUGE assumptions; and almost completely uninformed. It's also placing a significantly heavier burden on the non-criminal populace, since they'd have to pay for everyone's lifelong stay at hotel prison.

America uses death penalty because, in their opinion, it discourages people from committing serious crimes. Obviously it doesn't work, since America have among the highest homicide numbers in the world. As an example, the resent school shootings. If he were caught before he shot himself, would giving him the death penalty affect him, the criminal, in a negative manner? The answer is no. The whole point with a punishment is to give them a punishment, not give them the easy way out.

If you actually think that capital punishment is "giving them the easy way out," then you're an idiot. The actual number of criminals who want to die is incredibly small; so it's still a punishment. They also do spend years in prison going through the appeals system, so even with killing them they still "suffer" through the prison system. If they're one of those incredibly small number of criminals, they would likely be pretty high up on the prison hierarchy, so their stay in prison won't be anywhere near as bad as you seem to think.

You're so completely misinformed it's not even worth arguing with you, really. Have fun posting more crap.

 

[Antor]

I prefer 2 eyes for the 1 eye taken.

...And a single bullet to the head is cheap.

We should just kill them with a spork or by forcing them to eat an ungodly amount of candy corn without being allowed to use the restroom or anything (the entire supply of candy corn has been recycled since 1930 anyway; we've got plenty of that). That's pretty cheap.

 

[Elemmire]

I don't care if it's the easy way out as it will still help the gene pool if their rotten genes are gone <3

anyways, Uzor.. the experiment I was talking about is this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

women were found to be so more.. sadistic in it.

 

[Zephayra]

We should just kill them with a spork or by forcing them to eat an ungodly amount of candy corn without being allowed to use the restroom or anything (the entire supply of candy corn has been recycled since 1930 anyway; we've got plenty of that). That's pretty cheap.

Just thinking about candy corn makes me feel sick, let alone eating it.

 

[Uzor]

You're an idiot if you think that environment has no bearing on how they develop.

You are indicating a criminal gene, when you say things like:

The only way to be "naturally born" a criminal is to have a criminal gene, everything about you is regulated through your genes. Any other reason to become a criminal is due to environment.

I never said it didn't matter. I said it didn't matter all that much. You can have the best parents in the world and still grow up to be a criminal. And you can have the toughest upbringing in the world and still grow up a decent human being. How your brain works plays a huge role if you decide to do to others what your parents did to you. You wrote it as upbringing and childhood is all that matters. And you have to be a idiot if you think that.

And yes, I did say born a natural criminal. If you'd have read what I wrote, its in the brain. Its not a gene, its how your brain works. That's two completely different areas. Your genes and DNA play little part in which hormones you get exposed to while in the womb.

And here's you not understanding what culture is and completely ignoring the effects of environment. Apparently to you people just magically become criminals for no reason.

Please do explain to me where I'm wrong in that quote. Your parents and friends, and the nation in which you live, together with the religion you believe in etc. affect your morals, ethics and beliefs. They doesn't make you more aggressive or more passive. That's all yourself. What they do shape, though, is that raping, murder etc. is wrong. However, if you lack sympathy and empathy, you'll have a hard time understanding why its wrong, and thus why it doesn't matter all that much, since the way your brain works plays a larger role.

You're blatantly contradicting yourself from earlier.

I don't see me contradicting myself here.

So you went from not being able to stop themselves to having control. What's going on in sweden doesn't necessarily work for the rest of the world. I haven't heard about any sex offenders in the US voluntarily chemically castrating themselves; or at least not enough to make any kind of news.

The bolded part makes no sense, since I said they were addicted to it, but can't stop, even though they might want to. People addicted to cocaine doesn't do it because they want to, they do it because they are addicted to it. They can't stop. I'm talking from personal experience, since quite a lot of people on my father's side were addicted to drugs, and rather heavy shit as well. And guess what? their kids grew up just fine, even though their parents took drug up until they were 11.

This is naive beyond belief. If the rest of the world doesn't take in every criminal like their best friend, then the criminal will just commit more crimes? This is idealistic to the point of stupidity.

That's far from what I said. But ok, if you want to be a narrow minded fool, be my guest.

No, but you implied the hell out of it. You said that they were criminals due to things beyond their control(impossible to control behaviors and being born criminals); that makes them a victim, because they're not responsible for what they're doing.

No, that's not what I said. I've said it possibly three or more times now, but a lot of my post were mainly explaining what criminal behavior comes from. Roughly 90% of your body, possibly more, is all controlled through hormones and instincts. You're basically a robot. A computer is programmed to do something, and that's what it do. In exactly the same way your, mine, a cat, a dog, and a criminals mind work. That does not, however, mean they're not responsible for their actions. We differ from a computer in one large way. We're not 100% bound by the rules of which we are programmed. We can refuse to permit an action that our body tells us we need to perform, which a computer can not do. However, if you lack sympathy or empathy due to not having been exposed to a lot of estrogen in the womb, or otherwise having a disease which cuts off that part of the brain, can cause a human to not see what's wrong with it. That does not make them not responsible for their action. It does, however, explain their action.

So you can completely forget about a child rapist, but a murder is completely unforgivable and will never be able to not murder anyone again?

Rapings can, to a large extent, be stopped by sterilizing someone. Aggresivity can, to some extent, be fixed through visiting a psychiatrist. Murder, unless accidental, can rarely be fixed through visiting a psychiatrist, due to the person in question lacking empathy and sympathy. It can be a lot, or it can be a little. In some cases a person can completely lack it. But that doesn't necessarily make the person a brutal murderer. He just have no idea what a person is feeling, and can't think how his actions can affect another human being, nor can't he explain his own feelings, nor can he know what he's feeling. He might know what he's expected to feel, but can not be able to.

HUGE assumptions; and almost completely uninformed. It's also placing a significantly heavier burden on the non-criminal populace, since they'd have to pay for everyone's lifelong stay at hotel prison.

Yes, it is an assumption, but I'd say a rather good one. Serial killers usually don't care all that much for their own life, but can care for friend's or family's life. And it doesn't place a large burden on the non-criminal population, due to giving someone the death penalty costs more than keeping them in prison for life. In all honesty I don't know how killing someone can cost so god damn much, since I doubt serial killers spent much money when they killed their victims.

If you actually think that capital punishment is "giving them the easy way out," then you're an idiot. The actual number of criminals who want to die is incredibly small; so it's still a punishment. They also do spend years in prison going through the appeals system, so even with killing them they still "suffer" through the prison system. If they're one of those incredibly small number of criminals, they would likely be pretty high up on the prison hierarchy, so their stay in prison won't be anywhere near as bad as you seem to think.

Yes, I know that not a lot of people might want to die, but there is still a few people that don't care. My point, however, is that death isn't much of a punishment. The only punishment they get is before they actually get killed, after which point they're not a live, and can't serve their punishment. Death is weird like that, you know? Can't feel anything once you're dead. And you can't serve much of a punishment. Personally, if I were a serial killer, I'd much rather just get the death penalty then serve the rest of my life bore to death in prison.

As for the last part, hence why I said they shouldn't get to interact with other inmates, but sit in their cell, alone, without the luxury they get in most prisons with a TV, radio and access to books and private meetings with girlfriends.

You're so completely misinformed it's not even worth arguing with you, really. Have fun posting more crap.

Right back at you.

 

[Uzor]

While that test is interesting, it doesn't really fit well in this case, due to that being a test whether people could do horrible things if an authoric (is that even a word?) person told them to do it, like, say, the soldiers during WW2 etc.

 

[Chuash]

"Sixty months of life-skills therapy in how not to rape children"

5 years this guy had of therapy... I mean.. come on.. if its not crossing his head after the first 3 months. There is your sign.

And another way of handling of how not to rape children: Just don't do it.

 

[Alyada]

"Sixty months of life-skills therapy in how not to rape children"

5 years this guy had of therapy... I mean.. come on.. if its not crossing his head after the first 3 months. There is your sign.

And another way of handling of how not to rape children: Just don't do it.

Says the kid implying Superman molests children on his avatar! HAHA!

I agree with Canitoch though. Let him rot in prison, most of them never make it past two months. He'll get shanked or raped or something. There are things worse than death.

 

[Elemmire]

and that's why I want torture to come back <3 some publicly tortured. Anyone seen Berserk or read it? If you have, you'll know the torture Griffith went through after having smex with the Princess (not sure if it was rape or mutual but being he wasn't supposed to be with her that's why.. I forget.. hmm) anyways.. ya.. that torture would totally rock to punish some with and publicly show it so everyone can get the fear put into them and keep them from doing it again, whoo. Even if it stops one person from doing it, I consider that more than enough reason XD

 

[Cecilee]

Kinda afraid. Just a little bit.

 

[Mirewen]

I have a degree in behavioural/forensic psychology and some of the things being said he just makes me sit back and laugh because they are just wrong.

Anyway... they might be charging him with the rape/death of another girl so they would still have the chance to give him the death penalty for that case.