What To Do With The Town Psycho/sociopath?

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

It doesn't matter if they don't know right from wrong, there's no place in society for people like this.

*watches hunhee dropkick the phrase "Ignorance is bliss" over a very tall cliff*......

[Rev.Reverence]

Wow, this is where my liberal roots fail me.

If I believed in hell, let them burn in eternal fucking hell (that would not be good enough for them, but it's a start). Since I don't believe in any of that, them being dead is better than letting them live, at least for society, although sometimes I think living is more punishment than dying (my philosophy on death).

It doesn't matter if they don't know right from wrong, there's no place in society for people like this.

Okay, the island thing is pretty clever, but umm.. that would cost a shit ton of money to monitor.

I know, we can do like Battle Royal style (except with criminals and not outcast kids).. now THAT would be entertainment. Make it Pay Per View..heh

Bring BACK gladitorial COMBAT...WhooTwHOot!!!!

I'm being silly...or am I ?

[phee]

Send them a link to DGN and welcome them?

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

Bring BACK gladitorial COMBAT...WhooTwHOot!!!!

I'm being silly...or am I ?

ok you two....while I respect the opinions....I don't think going socially backwards is an answer...and no..I don't wanna hear "one step back for two steps forward"...cuz gladitorial combat IS NOT one step back....thats like coming close to the end of the marathon and turning the fuck around.

i'll admit...it does have a nice ring to it though....

[Destroit]

Keep 'em in isolation for the rest of their lives.

See, that's such a hard thing for me, I've always walked on the border of the schools of "kill 'em and just get 'em off the Earth" or "Killing is wrong either way, don't stoop to their level, just lock them up"

If I knew for 100% beyond a reasonable doubt that someone murdered someone else brutally and with no remorse for their actions, they should get fried. Well "injected" (how wtf retarded, what was wrong with the chair?). I like the thought of public being able to see this because it does one of who things: The audience is scared of it happened to them and therefore will commit less murder and also it fufills our morbid curiosity, imo, which sorta satisfies people into not murdering (don't believe me? Ask those horror movie freaks who have never actually killed anyone themselves, watching that kind of stuff sorta "feeds that need).

BUT, sometimes in death row cases the evidence isn't so crystal clear and mistakes are made. Some are caused by carelessness, biasness (i.e. look at The Green Mile), hurriedness, or just plain bad judgement. Many people on death row are innocent and put to death all the time for murders they did not commit, which makes my stomach churn to think about. What if that were to happen to you or someone you loved? It's hard to fathom. In cases such as these, the death penalty shouldn't be an option. It's too easy to put the wrong person to death. I would go with 25 to life on that sort of thing.

The only reason I really even think about the chair as a viable option is because, let's face it, we pay for each inmate that's in jail and that's not very fair on us. We pay to feed them, clothe them, keep shelter over them, keep the heat on (barely, but still ). The jail/prison system in America is already overfilled and under budgeted, if there are cases of extremely brutal and violent killers who WE KNOW did it beyond all 100% reasonable doubt, serial killers, child killers, etc, then they need to get fried to make some room. We really don't need those people around, nor do we want them.

[hunhee]

Send them a link to DGN and welcome them?

Now there's a response

Our cheerful goodness will definitely make them want to shape up.. lol

[Rayne]

See though.... even those with severe psychological issues can learn how to properly behave and function in society.

I agree, most can. But not all will. Despite a parent's (notice I said A PARENT) best attempts.

[Rayne]

As a child she has time to 'adjust' and learn 'releases' that are socially acceptable...

I as a child was not helped but further hindered...

If I could find MY own way through my own hellish disorders, I think (because she has such a wonderful support system), she should adjust quite fine...

P.S. there are natural herbs for that...

We hope.

She's been under a psychiatrist (monthly, sometimes more) and psychologist's (weekly) care since she was three. She'll be nine next month. She wasn't on meds at all until she was five.

She's improved in some areas, but gotten much worse in others.

[Rev.Reverence]

**ahem***

opoops OOPS...

[Goth Brooks]

I have to agree with bringing back gladiatorial combat. Other than the fatal aspect of it, it is absolutely no different than competitive sports we already watch. The government might as well turn the convicts into another source of income, rather than a money pit.

SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY

JEFFREY "I ATE YO' MOMMA" DAHMER

VS

JOHN WAYNE "HONK MY NOSE" "the Killer Clown" GACEY!!!!!

No Holds Barred! Last Man Standing

Place your bets.

[Destroit]

I have to agree with bringing back gladiatorial combat. Other than the fatal aspect of it, it is absolutely no different than competitive sports we already watch. The government might as well turn the convicts into another source of income, rather than a money pit.

SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY

JEFFREY "I ATE YO' MOMMA" DAHMER

VS

JOHN WAYNE "HONK MY NOSE" "the Killer Clown" GACEY!!!!!

No Holds Barred! Last Man Standing

Place your bets.

Dude, I so have ten bucks on Gacy. That guy's a crazy sonofabitch.

Dahmer was just curious what people tasted like, I mean come onnnn, child-like curiosity (baddd humor, please don't come over my house and think that the steak in my fridge is my neighbor after reading that. Not the case at all. I promise. If you come over, please bring seasoning in your pocket though..uhm....no reason.)

[ttogreh]

Society is a unified body. That's the point of a society.

And there is absolutely nothing fascistic about it.

Oh, boy.

Now, I have a choice... I can submit the dictionary definition of fascism, from several different dictionaries, cite several encyclopedia excerpts on fascism, QUOTE THE WORDS OF HITLER AND MUSSOLINI THEMSELVES, and then offer a counter view of society from several different libertarian thinkers (heavy on the Friedman, light on the Ayn Rand... it's too bad she was horse-kissing nuts... The Fountainhead is such a nice read...), and thereby paint you into a corner.

A corner, from which the only escape is to eat crow, and admit that without context, the idea that "society is a unified body" can indeed be interpreted as fascistic, or ineffectually attack me with ad hominems, straw men, and other logical fallacies. That way of doing things will get this thread locked quite quickly. I honestly don't want that.

Or, I can just ask you what exactly you mean by "society is a unified body", thereby allowing you to paint context to your words, and other a softer, kinder, gentler idea behind the phrase.

So... what exactly do you mean?

Then you are referring to the moment, I wasn't.

You see? CONTEXT MATTERS.

You also refer to an Island of Banishment. Which I can't really fathom. So are you saying it's not the right of the state to quickly, painlessly, end the life of someone who has destroyed others. But it is the right of the state to banish that same individual to a life of hunger and survival amongst his own kind?

That is severely sadistic. Not saying I'm against it, I actually like the idea. But it just doesn't seem to fit with the rest of your opinions in this thread (or others).

No, you see, I believe in reciprocity tempered with perspective. Killing a man or woman who has killed by strapping them down to a gurney and making a mockery of medical science by perverting it into an act of state-administered homicide sickens me.

Removing a murderer from society, so that he or she can never harm an innocent again, but giving them the slim, slim chance of creating some kind of positive life for themselves, in such a way that does not encourage crime by creating criminal colleges also known as prisons... that is not sadistic.

It's tough, brutal, and may very well, give the friends and family of the victim a better sense of justice.

[ttogreh]

Okay, the island thing is pretty clever, but umm.. that would cost a shit ton of money to monitor.

No... it really wouldn't. There are UAVs that run on solar cells and hydrogen fuel cells. These suckers can stay in the air for WEEKS. The coast guard knows how to moor ships offshore pretty well.

Trust me, the cost of remotely monitoring an island would cost volumes less than housing, feeding, clothing, bathing, heating, cooling, and doctoring a god-damn sociopath for ten or more years, the amount of time that the average death row appeals process takes.

[Rev.Reverence]

No... it really wouldn't. There are UAVs that run on solar cells and hydrogen fuel cells. These suckers can stay in the air for WEEKS. The coast guard knows how to moor ships offshore pretty well.

Trust me, the cost of remotely monitoring an island would cost volumes less than housing, feeding, clothing, bathing, heating, cooling, and doctoring a god-damn sociopath for ten or more years, the amount of time that the average death row appeals process takes.

Oh..if we could father such a Utopian society...( said in the strictest seriousness )

[sass_in_the_pants]

but punishment....for what you are...something that cannot be helped?...will we never come farther then this as a society??

lol...and no...not fava beans and a nice Chianti...but maybe like some brussel sprouts and a beer....lol

What would you propose - what would be the 'farther' that you are looking for?

A mental illness does not preclude someone from knowing right from wrong. As a matter of fact, punishment may be the only way to make that person's life better. Consider that if you don't know right from wrong, you would at least know what pleases you and what displeases you. Punishment is inherently displeasing, so assuming you would like to avoid things that displease you, employing punishment would be really the ONLY thing that could keep you functioning in society.

And there is no shortage of critics of the US prison system. To them, I say, you should see the ones in Mexico. I'm only half-joking.

But really, do I think prison in general is rehabiliative? No, but I do think dangerous people need to be seperated from the general population.

So what do I suggest?

There's always North Dakota. Just send em there.

I agree, most can. But not all will. Despite a parent's (notice I said A PARENT) best attempts.

I was just talking about this very thing with a co-worker today. Whenever some kid does some crazy shit, everyone says 'They must have had bad parents'. I'm not so quick to judge. No doubt, there are bad parents, and no doubt a good parent is the most powerful influence for good in a kid's life. But then, you always see on the news some kid who did all sorts of horrible stuff and their parents were just as dedicated as they could be, y'know?

And, as a parent, I am sure, like you said, that you wouldn't know how to answer this question, but I can probably safely assume that the only thing worse for you than the idea of your child being punished by society would be the idea that your child had done something to deserve that punishment.

My co-worker and I were saying today that we had sympathy not only for the parents of crime victims, but the parents of crime perpetrators. I'm sure they never meant for their kids to turn out like that.

[Rev.Reverence]

I was just talking about this very thing with a co-worker today. Whenever some kid does some crazy shit, everyone says 'They must have had bad parents'. I'm not so quick to judge. No doubt, there are bad parents, and no doubt a good parent is the most powerful influence for good in a kid's life. But then, you always see on the news some kid who did all sorts of horrible stuff and their parents were just as dedicated as they could be, y'know?

And, as a parent, I am sure, like you said, that you wouldn't know how to answer this question, but I can probably safely assume that the only thing worse for you than the idea of your child being punished by society would be the idea that your child had done something to deserve that punishment.

My co-worker and I were saying today that we had sympathy not only for the parents of crime victims, but the parents of crime perpetrators. I'm sure they never meant for their kids to turn out like that.

Likewise there are people with verry horrible parents that find a way to live a relatively adjusted life...

& are never seen on the news.

[Goth Brooks]

Now, I have a choice... I can submit the dictionary definition of fascism, from several different dictionaries, cite several encyclopedia excerpts on fascism, QUOTE THE WORDS OF HITLER AND MUSSOLINI THEMSELVES, and then offer a counter view of society from several different libertarian thinkers (heavy on the Friedman, light on the Ayn Rand... it's too bad she was horse-kissing nuts... The Fountainhead is such a nice read...), and thereby paint you into a corner.

A corner, from which the only escape is to eat crow, and admit that without context, the idea that "society is a unified body" can indeed be interpreted as fascistic, or ineffectually attack me with ad hominems, straw men, and other logical fallacies. That way of doing things will get this thread locked quite quickly. I honestly don't want that.

Or, I can just ask you what exactly you mean by "society is a unified body", thereby allowing you to paint context to your words, and other a softer, kinder, gentler idea behind the phrase.

So... what exactly do you mean?

What part of "Society is a unified body" is difficult to understand? There is my question (not an attack at all) to you. No matter what political group you point to, no matter what part of history you wish to examine, a group of people coming together into a unified whole has the exact characteristics of the animal body. Every part and system in the body you point out has it's equivalent within a 'tribal system', no matter it's political beliefs. Accept the appendix, of course.

As for my comment being fascistic, how would it be fascistic when (once again) every grouping of people, no matter their beliefs, is a society. A group of humans coming together as one unified body of living.

Would you call the Co-Op system fascistic? It's a society. It's a unified body of people coming together under the belief that everything should be owned and administered by the entirety of it's population. And yet there is STILL a head, there is still a form of policing and administering justice to those that break it's rules. In my opinion, the Co Op system is as far from any definition of "fascism" as you can dredge up. It still carries within it's system a mirror image of the body's own internal systems.

If you wish to argue that everything is fascist, you have fun with that.

making a mockery of medical science by perverting it into an act of state-administered homicide sickens me.

Medical Science is sterile, and therefore cannot be made a mockery of. But that's a matter of opinion, so enjoy yours.

Removing a murderer from society, so that he or she can never harm an innocent again, but giving them the slim, slim chance of creating some kind of positive life for themselves, in such a way that does not encourage crime by creating criminal colleges also known as prisons... that is not sadistic.

It's tough, brutal, and may very well, give the friends and family of the victim a better sense of justice.

Placing every murderer, rapist, violent criminal, parking ticket destroyer, etc on an island together to live out the rest of their lives to be dominated, destroyed, murdered/raped by their own kind does not have the slightest hint of sadism in your eyes? It would to many in society.

And now to the fallacies.... that whole first paragraph of yours, so very Good Will Hunting. And your statement regarding context? You seem to deliberately provoke people by taking someone's post, reading it out of the context in which is was meant, and then replying from that view. You've done it in posts by myself and 2 other people that I've seen so far.

This is DGN, not the Mensa debate boards, if you cannot carry on an intellectual conversation without demanding that the context of each and every post is absolutely made clear, then I would kindly suggest not participating. The context of my message was plain as day and needed nothing more than a quick run over to Webster to verify.

Feel free to reply with other people's thoughts.

[~Tszura~]

The idea of putting very violent criminals, like murder’s and rapists on an island still appeals to me the most. I believe that the only way someone who has violent thought processes and behaviors that does not flow with the rest of society will learn to live (if not peacefully, then at least functionally) is through experience. Putting them all on an island and leaving them there means they will all either kill each other, or learn to live together to survive.

And, I’m sorry, but once on the island, that’s it, there’s no coming off it. Even if a violent criminal learns through his/her experience, I wouldn’t want them back in society. This begs the question of why even bother with the island, why not just kill them? Well, I’m all about the experience. To me, there is justice in whether or not the criminal will truly comes to understand the severity of their actions in relation to society as a whole.

And I also agree that it is a slippery slope as far as who society would deem appropriate for the island. I certainly don’t think someone who robs and steals can be put in the same category as someone who murdered.

[hunhee]

I really am not in favor of this island thing. We'd have to know where to draw the line, AND if it's going to be a co-op island, and if we do, that means we have to decide whether or not to make them all sterile. I think that's another issue (fucking can of worms) you guys wouldn't be willing to deal with, but it's a distinct reality if you decide to do this type of punishment.

What about the chances of escape? You can remotely monitor stuff, but these are masterminds they're not inept stupid criminals we're dealing with. Where there's a will, and genius, there's a way.

I agree with the "not being able to let them off the island" because, they're STILL not going to be well equipt to live in OUR society. They may be able to handle the savage island, they may seem well reformed (although, I HIGHLY doubt it) but a normal life, they won't.

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

Where there's a will, and genius, there's a way.

hence the sucess of "MacGyver".....

[ttogreh]

I always thought it was the mullet, myself...

Look, Goth Brooks, I could go down point by point with you on your straw men and ad hominems, but that would hijack the thread. All I really need to say, is that I am continually amazed at how the need to "win" an argument on the internet is directly proportional to how ineffectual the tactics used to do as much.

Indeed, seeing as the island idea, in context, and with thought, appeals to a few folks other than myself, I really feel that it is you, not me, that has more work convincing the people of this thread, mostly Michiganders, as to why we should repeal the ban on capital punishment, a ban over one hundred years old.

[~Tszura~]

I really am not in favor of this island thing. We'd have to know where to draw the line, AND if it's going to be a co-op island, and if we do, that means we have to decide whether or not to make them all sterile. I think that's another issue (fucking can of worms) you guys wouldn't be willing to deal with, but it's a distinct reality if you decide to do this type of punishment.

What about the chances of escape? You can remotely monitor stuff, but these are masterminds they're not inept stupid criminals we're dealing with. Where there's a will, and genius, there's a way.

I agree with the "not being able to let them off the island" because, they're STILL not going to be well equipt to live in OUR society. They may be able to handle the savage island, they may seem well reformed (although, I HIGHLY doubt it) but a normal life, they won't.

I agree this is certainly not a clear cut issue, and there are many things that would need to be figured out first. I'm open to all alternatives with further discussion. Between keeping someone on Death Row (that we know for certain is brutal to the core, and theres no mistake about their crime or brutality) for 10 plus years, or putting them on an island(no TV, no medical care, etc) as punishment, I just feel the island option signifies greater justice. If my loved one were brutally murdered, having the killer put to death by lethal injection would not be justice for me. That would just be too easy of an out. I would feel better (?) with the murderer having to fend for themselves and suffer on an island. Maybe that’s sinking back to gladiator/barbaric days, but that’s just how I feel.

I don’t think we should have to clothe, feed, provide medical care, and various social amenities to brutal killers just because we feel its humane while they are waiting to die on Death Row. Shouldn’t the violence and brutality they enacted on society through their murderous ways disqualify them from receiving certain societal privileges?

And as far as the “sterile” issue, there’s really no trouble there for me….I say make them all sterile. We don’t need children being raised on this island, its for punishment only. Maybe making them sterile will have some effect on their behavior, as well. And yeah, this would be a whole other can of worms that our society would have to deal with, but again, I would be open to working out the specifics on a moral, ethical, lawful level with others versus not trying at all.

[hunhee]

I find it funny that liberals find Capital Punishment cruel and inhumane but this island where they can't do shit about shit and they have to starve to death more "humane"... that's an odd type of justice.

Tszura (above) had mentioned that it is more INHUMANE.. so what is it? Is it more humane than our current prison system or inhumane? I thought we wanted something that was a "fair" outcome... You scoff at my "battle royal scenario" but this island isn't much different.. it just wouldn't be glorified, and televised (and I wouldn't get the royalties from it

If we talk about what people deserve as punishment, if you believe in a creator, you would then hope that the creator has a fiery version of hell for these criminals to rot in for eternity. Then again if you believed in a creator, then why the hell would these "types" be allowed to even exist in the first place, and dont' say the devil, that's not your way out of that question.

I think I now understand why Republicans are for the death penalty, and pro life.

I am all for sociopaths suffering.. If it were someone that I loved or cared about that was the victim, the suffering these people would endure at my OWN hands would be excruciating if I ever got my hands on them, so much so, they would put ME away for having sociopathic tendencies..then I hope that some liberal gets a hold of me and puts me out of my misery.. most likely, I would do it myself.

You've got to take the emotional out of the equation, and remember that when you deal a type of punishment out, how much of your own humanity are you losing in the process (when I say you, I mean society as a whole).

I guess I'm not convinced at which is the higher form of suffering, and which is more cruel. They all seem pretty damn bad to me.. death row/lethal injection, lifetime imprisonment, or an island of banishment with sterility.

All seem pretty cruel to me. But I'm cheap (oh wait a friend of mine said the PC word is FRUGAL), throw the fucking switch... err inject the SOB. and walk away, and forget it ever happened... does that mean I have sociopathic tendencies if I can emotionally deal with this? Probably... if I get carried away, you can throw the switch on me as well.

[ttogreh]

I reject the liberal / conservative false dyad, Hunhee. Life is a spectrum, not a game of Chess. The fact of the matter is, basing societal response to murder on a metric such as cruelty or kindness... just isn't really all that relevant.

The point of any punishment to murder should be deterrence and justice. Since absolutely nothing can be done to return the victim of murder to his or her friends and family, any course of action in an effort for justice will by definition, fall short.

As such, we should look at cost effectiveness and deterrence as the most relevant and obtainable factors in punishment. At the current time, and there are several unbiased studies that prove this, it is simply cheaper to keep a murderer in prison for the rest of his life than it is to keep him on death row for ten or more years, due to the constitutionally guaranteed appeals process.

Logically, we can assume that banishing an unashamed and clinically diagnosed murderous sociopath / psychopath on a remotely monitored island would cost that much less, and would be a far more frightening idea than "If you do this, you will be fed, housed, and medically cared for for the rest of your life, and you will be able to exact brutality on any number of people for years and years", which could very well be what a sociopath feels what life imprisonment really means.

I am sold on the banishment idea. It just appeals to my sense of justice.

[Guest GodfallenPromos]

I reject the liberal / conservative false dyad, Hunhee. Life is a spectrum, not a game of Chess. The fact of the matter is, basing societal response to murder on a metric such as cruelty or kindness... just isn't really all that relevant.

The point of any punishment to murder should be deterrence and justice. Since absolutely nothing can be done to return the victim of murder to his or her friends and family, any course of action in an effort for justice will by definition, fall short.

As such, we should look at cost effectiveness and deterrence as the most relevant and obtainable factors in punishment. At the current time, and there are several unbiased studies that prove this, it is simply cheaper to keep a murderer in prison for the rest of his life than it is to keep him on death row for ten or more years, due to the constitutionally guaranteed appeals process.

Logically, we can assume that banishing an unashamed and clinically diagnosed murderous sociopath / psychopath on a remotely monitored island would cost that much less, and would be a far more frightening idea than "If you do this, you will be fed, housed, and medically cared for for the rest of your life, and you will be able to exact brutality on any number of people for years and years", which could very well be what a sociopath feels what life imprisonment really means.

I am sold on the banishment idea. It just appeals to my sense of justice.

I'm partially with you...but on a different part of your post. You mentioned the "fed, housed, and medically cared for" well...thats all fine and good...but do they NEED cable TV, CD players, etc in prison??....this is f*cking ridiculous in my opinion.....I mean...damn...their outlawing cigarettes in jails and prisons, but you can get premium cable??? if that really ness??

for a good example...when I was jailed in Knoxville TN....the way they would punish general population was a guard would walk in...put a key in the JUICE FOUNTIAN MACHINE (yes...you read that right), and turn it off....ummm....isn't that what you do to 7 year olds in school????