Viewing Thread:
"Feeling a little fecked"

Aggressive tw*ts, drunks who just won’t listen, I can handle them
Immature kids who shout “pig’s”, I can put up with.
People who argue over tickets “I’ve only been here I minute”, I can deal with.

These are all everyday occurrences and ones that although they can be slightly irritating, do not make my job nasty.

A 16-year-old who is pregnant with her second kid and has been slapped around.
Indecent pictures of children.
Elderly people who’ve been robbed.

These are the things that get me down.

Cyclone wrote:
> But you said it yourself - there are far worse things than death.
> Surely if we really wanted to punish people, then death is the easy
> option (using the logic you put out in your post).

But if a dog savages a child, we put it down - why?

Why do we not 'rehabilitate' the dog, try to teach and train it to act in an acceptable manner? Simple - because people generally accept that an animal, once it has savaged a human, will do it again in the future. Rather than take the risk and give it the opportunity, they put the dog down. The dog doesn't suffer, it is a 'humane' thing to do.

So why do they not apply the same criteria to humans - it's only because we are the same species. Like someone said in a euthanasia text I read recently : "Most humans would not let an animal suffer in pain for the rest of its life, they would kill it humanely. But when it comes to humans they refuse to do it." (or words to that effect).

Mutilation isn't the answer.

Flockhart wrote:
> if people thought justice was being done,the public wouldnt feel the
> need to take the law into their own hands.

But this is the point. They are TOLD justice is not being done - sometimes of course it is not. I take Maxine Carr. She had served most of her time in prison and then was reccomended for release with electronic tagging. The papers went crazy and told everyone that this was evil, unjust - yet what was happening to Carr (sp?) was legal and just - the way the law works!!!

> even then if someone refused to call the police after they had been
> beaten up,their friend might decide to deal with the sod

That's just plain stupidity. First of all, that's not even injustice, that's just not calling the authorities down on another idiot. Secondly, what the person did to the 'sod' could potentially be far worse than what had happened before, fueled by rage etc.

But you said it yourself - there are far worse things than death. Surely if we really wanted to punish people, then death is the easy option (using the logic you put out in your post).

'Eye for an eye' is just the most stupid rubbish ever. I admit at times I've had to get the last stab (not literally) in, but that has been in petty arguments with my brother. Not when confronted with vile people and stooping to their level.

I'm mainly talking about personal level - when one gets to what punishments should actually be, and then war, my thoughts are less clear.

if people thought justice was being done,the public wouldnt feel the need to take the law into their own hands.
even then if someone refused to call the police after they had been beaten up,their friend might decide to deal with the sod

I think the whole killing people subject is a grey area.

I mean, we're allowed to kill people if they are a threat to national security, we are allowed to kill people for treason. In america, the death penalty is still in use, and to be honest I agree with it.

I've thought a lot about it recently I have to admit, originally I thought that even serial killers should be given a second chance - that they may possibly be rehabilitated. But why waste the money? I think we are too 'humane'. how do you think Jamie Bulgers mum feels, having these little gets living the life of luxury, after horrifically killing her son. The same with Holly and Jessicas parents.

I really do now believe that the death penalty is a fitting punishment for some crimes. If I had committed such horrific acts of brutality, I would expect nothing less to be done to me. Surely it's for the best. There are far worse things than death.

Paradox: wrote:
> Flockhart wrote:
> if justice wont punish them the public will.
>
> You'd think so wouldn't you? But these sick criminals get protection.
> Ian Huntley is being protected in prison when really he should be put
> in a cell with a sex-starved 7 foot 42 stone convict and be made to
> be his b**ch.


Yes. What Huntley did was wrong. But somebody killing him because of what he did (for example) is still wrong, whether it was 'morally justified or not.

Flockhart wrote:
> lie detectors are easy to deceive if you know how

do tell ....

*begins plotting crime spree*

Belldandy wrote:
> Twistid wrote:
> I agree with your way of thinking, ie a sex offender should have his
> balls cut off, but the trouble is innocent people are still
> convicted, and I think this would take us back to the times when
> innocent people were hanged for murder
>
> So by the same logic a drunk should have his tongue cut out,
> shoplifers have hands chopped off... heh we'll keep on going until
> the UN sanctions our economy to dust...

Why shouldn't shoplifters have there hands chopped off?
They've broken a law. Maybe for these misdeamours there could be lighter sentence such as prison time.

But I hardly think that killing James Bulger in such a vicious way and getting lifestyles like they have now is right.

And being a drunk is not a crime.

Peter Venkman wrote:
> And if these Laws were brought in, it would be more of a deterrent
> than a sentencing system.

USA has death penalty, as do other places, doesn't stop crimes though...ho hum.