Print Page | Close Window

new form of punishment

Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=177277
Printed Date: 21 April 2026 at 7:31pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: new form of punishment
Posted By: GI JOES SON
Subject: new form of punishment
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:11pm
since we apparently can't put people on death row and actually kill them, and for those who confess to things they do and just get time, i thought of something. well, i sort of ripped off an idea and let it snowball in my head a little.

die hard with a vengeance- the cop has to stand on street corner in harlem. with a sign that says "i hate *racial term for black people*"

so. what if we take convicted and confessed criminals and make them do that? i think it would be interesting.



Replies:
Posted By: Styro Folme
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:12pm
So what.  When the black people kill them, they have to hold up the sign too?


Posted By: impulse!
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:13pm


-------------


Posted By: Predatorr
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:17pm
Vendetta.  That's the best form of punishment.


Posted By: oreomann33
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:22pm
It's called Scarlet Letter punishment, it's used on small, petty crimes but it's usually appealed as unconstitutional. 

-------------


Posted By: unvolution
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:28pm
send them into space without a suit.... or make a bottomless pit to push them all into


Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 8:29pm
Yeah..so they get killed, then the killer picks up the sign, gets killed, etc?

Actually....might be a good way to clean up the ghetto...


Posted By: Rambino
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 9:00pm

Originally posted by GI JOES SON GI JOES SON wrote:

...for those who confess to things they do ...

You should know that false confession is considered by most experts to be the second leading cause of the conviction of innocent people.

A confession alone is not particularly persuasive.



-------------
[IMG]http://i38.tinypic.com/aag8s8.jpg">


Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 9:51pm
What's so wrong with just having a civilized justice system?


Posted By: WGP guy2
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 9:54pm
Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

What's so wrong with just having a civilized justice system?


Because many criminals aren't civilized.


Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 9:56pm
Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

What's so wrong with just having a civilized justice system?


Civilized != flawless


Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 9:59pm
Originally posted by WGP guy2 WGP guy2 wrote:


Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

What's so wrong with just having a civilized justice system?
Because many criminals aren't civilized.


And here I was thinking that we were supposed to be better people than criminals.

Originally posted by choopie911 choopie911 wrote:

Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

What's so wrong with just having a civilized justice system?


Civilized != flawless


Indeed. Nothing is perfect. I don't get the point though.


Posted By: Da Hui
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:02pm
I say we eliminate all prisons on North America and send the prisoners to Antartica.


-------------


Posted By: GI JOES SON
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:03pm
Originally posted by Rambino Rambino wrote:

Originally posted by GI JOES SON GI JOES SON wrote:

...for those who confess to things they do ...

You should know that false confession is considered by most experts to be the second leading cause of the conviction of innocent people.

A confession alone is not particularly persuasive.


good sir;

i of course, refer to those who go in depth explanations of killing innocent persons; and their torture that preceded their death. charles manson comes to mind


Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:04pm
Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

Originally posted by WGP guy2 WGP guy2 wrote:


Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

What's so wrong with just having a civilized justice system?
Because many criminals aren't civilized.


And here I was thinking that we were supposed to be better people than criminals.

Originally posted by choopie911 choopie911 wrote:

Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

What's so wrong with just having a civilized justice system?


Civilized != flawless


Indeed. Nothing is perfect. I don't get the point though.


Vigilante justice is just more...fun


Posted By: Rambino
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:16pm

Originally posted by GI JOES SON GI JOES SON wrote:

i of course, refer to those who go in depth explanations of killing innocent persons; and their torture that preceded their death. charles manson comes to mind

False confessions are false regardless of how indepth they are or how much torture they describe.

Confessions that are obviously false do not typically lead to conviction.  The good ones are all believeable.  That is why false confession is a leading cause of wrongful conviction.



-------------
[IMG]http://i38.tinypic.com/aag8s8.jpg">


Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:22pm
This thread sucks.

Everyone has either posted something stupid, or high and mighty.


-------------
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo


Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:24pm
Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

This thread sucks.Everyone has either posted something stupid, or high and mighty.


I like that the new codename for intelligent is "high and mighty."



Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:29pm
Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

This thread sucks.Everyone has either posted something stupid, or high and mighty.


I like that the new codename for intelligent is "high and mighty."



I think he was referring more to the people who claim the moral high ground and assume that anyone who disagrees with them must be occupying the less stellar depths of morality.


-------------


Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:31pm
Originally posted by Mack Mack wrote:

Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

This thread sucks.Everyone has either posted something stupid, or high and mighty.


I like that the new codename for intelligent is "high and mighty."



I think he was referring more to the people who claim the moral high ground and assume that anyone who disagrees with them must be occupying the less stellar depths or morality.



Please.


Adopt me.


-------------
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo


Posted By: Shub
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:46pm
Originally posted by Bill Of Rights Bill Of Rights wrote:

Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


Posted By: Pariel
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:47pm
Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:


Originally posted by Mack Mack wrote:


Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

This thread sucks.Everyone has either posted something stupid, or high and mighty.


I like that the new codename for intelligent is "high and mighty."

I think he was referring more to the people who claim the moral high ground and assume that anyone who disagrees with them must be occupying the less stellar depths or morality.
Please.Adopt me.


You'd have to move to Canada usaf, you really want that?

I agree with whoever said we should send them to Antarctica. Someone needs to take back the last continent! Also, they're not allowed to do anything that would harm the environment. Or we bomb them.

I'm deadly serious. Cluster bombs. Or bon-bons (don't ask me why that came into my head, it's not quite right up there), whichever is cheaper.


Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 10:52pm
Originally posted by Mack Mack wrote:



...anyone who disagrees with them must be occupying the less stellar depths of morality.


The truth hurts sometimes.


Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 05 August 2008 at 11:35pm
Originally posted by GI JOES SON GI JOES SON wrote:

Originally posted by Rambino Rambino wrote:

Originally posted by GI JOES SON GI JOES SON wrote:

...for those who confess to things they do ...

You should know that false confession is considered by most experts to be the second leading cause of the conviction of innocent people.

A confession alone is not particularly persuasive.


good sir;

i of course, refer to those who go in depth explanations of killing innocent persons; and their torture that preceded their death. charles manson comes to mind

That might work, except Charles Manson never killed anyone.



Posted By: GI JOES SON
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 10:03am
no, he just convinced a whole lot of people to drink the cool aid. i personally view that as psychological abuse and coersion; he convinced them to do all that crazy stuff until some congressman started an investigation and he told them all to kill themselves.

besides if he held a sign like that it'd probably be true...correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't he have a swastica on his forehead?


Posted By: Da Hui
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 10:10am


-------------


Posted By: JohnnyHopper
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 10:16am
Originally posted by GI JOES SON GI JOES SON wrote:

no, he just convinced a whole lot of people to drink the cool aid. i personally view that as psychological abuse and coersion; he convinced them to do all that crazy stuff until some congressman started an investigation and he told them all to kill themselves.besides if he held a sign like that it'd probably be true...correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't he have a swastica on his forehead?


You're mixing your crazy people....crazy

-------------
My shoes of peace have steel toes.


Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 10:48am
Originally posted by Pariel Pariel wrote:

Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:


Originally posted by Mack Mack wrote:


Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

This thread sucks.Everyone has either posted something stupid, or high and mighty.


I like that the new codename for intelligent is "high and mighty."

I think he was referring more to the people who claim the moral high ground and assume that anyone who disagrees with them must be occupying the less stellar depths or morality.
Please.Adopt me.


You'd have to move to Canada usaf, you really want that?

1.  Why would he have to move to Canada?
2.  Adoption depends on USAF's age; just got the last one out of college.

Originally posted by agentwhale007 agentwhale007 wrote:

Originally posted by Mack Mack wrote:



...anyone who disagrees with them must be occupying the less stellar depths of morality.


The truth hurts sometimes.


I was also going to mention the arrogance that is involved in such automatic assumptions of holding the moral high ground . . . but I don't think I need to now.


-------------


Posted By: Rambino
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 11:02am

Originally posted by GI JOES SON GI JOES SON wrote:

no, he just convinced a whole lot of people to drink the cool aid. i personally view that as psychological abuse and coersion;

Which, of course, is different from what you were talking about earlier.

Quote besides if he held a sign like that it'd probably be true...correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't he have a swastica on his forehead?

"Probably" is now the standard?  Having a swastica carved in your forehead means you are guilty?

(The swastika, BTW, came only after he was convicted.  He initially carved an "X" during the trial, and then later modified it to a swastika.  And, of course, we have already had discussions here about the origins and uses of the swastika symbol.)

Do you see how quickly you got into a muddle with even the most "obvious" of criminal cases?

There is a very, very long way to go from "beyond a reasonable doubt" to "absolute certainty."



-------------
[IMG]http://i38.tinypic.com/aag8s8.jpg">


Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 11:09am

Originally posted by GI JOES SON GI JOES SON wrote:

no, he just convinced a whole lot of people to drink the cool aid. i personally view that as psychological abuse and coersion; he convinced them to do all that crazy stuff until some congressman started an investigation and he told them all to kill themselves.

besides if he held a sign like that it'd probably be true...correct me if i'm wrong, but didn't he have a swastica on his forehead?

How can you argue your point when you're confusing Jim Jones with Charles Manson?



Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 11:12am
Wikipedia is your friend.

-------------

irc.esper.net
#paintball


Posted By: Rambino
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 11:28am
Originally posted by Dune Dune wrote:

How can you argue your point when you're confusing Jim Jones with Charles Manson?

You took the kool-aid literally?  I figured it was a metaphor...



-------------
[IMG]http://i38.tinypic.com/aag8s8.jpg">


Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 11:32am
Originally posted by Rambino Rambino wrote:

Originally posted by Dune Dune wrote:

How can you argue your point when you're confusing Jim Jones with Charles Manson?

You took the kool-aid literally?  I figured it was a metaphor...

Yeah, after read through his post several times I don't think he has the up-to-date info on crazy people. I'm guessing he was just confusing them.



Posted By: Rambino
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 11:37am
I guess my theory is that talking about punishing Jim Jones for the whole kool-aid thing is a tad silly...

-------------
[IMG]http://i38.tinypic.com/aag8s8.jpg">


Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 11:40am

Originally posted by Rambino Rambino wrote:

I guess my theory is that talking about punishing Jim Jones for the whole kool-aid thing is a tad silly...

I would only prosecute him for those individuals he shot due to refusal. Although I believe those numbers to be very low.

Edit: Then again, there are still debates on if that really happened.



Posted By: Rambino
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 11:51am
I meant since he died too and all...   :)

-------------
[IMG]http://i38.tinypic.com/aag8s8.jpg">


Posted By: Dune
Date Posted: 06 August 2008 at 11:52am

Originally posted by Rambino Rambino wrote:

I meant since he died too and all...   :)

Yeah. There is that. I just do not quite understand the push to kill the killers. I always assumed our criminal justice system stood for something more.




Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2021 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net