Work Camps

[Nobody]

You cappies like to mock us communists for the work camps of the USSR and China. But you know what they were on to something. Actually I think we should take it one step father. You know waht I mean.

No prisons, only workcamps.

Crimanals get treated too well, take them all up to Alaska and have them build a highway... to nowhere. Crime is anti-social. Not only do you wound society by committing your crime, but then you add insult to injury by making us pay to support them while they sit around and watch Opara (whatever that *****es name is).

If you try to escape, shoot them.

Don't want to work, you get a lunch of lead.

You kill someone, 50 years in a camp.

You shoplift a can of veggies. 5 years hard labor.

Betcha there would be no crime, eh.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Let's start with that bastard Fiqar. His crazy ball-gag and hood fornication practises are the devil's soercery!!

Him and his damn evil-midget minions. Sorcery!

[Nobody]

I knew it, put the words work camp in the title and people will come!

Long live Stalin and all his ideas!!!

[Nobody]

RAF, camps are for CRIMES, not for "witches, you silly laddie.

[Dark Capitalist]

If you try to escape, shoot them.


Okay.


Don't want to work, you get a lunch of lead.

Nah, you'll just starve.


You kill someone, 50 years in a camp.

No. You kill someone, you die.


You shoplift a can of veggies. 5 years hard labor.

You get fined. However it depends on what you steal. Punishments for stealing can range anywhere from fines, to public floggings, to life in prison.

[CubanFox]

Paedophiles and other child molesters get life imprisonments, of course.
The Transarctic Highway will be built by the scum of society.

5 years for stealing a can of veggies? A bit harsh...I say a month in Alaska for that.

[Nobody]

Sorry DC, you're a cappie so I think that means you DO NOT GET A SAY IN POST-REVOLUTION CRIMANIAL SYSTEM.

Just hard labor.

Cubanfox- Nope, Peadhphiles get physically castrated, then hard labor.

PS, there can be no fines when there is no money.
PPS-Don't let Redstar take of imprisoning pheadphiles, he'll tell you they just have different "tastes".

[Loknar]

I bet you guys love Startrek :D

[Rastafari]

haha. Wow. You've posted bullshit 650 times!!!
Congratulations!!!

[Vinny Rafarino]

http://www.alphalink.com.au/~sparry/kirkorig1.jpg

[Ctisphonics]

Didn't Fidel have a consentration camp for homosexuals where the 'Fragile' were locked in a consentration camp with gun turrents and barb wire and awaken at 3:00 AM just to cut Sugar Cane? I read it all was because two of Fidel's men early in the revolution were gay and abandoned him (to do what only god and those few sick-minded individuals on these boards knows) !!!

Isn't this the same plan the Nazis had with the Jews in the construction of the Autobahn? I think they were more humane. Don't worry, the Wolverines will save the prisoners from the Cuban Invasion force, just as the did in the movie Red Dawn.

http://www.fast-rewind.com/
http://www.allwatchers.com/topics/info_7182.asp

[Ctisphonics]

You have to go down into the corner and click on Red Dawn for the first link, it won't link directly to that page. Good to see the residents of Colorado quick on thier feet to capture that actor/paratrooper who landed offcourse a good mile. Proof that the Russians would have met resistance as soon as they landed :rolleyes:

[CubanFox]

I want to see that. I love trashy movies.

[Xvall]

Shoplifing a can of vegetables gives you five years in prison? Dude; the average american teenager shoplifts more than that; I doubt you want to be sending 90% of the nation's youth to work to death in Alaska. Anyways; I don't see a need for 'highways in alaska'. However, I agree that prisoners should be required to work.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Drake's subversive comments will not be tolerated. 50 years hard labour for "Dracoli". If that's even your real name.

[Nobody]

I agree five years is a bit long. I take it back. But you get the general idea. Loknar, why would I like star trek?

[Dark Capitalist]

TNG is better than TOS.

[CubanFox]

Originally posted by Drake [email protected] 28 2003, 01:27 AM
Shoplifing a can of vegetables gives you five years in prison? Dude; the average american teenager shoplifts more than that; I doubt you want to be sending 90% of the nation's youth to work to death in Alaska. Anyways; I don't see a need for 'highways in alaska'. However, I agree that prisoners should be required to work.
The point of the highway is that it's pointless.


Wow, that sounded philosophical.

[Ctisphonics]

Yep, it's a trash movie all right. Still can't decide if they were serious or not in the making of it, I at times think the storywritter was serious, but when he presented it to the Studio, they all laughed 'with' him thinking it was comedy; being to embarrassed to tell them the truth he had to go through with it. It's a funny movie, I tell you that! :lol:

[Comrade Ceausescu]

Didn't Fidel have a consentration camp for homosexuals where the 'Fragile' were locked in a consentration camp with gun turrents and barb wire and awaken at 3:00 AM just to cut Sugar Cane? I read it all was because two of Fidel's men early in the revolution were gay and abandoned him (to do what only god and those few sick-minded individuals on these boards knows) !!!

Isn't this the same plan the Nazis had with the Jews in the construction of the Autobahn? I think they were more humane. Don't worry, the Wolverines will save the prisoners from the Cuban Invasion force, just as the did in the movie Red Dawn.

is this true?

[Ctisphonics]

Yes,

Spectator, August 15, 1998 by John Casey. I happened to have that source right here next to me, having just picked it up today. Learned all kinds off cool stuff about Cuba today, got some studying and social networking to do.

[Vinny Rafarino]

It's only true if you believe the editorial. I would suggest you research ytourself rather than rely on editorials by anyone. Here are the resources you will need...in addition to the mentioned editorial.


Ctisphonics es una oveja (http://www.bcis.gov/graphics/services/asylum/ric/documentation/CUB99001.htm)

[Ian]

From Face to face with Fidel Castro (1992)

Tomás Borge: Many people think that there is sexual discrimination in Cuba. What are your views on homosexuality?

Fidel Castro: I don't consider homosexuality to be a phenomenon of degeneration. I've always had a more rational approach, considering it to be one of the natural aspects and tendencies of human beings which should be respected. That's how I view it... I am absolutely opposed to any form of repression, contempt, scorn or discrimination with regard to homosexuals. That's what I think.

If you believe that homosexuals are oppressed in Cuba read up on the 1994 Mayday parade which was led by a GLBTQ contigent, it was well recieved and whole-heartedly endorsed by the Communist Party

[Loknar]

Do you guys honestly think that the Soviet army could have invaded America with out resistance? If you think so then you're crazy. America would NEVER tolerate a foreign occupation.

[Vinny Rafarino]

http://www.robynsnest.com/images/babycry2.jpg

[Sovietski Soyuz]

I agree with the idea of work camps for criminals. Why not? At least have them do something productive while living out their sentence. But highways to nowhere? Nah, just have them work in a shovel factory or something.

[Ctisphonics]

Yes, I'm sure Fidel has had a huge turn-around with his attitude with gay people, in fact, I bet within the next ten years we'll be reading about his first homo-sexual experiance with some guy name Jesus Gonzales...Ya right!!!!

THough that wasn't the source I read, it had many of the same things in it as in the article. I also read about the Cubans putting Priests in cells with bears, outting prisioners infront of fake firing squads, Race peoblems between the whites and the blacks, ect. I wasn't planning on mentioning any of this stuff till after I verified it by checking in with the Exile groups down south and found a few 'independant' secondary sources, but saw this thing about consentrations camps and thought why not.

If you guys have any counters to the 'rhetoric' and 'propaganda' you think I'm likely to receive when contacting the exile groups drop the links off here and I'll take a look at them.

[Ian]

You made the claim, or moreover, the exile groups made the claim, let them offer the proof, if there is no proof why would it be necessary for us to disprove it?

[Ctisphonics]

Ctisphonics is a ewe?
(http://www.free-translator.com/index3.html
Ctisphonics es una oveja)

Dictionary.com

E·we Audio pronunciation of ewe ( P ) Pronunciation Key (w, v)
n. pl. Ewe or E·wes

1. A member of a people inhabiting southeast Ghana, southern Togo, and southern Benin.
2. The Gbe language of the Ewe people.
------------

How the Fu** you guys figure that out! You've been monitoring me, havn't you!!!!!!!! Aaahhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!! I'm sorry, don't hurt me, how you figure it out? You guys have some secret underground Soviet Tech tracking people?

[Comrade Ceausescu]

ian and raf are right.Ctisphonics you are starting to sound ridiculous.

[Vinny Rafarino]

http://www.ag.ohio-state.edu/~ansci/facilities/images/sheep.jpg



Is that better for you?

[truthaddict11]

here is a crazy idea no one will steal goods because they will be provided for free!

[IHP]

5 years for stealing a can of vegetables?

Ok, say two 12 year olds go into a shop, one of them steals that can. They both go home. Through whatever source (school perhaps) the store is able to find out who they kids were. The one who stole the can blames the other kid. The other kid (innocent) goes to a hard labor camp. Sorry, but no. Your system is disgusting.

[Sovietski Soyuz]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2003, 12:42 AM
5 years for stealing a can of vegetables?

Ok, say two 12 year olds go into a shop, one of them steals that can. They both go home. Through whatever source (school perhaps) the store is able to find out who they kids were. The one who stole the can blames the other kid. The other kid (innocent) goes to a hard labor camp. Sorry, but no. Your system is disgusting.
He may have been joking with the 5 years for stealing thing... I hope.

I'd just say cut their right hand off. :lol:

Nah, no forced labor for stealing. Maybe if they stole $20,000,000 from an armored car, then they could get 30 years of labor or something.

[truthaddict11]

there would be no theft of large sums of money because money will be abolished or any need to steal food because that will be provided for free.

[Sovietski Soyuz]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2003, 12:09 PM
there would be no theft of large sums of money because money will be abolished or any need to steal food because that will be provided for free.
I'm talking about socialism here. I understand that there would be no money in the final stages of communism, there would be no prisons either. But during the socialistic transition phase, both of these would be present.

[Ctisphonics]

Unless the currency is de-valued to such a point that it's no longer even worth the papaer it's printed on.
Besides, even in the final stage, people will still steal even if everything is free just for the chemical rush in the brain, it's addictive to some. I can imagine counter-culture movements popping up a few centuries after the last struggle with teenagers running around swapping stuff, giving each other the evil eye for things others have simply cause they have it- a Gorrilla rrely is satified with one wife. Social status exsists even in prisions and nurseries, where the enviroment is controlled and the goods are evenly dispursed.

[Desert Fox]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2003, 12:23 AM
You cappies like to mock us communists for the work camps of the USSR and China. But you know what they were on to something. Actually I think we should take it one step father. You know waht I mean.

No prisons, only workcamps.

Crimanals get treated too well, take them all up to Alaska and have them build a highway... to nowhere. Crime is anti-social. Not only do you wound society by committing your crime, but then you add insult to injury by making us pay to support them while they sit around and watch Opara (whatever that *****es name is).

If you try to escape, shoot them.

Don't want to work, you get a lunch of lead.

You kill someone, 50 years in a camp.

You shoplift a can of veggies. 5 years hard labor.

Betcha there would be no crime, eh.
Well that is actually THE SOLUTION for crime in my country, the arch enemy nr 1 of our country lives in the prison with a special room with a pc, ps2, tv with every channel you can get. He is treated like a king. But your idea would put a end to all of such things. Well I have to say communism has some idea's I really like :D

[Felicia]

Canada sent people of Japanese heritage to consentration camps during WWII.

yep. And stole everything they owned. The poeple held have still yet to receive compensation for their lost property and belongings.

:angry:

[truthaddict11]

ameican prison system being described as a hotel is a farce. read accounts by political prisoners Leonard Peltier and Mumia Abu-Jamal
they paint a much different picture of american prisons that what you think.

[Hampton]

Crimanals get treated too well, take them all up to Alaska and have them build a highway... to nowhere. Crime is anti-social. Not only do you wound society by committing your crime, but then you add insult to injury by making us pay to support them while they sit around and watch Opara (whatever that *****es name is).

You're views on prison life in America is pretty fucked up. More chances than not they're working in factories inside the prison making 25 cents an hour for products sold for a couple of hundred dollars. And if you're lucky enough be stuck in solitary you can enjoy your life 23 hours a day behind bars in a dark cell with constant harassment from guards and living in fear that another prisoner will stab you with a blunt dull object.

It's a real treat.

[Anti-Fascist]

What you are advocating is truly disgusting. Punishment is worst of all crimes, never mind this sort of
punishment. I am opposed to all forms of punishment.

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2003, 12:37 AM
Paedophiles and other child molesters get life imprisonments, of course.
The Transarctic Highway will be built by the scum of society.

5 years for stealing a can of veggies? A bit harsh...I say a month in Alaska for that.
Paedophilia is a mental illness and paedophiles therefore must be treated
as mentally ill persons. They must not be imprisoned. They must be
treated with behavioural conditioning techniques which have been
proven to work in laboratories. Punishing them for unintentionally hurting
children by having sex with them is a cruel punishment.

You must remember - most paedophiles do not know that their actions are
likely to cause harm.

Punishment is the greatest of all evils. No one should ever be punished.
Everyone who commits a "crime" should be treated, regardless of the
crime. No matter how sick (paedophiles, sadists), no matter how awful
(serial murerers, etc), punishment is never justified.

I am completely opposed to punishing anyone.

[commie kg]

I thought you were a Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist, Huzington? You can't deny that Stalin punished people.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Good grief, why does Stalin always have to be brought up in every issue? Next I will be expecting someone to bring up the fact that Stalin liked wheatabix in the morning when a "stalinist" advises of his preference for eggs and sausages for breakfast.

[Urban Rubble]

Actually, I think Stalin prefered Lucky Charms, but whatever RAF. Counter Revolutionary.

Anti Fascist, your 2 posts disgusted me.

First, you're opposed to all forms of punishment ? Are you fucking serious ? So a serial killer shouldn't be punished ? Explain that to me.


Punishing them for unintentionally hurting
children by having sex with them is a cruel punishment.

ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS ? You think these guys don't know that shoving an adult dick in a little child hurts them mentally and physically ? Unintentional ? That is fucking disgusting. Ya, don't imprison them, let them running around raping more childeren, because we must protect these poor poor pedophiles. You make me sick.


No matter how sick (paedophiles, sadists), no matter how awful
(serial murerers, etc), punishment is never justified.

Jesus Christ man. What the fuck ? You have to be kidding with this bullshit. So what do you do with serial killers ? Someone who orgasms at the thought of killing someone. If you think people like this can be cured then you are wrong. Sure, some of them may be cured, but what about their previous crimes ? Someone that murders 30 people and eats their bodies should just be let off scot free once he is "rehabilitated" ? God, you a fucking joke kid.

Talk to me when someone rapes and murders your wife. Talk to me when someone abducts your 3 year old daughter, has sex with her, then murders her. We'll see how bad you want that guy let off.

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by commie [email protected] 1 2003, 08:25 PM
I thought you were a Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist, Huzington? You can't deny that Stalin punished people.
What does Stalin have to do with this? What is a Stalinist? I do have great admiration for Stalin, if that is what you mean by "Stalinist".

[Anti-Fascist]

First, you're opposed to all forms of punishment ? Are you f***ing serious ? So a serial killer shouldn't be punished ? Explain that to me.

Yes, that is correct. A serial murderer should never, in any circumstances, be punished. In my perspective, punishing him is cruel. He ought to be treated. Clearly he has a mental illness.


You think these guys don't know that shoving an adult d*ck in a little child hurts them mentally and physically ? Unintentional ?

According to my studies of criminology, most sexual acts involving adult and child consist mostly of non-penatrative forms of sexual contact, such as fondling and kissing. Obviously someone who would do such a thing to a child has a psychosexual disorder - he is mentally ill. He must be treated in hospitals of the insane. Even someone who violently rapes a person (child, man, or woman -- rape is terrible in all forms), he should be treated, for he clearly has a psychosexual disorder; if the psychosexual disorder can be removed, he will not rape again! If he is severely punished, his disorder is liable to become more severe, and he might repeat his offence.


That is fucking disgusting. Ya, don't imprison them, let them running around raping more childeren, because we must protect these poor poor pedophiles. You make me sick.

I am not talking about only paedophiles. I am talking about all offenders. Everyone can be corrected by treatment. Punishment is superfluous.

Punishment is the greatest of all crimes. The only humane thing to do is to treat the mentally ill! How could you disagree?

[Vinny Rafarino]

Easy Anti-facsupernington...(I'm not sure what you wanna go by) Until we can effectlively treat mental disorders that lead to cases of serial killings such as extreme sociopathology on the genetic level (psychological therapy will not work at all in these cases) punishment will have to be sufficient.

[BuyOurEverything]

I fail to see what's wrong with consentual sex with people under the age of 18. But that's another topic. I have to say I completely disagree with Anti-Fascist and all the people who say prisoners should do manual labour. Who's to say what's a mental illness? If I do something that "society" deems to be "abnormal" then I have a mental illness? I think for many crimes treatment is far more degrading than punishment. I also agree with Comrade RAF that we don't even have the means of curing all mental illnesses. Punishment is neccessary but rehabilitation should always be the primary goal. Instead of focussing so much on criminals and making them the scapegoats for society's problems, we should look at society and see why people commit these crimes. If mililions of people are commiting certain crimes, is it really just the criminals who are fucked up? I think not.

[Loknar]

Anti-Fascist

this is your site:

http://www.nambla1.de/

[Vinny Rafarino]

Why would you EVER post a link to NAMBLA Loknar? What's the matter with you?


You did not even remotely understand what Anti-fascist was talking about. If you think for ONE MINUTE that AF was advocating paedophilia then you are either daft or you simply want to get attention. Which is it kid?

[Loknar]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 2 2003, 06:48 AM
Why would you EVER post a link to NAMBLA Loknar? What's the matter with you?


You did not even remotely understand what Anti-fascist was talking about. If you think for ONE MINUTE that AF was advocating paedophilia then you are either daft or you simply want to get attention. Which is it kid?
I know what he is saying, he is posting pussy bullshit. We seem to forget about the victims when we says things like "we should treat them'', what if you were violently fucked up the ass, or your wife was? WOuld you say "lets treat the sicko"? I am sick of that attitude, you dont have to be a commie to be in favor of the death penelty or life in prison.

[Vinny Rafarino]

"Off with their heads!"


-Loknar

[Loknar]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 2 2003, 06:55 AM
"Off with their heads!"


-Loknar
No, lethel injection works. I am not for making their death painful, I just think they should be ejected from our society.

[Sovietski Soyuz]

Supernius/Anti-Fascist/Huzington, I understand where you are coming from, but I must disagree. Forms of puishment are nessecary in a socialist society. If a serial killer kills 10 women, screw rehabilitation, unless he is noticably insane. He gets death, period. You commit crimes against the State or it's people, you get prison time/constructive labor. If that is what you mean by punishment, they deserve it.

[Loknar]

Originally posted by Sovietski [email protected] 2 2003, 06:58 AM
Supernius/Anti-Fascist/Huzington, I understand where you are coming from, but I must disagree. Forms of puishment are nessecary in a socialist society. If a serial killer kills 10 women, screw rehabilitation, unless he is noticably insane. He gets death, period. You commit crimes against the State or it's people, you get prison time/constructive labor. If that is what you mean by punishment, they deserve it.
Yes, well said.


I think we need to consider whether the crminal actually deserves to be rehabiliated.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Would you not be noticable insane if you killed even one person for pleasure? Serial killers kill because they suffer from a mental disorder. Eventually that mental disorder will be able to be corrected. At that time, it would then be illogical to "punish" someone for crimes that they had no contol over. (it's actually illogical now, but we unfortunately lack the necessary means to correct these disorders)

The "an eye for an eye" concept will eventually become as archaic a decadent as Loknar's politics.

[sc4r]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 2 2003, 01:08 AM
Good grief, why does Stalin always have to be brought up in every issue? Next I will be expecting someone to bring up the fact that Stalin liked wheatabix in the morning when a "stalinist" advises of his preference for eggs and sausages for breakfast.
Is this true ?

With sugar or without ?

What did Trotsky Have for breakfast?

I think we should be told.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Trotsky at one point followed comrade Lenin in the ways of the "people's breakfast" which consisted of wheatabix without sugar (the earthy flavour represented the proletariat toiling on the farms) but soon broke from the normal Marxist breakfast once Stalin first wanted to perfect the standard "people's breakfast" demestically prior to spreading the wheatabix revolution to other nations. Stalin feared that the counter-revolutionaries from Kellog would send armies armed with corn flakes into Siberia, eventually making their way into the cupboards of the Moscow proletariat.

Trosky soon announced that the "true" Marxist breakfast could either be with or without sugar, depending on what the individual tastes of different factions. the matter was help up for vote.

Losing the public sugar elections by a landslide, Trotsky began a new wave of propaganda, claiming the USSR was nothing but a "degenerated breakfast state" and he immediately began to call for a counter-revolution of his own with designs on wrenching power from the sugar hoarding bureaucrats in the Kremlin.

To spite comrade Stalin, he began to publically denounce unsweetened wheatabix claiming that Lenin truly loved to put sugar on his wheatabix and that Stalin was simply hiding this fact from the proletariat so he could create a stockpile of sugar that would be sold at an undisclosed profit to germany in the form of a "freindship treaty".

The rest my freinds is history.

[kylie]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2003, 01:23 AM
You cappies like to mock us communists for the work camps of the USSR and China. But you know what they were on to something. Actually I think we should take it one step father. You know waht I mean.

No prisons, only workcamps.

Crimanals get treated too well, take them all up to Alaska and have them build a highway... to nowhere. Crime is anti-social. Not only do you wound society by committing your crime, but then you add insult to injury by making us pay to support them while they sit around and watch Opara (whatever that *****es name is).

If you try to escape, shoot them.

Don't want to work, you get a lunch of lead.

You kill someone, 50 years in a camp.

You shoplift a can of veggies. 5 years hard labor.

Betcha there would be no crime, eh.
Heres an idea: give people the social conditions neccessary for them not to need to commit crime.
And work camps in particular would be counter-revolutionairy. Under Socialism it would be much easier to just deport criminals to the capitalist countries. The gain in production from forcing criminals to work would be offset, and possibly then some, by having to build these camps, then have members of the population organising, supervising and guarding these places. And of course once there is no longer any capitalist countries to deport criminals too, then the transition to Communism will have, or soon will have, begun. In Communism authoritarian acts such as what you propose have no place.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

IRT Comrade RAF:

Also a true commie breakfast includes sausages and bacon made from finest capitalist.

[Loknar]

How about letting the worker choose his own breakfast?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Because the proletariat cannot choose their own breakfast and need to be guided.

[Urban Rubble]

Goddamn Loknar, the breakfast thing was a joke.

Saying all serial killers can be treated is not only idealistic, it's idiotic. And like someone else said, not punishing them completely disregards the victims. I know if I was raped, I would want that fuck to sit in jail at the very least.

What about crimes that aren't caused by a mental illness ? What about someone who steals simply because he didn't feel like paying ? What about someone who vadalizes for fun ? What about someone who assaults someone ? Should they just be let go ?

People need to be held accountable for their actions, always. If not, what is to stop someone from committing crime ? If someone has the desire to rape a child, they are going to be alot less likely to do it if they know they are going to pay for it. If they know all that is going to happen is that they will go to a nice little rehab center, that is not a effective deterent. Violent criminals, no matter how mentally ill, should be punished. Anyhting else would be fucking insane.

[Loknar]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2003, 02:28 PM
Because the proletariat cannot choose their own breakfast and need to be guided.
You see this is just like Euro socialism. I completely disagree with your statement. Are most people too stupid to vote properly? Of course. However you comment is suggests that people need to be led in every day life, how to dress, where to work, what to eat, when to exercise ect. That's too much government in ones life. At least in Startrek they aren’t like that...

[Sovietski Soyuz]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2003, 02:28 PM
Because the proletariat cannot choose their own breakfast and need to be guided.
C'mon. Tell me you are just poking fun at Leninism there.

The workers can most definately choose their own food.

[Desert Fox]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2003, 06:02 PM
What you are advocating is truly disgusting. Punishment is worst of all crimes, never mind this sort of
punishment. I am opposed to all forms of punishment.
Well next thing you are going to promote your very own garden of eden. There are laws break them get punished. It is simple as that ;)

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 2 2003, 03:54 AM
Easy Anti-facsupernington...(I'm not sure what you wanna go by) Until we can effectlively treat mental disorders that lead to cases of serial killings such as extreme sociopathology on the genetic level (psychological therapy will not work at all in these cases) punishment will have to be sufficient.
Of course we can treat them at the genetic level. How? By not allowing criminals to proliferate. We can, moreover, effectively liquidate such illnesses by way of psychosurgery, behavioural therapy, hormonal supplements, drugs of all sorts, etc. - this we can do already. Unless you are going to shoot the man on the spot, or give him a life sentence and keep him confined for the rest of his life, which are both a waste of a potential worker, punishment does not work, it has never worked, and most likely it never will work.

Now paedophiles are of particular importance. For the paedophile (and any other sexual deviant) is an example of a curable criminal. By way of conditioning, his prepubescant sexual predilection can be decidedly liquidated. How does the paedophile become a paedophile? - another important question, if we want to get rid of paedophiles. The answer is this: by way of masturbatory conditioning. You see, conditioning plays such an important role for the criminal - both in inducing him to commit a crime, and in stopping him from commiting crimes. (Conditioning, in fact, determines almost everything - whether one will be a satisfactory citizen, a splendid mathematician, an artist, or whatever else.) And if, by some improbable chance, conditioning does not correct the sexual deviant, eliminating his sexual drive will indubitably be effective. And this can be done quite easily. Furthermore, we can employ the miracle of psychsurgery if all else fails - and all else shall not fail. The criminal will stay in a hospital of the insane until he is cured.

The only problem is that the masses, for some odd reason, think it unethical. They had rather the criminal be punished, than cured. "It is wrong to take chunks of a man's brain," they say. "If you condition him, you are taking away his free will, which is most immoral." I do not understand these people. Punishment is a manifestation of sadism, which is itself a psychosexual disorder, and which, besides, is far more unethical than curing the person!

Punishment is obsolete.

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2003, 06:41 AM
Anti-Fascist

this is your site:

http://www.nambla1.de/
Why the hell would you link to NAMBLA? If I were advocating paedophilia, why would I advocate getting rid of paedophilia by means of treatment? I am merely advocating curing the paedophile. If we were to follow your logic, I would also be advocating serial murdering, because I advocate curing serial murderers. Please. Are you trolling?

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by Sovietski [email protected] 2 2003, 06:58 AM
Supernius/Anti-Fascist/Huzington, I understand where you are coming from, but I must disagree. Forms of puishment are nessecary in a socialist society. If a serial killer kills 10 women, screw rehabilitation, unless he is noticably insane. He gets death, period. You commit crimes against the State or it's people, you get prison time/constructive labor. If that is what you mean by punishment, they deserve it.
What if, as in the case of the sexual deviant, the criminal can be cured? I firmly believe that sadism is curable. Serial murderers and rapists are sadists. And what of thieves, drug dealers, and other lumpen-proletarians? Society creates those and society itself must therefore be corrected. A Socialist society wherein there is a good deal of drug dealers and thieves is not a satisfactory Socialist society. Most people who steal steal because they do not have what they need. True, there is a minority of impulsive thieves. Such would be a manifestation of a mental illness. Such a person must therefore be treated. Drug dealers must not be punished. They can be got rid of by decriminalising drugs, and at the same time curing drug users. They will disappear very quickly.

We must make a distinction between (A) the criminal who commits crimes because of some mental illness (those with antisocial personality disorder, sexual deviants, impulsive thieves, etc), and (B) the criminal who commits crimes because of the errors of the State (thieves generally, drug dealers, etc). The former can be corrected by treating the individual, the latter can be corrected by treating society itself. (Of course, generally crimes are a mixture of both A and B.)

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by Loknar+Oct 2 2003, 07:01 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Loknar @ Oct 2 2003, 07:01 AM)
Sovietski [email protected] 2 2003, 06:58 AM
Supernius/Anti-Fascist/Huzington, I understand where you are coming from, but I must disagree. Forms of puishment are nessecary in a socialist society. If a serial killer kills 10 women, screw rehabilitation, unless he is noticably insane. He gets death, period. You commit crimes against the State or it&#39;s people, you get prison time/constructive labor. If that is what you mean by punishment, they deserve it.
Yes, well said.


I think we need to consider whether the crminal actually deserves to be rehabiliated. [/b]
"Deserve" is indefensible. It is metaphysical Idealism. Where are these "deserves"? How do we verify
them? You cannot prove that anyone deserves anything.

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 2 2003, 07:06 AM
Would you not be noticable insane if you killed even one person for pleasure? Serial killers kill because they suffer from a mental disorder. Eventually that mental disorder will be able to be corrected. At that time, it would then be illogical to "punish" someone for crimes that they had no contol over. (it&#39;s actually illogical now, but we unfortunately lack the necessary means to correct these disorders)

The "an eye for an eye" concept will eventually become as archaic a decadent as Loknar&#39;s politics.
Sadism is curable. Too many people simply think the methods by which to cure it are unethical.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Now paedophiles are of particular importance. For the paedophile (and any other sexual deviant) is an example of a curable criminal. By way of conditioning, his prepubescant sexual predilection can be decidedly liquidated.


This is pure speculation. Hitherto there have been absolutely no "cures" for this type of sexual disorder.

I will qoute Charles A. Bertrand, M.D., FACP, DIM-CD;

Over the years, society has initiated many attempts to control pedophilia -- incarceration, psychotherapy, various medications, chemical treatment, even castration (i.e., surgical removal of the testicles). Few of these have proven successful. A Norwegian study reported that castration significantly reduced the recidivist rate of these sexual predators. However, this radical procedure has not recieved wide support in the United States. A Texas man, convicted of child molestation, beged to be castrated in order to prevent him from repeating his crime, but a court ruled that such surgery would constitute "cruel and unusual punishment," forbidden by the U.S. Constitution.

Here is the most recent treatment for paedophilia (paraphilia);

This last approach has come under attack by a number of critics who point out that its sidt effects are sometimes severe. However, a new study by Ariel Rosler, MD, and Eliezer Witztum, MD, of Israel -- published in the New England Journal of Medicine (Feb. 12, 1998, Vol. 338, No. 7 Pages 416-422) promises a better method of chemical treatment.

The study involved 30 volunteers, men with an average age of 32, with a long-term history of paraphilia. The researchers report using a substance called triptorelin, which acts through the pituitary gland and markedly reduces the level of testosterone. Subjects recieved 3.75 milligrams of triptorelin, injected into a muscle each month.

The results were striking. These men reported a significant decrease in deviant sexual fantasies and desires, as well as a marked descrease in abnormal behavior. For example, while subjects recieved this medication for one year, the incidence of abnormal sexual behavior dropped from an average of five per month to zero. The serum testosterone concentration fell from an average of 545 mg to an average of 23 mg. The beneficial effects appeared after three months of treatment and were persistent in all 24 men who continued therapy for at least one year.

None of the 24 individuals committed a sexual offense while on treatment, even though they lived in their usual environment. Their deviant sexual fantasies and urges were markedly decreased. These results were reported not only by the subjects themselves but also by family members and probation officers.

Unlike earlier substances used to inhibit abnormal sexual urges, subjects reported few side effects.

When six subjects ceased the treatment, five out of those six monitored experienced a return of deviant symptoms, their testosterone levels increased, and two were subsequently prosecuted for sex crimes and sentenced to prison. It seems clear from this study, that in order to eliminate the problem, pedophiles must continue monthly injections.

The study has some limitations. In the first place, the sample was small -- only 30 men. In addition, the researchers did not employ a double blind technique, wherein a placebo os given to a comparable control group. Instead, it was an observational study, one in which an entire group is observed over a period of time. Other studies will no doubt follow, perhaps more controlled and comprehensive.

Nevertheless, the current study strongly suggests that this method of therapy is effective in the treatment of pedophilia. If so, the implications are considerable. Pedophiles living in the community may recieve reliable medication and lead normal lives, free from an obsession-compulsion that results in behavior society punishes severely. Pedophiles who are now incarcerated may look forward to easier parole and successful rehabilitation. Of course, they would have to recieve monthly injections -- though perhaps, after more research, a different schedule might suffice, especially if longer acting medication was developed.

Pedophiles have always been the most reviled members of society, despite the fact that most people realize such people are, in some fashion, ill. A further speculation may emerge regarding other compulsive sexual crimes -- so called "sex addition" or sexaholics, serial rapists, te al--could these subjects be controlled by this or similar medication. Time will tell -- for the present it is certainly warrented to persue further studies.




Of course we can treat them at the genetic level. How? By not allowing criminals to proliferate. We can, moreover, effectively liquidate such illnesses by way of psychosurgery, behavioural therapy, hormonal supplements, drugs of all sorts, etc. - this we can do already. Unless you are going to shoot the man on the spot, or give him a life sentence and keep him confined for the rest of his life, which are both a waste of a potential worker, punishment does not work, it has never worked, and most likely it never will work.



You are "lumping" all mental disorders into one category. Many mental disorders can be controlled easyliy with modern medications such as 5-HT system disorders and other neurotransmitter disorders. However the majority of mental disorders hitherto have no absolute treatment, much less a cure.

Psychosurgery (the technical name for a lobotamy) has progressed very far from the days of creating walking xombies however there is still MUCH more that needs to be researched and developed prior to this being an effective cure for most mental disorders.


if we want to get rid of paedophiles. The answer is this: by way of masturbatory conditioning

No it isn&#39;t.



Conditioning, in fact, determines almost everything - whether one will be a satisfactory citizen, a splendid mathematician, an artist, or whatever else

Conditioning is not even remotely a factor in mental disorders related to disfunction of certain neurtotransmitters, amygdalic funtions or certain areas of brain tissue. (this would also be 99% of all mental disorders) Your understanding of mental disorders and their treatments is, unique. If you suffer from say, a neurotransmitter related disorder such as depression, no matter what "conditioning" you received throughout your life, you will STILL suffer from this disorder.


I think you really need to research this matter further, it sounds like you have either developed your own interesting theories or you have been talking to some crack-pots.

[Anti-Fascist]

People are trained to be sadistic. They are from the time they can speak (nay, before they can speak) to believe that someone "deserves" to be punished, etc.


I know if I was raped, I would want that fuck to sit in jail at the very least.

You have been conditioned to think that way. Many people do not think that way. Many people who have
been raped do not think that way.


Saying all serial killers can be treated is not only idealistic, it&#39;s idiotic.

Not all persons with any illness can be cured. Does this mean we should stop treating them?


And like someone else said, not punishing them completely disregards the victims.

That is how primitives think. Do not be absurd; you are presupposing a moral prerogative. That is Idealism.


Should they just be let go ?

I never said that. They will be locked up in an hospital of the insane until their illness is sufficiently mitigated or, if possible, cured. Do you forget that with present day technology, we can get rid of agressiveness in a man? Too many crimes simply cannot occur without the element of aggression.


People need to be held accountable for their actions, always. If not, what is to stop someone from committing crime ? If someone has the desire to rape a child, they [sic] are going to be alot less likely to do it if they know they [sic] are going to pay for it.

How likely would someone be to commit an aggressive crime if he has no aggression? How likely would someone be to commit a sexual crime if he has no sexual drive? And so forth. We already have cures for these things; we just say it "unethical" to employ them. I am sure the would-be criminal fears the cure (therefore he is accountable), or perhaps he welcomes it (therefore he will be cured before he commits a crime).


If they know all that is going to happen is that they will go to a nice little rehab center, that is not a effective deterent.

Why do you need a deterrent when it is the State&#39;s fault that people commit so many crimes? The State creates many of these devils. Should we deter people from commiting crimes which arise from the State&#39;s own incompetence? Or should we eliminate the State&#39;s incomptetence? Punishing people to deter criminals is punishing those people for being created by the State. Others have mental illnesses, perhaps genetically predetermined ones. I do not believe in "punishing" the mentally ill for being mentally ill.


Violent criminals, no matter how mentally ill, should be punished. Anyhting else would be fucking insane.

There&#39;s your Idealism again.

[Anti-Fascist]

RAF - those quotations did not explain much. They basically said that it is not curable, but it does work, and that it is "too severe". Since you advocate punishment, the "too severe" bit can be the element of punishment, if you wish it to be.

Nevertheless, even if it is not treatable with present day knowledge (which is false), punishment is itself immoral.

I will change my position for the moment, for the sake of argument. I would say that every criminal who commits a crime which causes irreversible damage (murder) and who is manifestly untreatable, should be punished, not for the sake of punishment itself, but to deter others from commiting the same crime. Now the question then is, who are these criminals who cause irreversible damage? Murderers. Of these criminals, which ones are manifestly untreatable? I do not say "uncurable" - schizophrenics cannot be cured; this does not mean that we cannot treat them. I am talking about the untreatable. Can their illness be mitigated (not necessarily cured) to the point at which their illness induces them to have an aversion to commiting crimes of that nature?


You are "lumping" all mental disorders into one category. Many mental disorders can be controlled easyliy with modern medications such as 5-HT system disorders and other neurotransmitter disorders. However the majority of mental disorders hitherto have no absolute treatment, much less a cure.

I did not "lump" all mental disorders into one category. I was talking about those mental disorders which result in crime and the various methods by which to correct them.



if we want to get rid of paedophiles. The answer is this: by way of masturbatory conditioning

No it isn&#39;t.

Why do you say this?


Conditioning is not even remotely a factor in mental disorders related to disfunction of certain neurtotransmitters, amygdalic funtions or certain areas of brain tissue. (this would also be 99% of all mental disorders) Your understanding of mental disorders and their treatments is, unique. If you suffer from say, a neurotransmitter related disorder such as depression, no matter what "conditioning" you received throughout your life, you will STILL suffer from this disorder.

I already know all that. Of course you will think that way, if you believe minds. They will "suffer" from the mental illness only because they supposedly have "minds" with which to suffer. There is no evidence that this "mind" exists and that people actually suffer. Since I do not believe in minds, I define a mental illness as, more or less, abnormal behaviour. This can be cured&#33; Behaviour is that with which I am concerned, not this thing about the "mind".

Edit: Actually, the word "mental" I am opposed to. "Mental illness" is not a good work. I shall use it, though, and, despite, the use of the word "mental" which implies a "mind", I shall use it more or less synonymously with "abnormal behaviour".

[Urban Rubble]

Listen, I am not against treating these sick people, I am against treating them and then letting them off like nothing happened. Just because someone CAN be treated does not mean they WILL be. So what, you give them their treatment, let them back out on the street, and they do it again, what would you do then ? Give them another shot at rehabilitation ? That is disgusting. You may be able to deal with that blood on your hands, but I wouldn&#39;t want to.

Again, talk to me when your daughter gets abducted, raped and then murdered. I think you would have a different outlook.

[Urban Rubble]

Oh, and you dodged my question. What about people who commit crimes that aren&#39;t caused by mental illnesses ? What do you do with them ? Or do you think ALL people who commit crimes are mentally ill ?

[Anti-Fascist]

Listen, I am not against treating these sick people, I am against treating them and then letting them off like nothing happened. Just because someone CAN be treated does not mean they WILL be. So what, you give them their treatment, let them back out on the street, and they do it again, what would you do then ? Give them another shot at rehabilitation ? That is disgusting. You may be able to deal with that blood on your hands, but I wouldn&#39;t want to.

I have already addressed this above.


Again, talk to me when your daughter gets abducted, raped and then murdered. I think you would have a different outlook.

This argument will not do because, firstly, I do not have a daughter and I do not plan on having a daughter. Secondly, I have been raped before, and I still believe everything I have said. Thirdly, your argument is a type of "ad hominem".

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by Urban [email protected] 2 2003, 07:31 PM
Oh, and you dodged my question. What about people who commit crimes that aren&#39;t caused by mental illnesses ? What do you do with them ? Or do you think ALL people who commit crimes are mentally ill ?
I did not "dodge" your question. I answered it above. Scroll up. It is around where I mentioned thieves and drug dealers.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Nevertheless, even if it is not treatable with present day knowledge (which is false), punishment is itself immoral

Prove it. I supplied evidence from a reputable doctor in addition to a study from the NE J of M. Morality is also subjective and has no place in a scientific discussion. the only thing you said here was that according to you, my qoutes "did not explain much" (which is false)


I will change my position for the moment, for the sake of argument. I would say that every criminal who commits a crime which causes irreversible damage (murder) and who is manifestly untreatable, should be punished, not for the sake of punishment itself, but to deter others from commiting the same crime. Now the question then is, who are these criminals who cause irreversible damage? Murderers. Of these criminals, which ones are manifestly untreatable? I do not say "uncurable" - schizophrenics cannot be cured; this does not mean that we cannot treat them. I am talking about the untreatable. Can their illness be mitigated (not necessarily cured) to the point at which their illness induces them to have an aversion to commiting crimes of that nature?


Schizophrenia is not the issue. Paedophilia is. Thanks for letting me know what "mitigated" meant son, I reckon my doctorate degree would not have helped me at all there. The source and cause of schozophrenic behaviour has been known for some time. There is no known source or cure for paedophilia. Period.



Why do you say this?


Because it&#39;s true. I&#39;m glad YOU feel "masturbatory conditioning" is the long lost cure for paedophilia, but unfortunately the scientific community that contains actual doctors disagrees.



I already know all that. Of course you will think that way, if you believe minds. They will "suffer" from the mental illness only because they supposedly have "minds" with which to suffer. There is no evidence that this "mind" exists and that people actually suffer. Since I do not believe in minds, I define a mental illness as, more or less, abnormal behaviour. This can be cured&#33; Behaviour is that with which I am concerned, not this thing about the "mind".

As I stated before, your views are definitely "unique".

[Loknar]

OK, I have an idea to ‘condition’ these sexual perverts. Cut their balls off. I am serious, this would greatly reduce their natural sex drive. I see this as the only alternative, we should not risk the general population hoping he is cured. Lets say you are a doctor in charge of curing a serial murderers, you cure your 5th patient, but something happens, he snaps, kills a few people. Who’s fault is it? And why are you even willing to risk the general population?

What has happened to you commies? You guys knew how top kick ass when you had to, you&#39;ve lost that that trait.



Anti-Fascist

Your claim that "not all raped people think that way" is unimaginable. What if you were tied up and had to watch guy/guys go to town on your wife? The emotional stress is allot for a person to bare, mental pain is just as bad if not worse than physical pain. It sure is easy to talk in a forum, but you and I well know that if you had a gun you would gladly shoot the man/men who violated your wife. .

[Urban Rubble]

Loknar, stop acting as if all "commies" support this bullshit about not being able to punish anyone, we do not. I actually agree with you for once, go ahead and cut their balls off. People who intentionally hurt childeren should be dealt with, harshly.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Loknar you are from the middle ages. In this day and age, it&#39;s called "chemical castration". There&#39;s no need for anyone to get their nuts hacked off kid. Jeez, I bet this kid dtill thinks "bleeding people" with leeches is still the ay to go.

[Loknar]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 2 2003, 11:41 PM
Loknar you are from the middle ages. In this day and age, it&#39;s called "chemical castration". There&#39;s no need for anyone to get their nuts hacked off kid. Jeez, I bet this kid dtill thinks "bleeding people" with leeches is still the ay to go.
Why did eunuchs attend to princesses?

[Vinny Rafarino]

Are you an Idiot? Did I not just mention "Chemical castration"? Look it up son. Then also look at how "succsessful" castration is.

[Nobody]

Because 2000 years ago they could not chemical castrate someone, the only way was removal.

If you are really that naive, they did not want the servents making the princess "used goods".

[Loknar]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2003, 11:49 PM
Because 2000 years ago they could not chemical castrate someone, the only way was removal.

If you are really that naive, they did not want the servents making the princess "used goods".

(there were still eunuchs in China in the 1960&#39;s)
Yes because of the lack of a sex drive. I am saying, if these guys will be let out into society then they should have their sex drive taken away, it is simply too risky to innocent people.


I don’t know if their balls should be chopped off, but they shouldn’t be permitted to have an active sex drive.

[Nobody]

I assumne these enuches were leftovers from the pre-revolution days?

[Loknar]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2003, 12:35 AM
I assumne these enuches were leftovers from the pre-revolution days?
YEs, the last Emperor as I recall threw them out of the forbidden city because they were stealing from him. Dont worry, Mao&#39;s hands are clean :D

[Anti-Fascist]

Prove it. I supplied evidence from a reputable doctor in addition to a study from the NE J of M. Morality is also subjective and has no place in a scientific discussion. the [sic] only thing you said here was that according to you, my qoutes [sic] "did not explain much" (which is false)

No moral can be proven, son. I am not attempting to prove anything concerning morality, son.


I will change my position for the moment, for the sake of argument. I would say that every criminal who commits a crime which causes irreversible damage (murder) and who is manifestly untreatable, should be punished, not for the sake of punishment itself, but to deter others from commiting the same crime. Now the question then is, who are these criminals who cause irreversible damage? Murderers. Of these criminals, which ones are manifestly untreatable? I do not say "uncurable" - schizophrenics cannot be cured; this does not mean that we cannot treat them. I am talking about the untreatable. Can their illness be mitigated (not necessarily cured) to the point at which their illness induces them to have an aversion to commiting crimes of that nature?



Schizophrenia is not the issue. Paedophilia is.

I was describing a certain similarity with regard to paedophila and schizophrenia which is a sufficient condition to justify treating rather than punishing paedophila, son


Thanks for letting me know what "mitigated" meant son, I reckon my doctorate degree would not have helped me at all there.

What are you talking about, son? I never even defined the word "mitigate". "Mitigate" is an everyday word the definition whereof everyone knows.


The source and cause of schozophrenic behaviour has been known for some time. There is no known source or cure for paedophilia. Period.

I said that paedophilia, like schizophrenia, cannot be cured. But I said that paedophilia, like schizophrenia, as an illness, is worth treating.


Because it&#39;s true. I&#39;m glad YOU feel "masturbatory conditioning" is the long lost cure for paedophilia, but unfortunately the scientific community that contains actual doctors disagrees.

Is English your second language? I said that masturbatory conditioning gives rise to paedophiles, and this theory is supported by a considerable section of the scientific community.


As I stated before, your views are definitely "unique".

Thank you.

[kylie]

I dont have much to add, but i completely agree with Anti-Fascist. Punishment is not the answer to stopping crime, nor is it the correct way of responding to it. As firstly it fails as a detterent, due to the thinking that &#39;it wont happen to me&#39;, and secondly because of its incompatability with socialism and communism, as i&#39;ve mentioned further back.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Originally posted by Sovietski Soyuz+Oct 2 2003, 04:04 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Sovietski Soyuz @ Oct 2 2003, 04:04 PM)
[email protected] 2 2003, 02:28 PM
Because the proletariat cannot choose their own breakfast and need to be guided.
C&#39;mon. Tell me you are just poking fun at Leninism there.

The workers can most definately choose their own food. [/b]
You Leninists are funny.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2003, 07:35 AM
I dont have much to add, but i completely agree with Anti-Fascist. Punishment is not the answer to stopping crime, nor is it the correct way of responding to it. As firstly it fails as a detterent, due to the thinking that &#39;it wont happen to me&#39;, and secondly because of its incompatability with socialism and communism, as i&#39;ve mentioned further back.
Its fair to say that the threat of punishment does not stop all crime. However, it is far from being absoultely useless as a deterrent. If you steal for example you know that you may get caught and if you do it is likely you will be punished. If we become more proficient in apprehending criminals and make our punishments more severe crime will certainly fall.

There are of course other factors involved to maintain law and order. Prisoners require rehabilitation so they do not continue to commit offenses once they complete their sentence. Also a more cohesive society with disciplined, moral individuals would decrease crime.

In capitalist society we have an abundance of poverty, lack of care, ill behaviour, immorality, social division, and a lack of state officials and funding for them.

[Desert Fox]

Originally posted by Chairman Mao+Oct 3 2003, 12:37 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Chairman Mao @ Oct 3 2003, 12:37 PM)
[email protected] 3 2003, 07:35 AM
I dont have much to add, but i completely agree with Anti-Fascist. Punishment is not the answer to stopping crime, nor is it the correct way of responding to it. As firstly it fails as a detterent, due to the thinking that &#39;it wont happen to me&#39;, and secondly because of its incompatability with socialism and communism, as i&#39;ve mentioned further back.
Its fair to say that the threat of punishment does not stop all crime. However, it is far from being absoultely useless as a deterrent. If you steal for example you know that you may get caught and if you do it is likely you will be punished. If we become more proficient in apprehending criminals and make our punishments more severe crime will certainly fall.

There are of course other factors involved to maintain law and order. Prisoners require rehabilitation so they do not continue to commit offenses once they complete their sentence. Also a more cohesive society with disciplined, moral individuals would decrease crime.

In capitalist society we have an abundance of poverty, lack of care, ill behaviour, immorality, social division, and a lack of state officials and funding for them. [/b]
Well, I like the chinese system the best. If you get caught and you don&#39;t search for any excuse and say you are guilty, than you get a more reasonable punishment. If you say unguilty and there is prove you were lieïng you should get some of the worst punishments that are possible. A very strict system and strict punishment will reduce the crime. I don&#39;t see in how anything else but heavy punishment can convert a mischief into a good civilian ;)

[Vinny Rafarino]

Well I reckon that&#39;s that then isn&#39;t it supernius? You have now fallen so low as to make this a bickering match rather then an argument. Fair enough, however I won&#39;t play that game with you. Once your face is relieved from the reddish-purple tinge it must now display, you will realise that you have failed to provide any support to your claims and have subconsciously recognised this error, hence the petty little shots you are taking at me.

If you are able to support any of your claims with even a shred of evidence, feel free to post it and I will respond. Have a nice day son.

[Anti-Fascist]

Originally posted by COMRADE [email protected] 3 2003, 04:55 PM
Well I reckon that&#39;s that then isn&#39;t it supernius? You have now fallen so low as to make this a bickering match rather then an argument. Fair enough, however I won&#39;t play that game with you. Once your face is relieved from the reddish-purple tinge it must now display, you will realise that you have failed to provide any support to your claims and have subconsciously recognised this error, hence the petty little shots you are taking at me.

If you are able to support any of your claims with even a shred of evidence, feel free to post it and I will respond. Have a nice day son.
Hah. You still want evidence for morals, son. I shall leave that to you then, son.

Anyway, you started it, with you "tone", your use of "unique", calling me "son
, and all. Even so, I was hardly "bickering". Oh well, I shall just take it as a sign of your inability to confute my statements, son.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Take it how ever you like. I don&#39;t think your assumptions will affect my life at all.....As a matter of fact, I&#39;m sure of it. Oh no&#33; Supernius thinks he&#39;s smarter than me&#33; How will I ever be able to suvive&#33;

One day you may come around but until then, keep on truckin&#39; amigo&#33;






Here&#39;s a good link (http://www.psychology.org) for you, I suggest you browse it. Who knows? You may actually learn something (don&#39;t worry, I won&#39;t tell)

[Anti-Fascist]

What are you talking about? I never said any of those things. And it seems it is you who need to visit the site to which you linked. And stop bickering.

edit: ubb

[Ctisphonics]

Just start drilling holes into the child rapists heads until we discover the exact location of thier controls, and cut it out. I know Americans don&#39;t suport taking chunks out of brains, but I think it&#39;s not a bad idea.
--------
Chemical Castration is good, but if it is a pyschological disorder, they can still be motivated to rape. Nullo&#39;s cut everything off, and yet many still engadge in sex. Why is the guy (or woman) raping in the first place? Is it an orgasim they seek, or power, or something else?
-------
What is crime? You state it as a term universally known to all. Does crimes originate from the legal sphere of though, or is it biological, or a force of it&#39;s own, something else?
-------
A lot of what you guys said is ad hominem, I can easily disregard 90% of your arguements on this basis if I wanted to. Confront it for the substance that stands behind it, don&#39;t snub your nose to people, it&#39;s nothing more than unproductive manoevering getting us nowhere.
-------
Punishments are primitive? Who the f&#39; says? I owe jack to the modern psychological community about Punishment theory. Military theory predates Unopian theory in both the Modern World and Greece, but the nature of military theory (In many societies, both ancient and modern it has become a science just as authentic {or more so} than orthodox psychology)
-------
You know any of the modern works on Rewards and Punishments, or the ancient works? You know the reasons why SEVERAL societies around the world devoloped very simular thoeries on this subject? You can&#39;t just call something primitive without explaining why. Perhaps there does exsist other tatical systems, but it doesn&#39;t mean one&#39;s primitive in comparision to the other if one was devoloped afterwards, or is even decended from the other. You have to measure these things on the basis of the aim in ralation to thier opeerational usage, rating them on the basis of being Progressive, Regressive to said subjects.
---------
Doctriate degrees mean squat to me in debate, I say this now, I&#39;ll say it in the future when I&#39;ll have one. I&#39;ve seen 9 year old kids come up with pretty impressive arguements, and heard some pretty stupid stuff come out of Phd mouths.
---------

(Anyone read Wei Liao Tzu, Lord Shang, John Locke?)

[kylie]

However, it is far from being absoultely useless as a deterrent. If you steal for example you know that you may get caught and if you do it is likely you will be punished. If we become more proficient in apprehending criminals and make our punishments more severe crime will certainly fall.

The death penalty is available in the US, yet still there is high crime rates there. There is other things that affect the crime rate other than the punishment threatened, but it shows that having severe punishments, such as this 5 years imprisonment for stealing, is not the solution to lowering crime. If a person is hungry enough, they will attempt to steal, without regard to the likelyhood of being found out, and the resulting punishment. What alternative is there? Starve? With regards to things such as murder, while severe punishment such as the death penalty would mean less murders than if the maximum punishment was say a year in prison, you would still have some murders. There will be people who due to lack of control, mental instability or not thinking clearly(drunkeness, for example) override the concious part of them that prevents them from commiting murder. What you suggest is trying to detter crime, rather than stopping the want to commit crime in the first place. With things such as stealing its fairly obvious what this would require, not allowing the population to go hungry, and including conditioning away from greed in the social revolution that would take place during socialism. Though with murder, it would be harder. Movement away from Capitalist culture would help reduce murder, but to stop all individual cases occuring would take a lot more work.
I&#39;m not including Counter-revolutionaries when i talk about not punishing crimes, by the way. What they do is very different to normal crime. Counter-revolutionaries want to commit crime(spreading capitalist lies, etc), and cause the return of Capitalism. While normal crimes are just the result of social and economic factors, which are preventable.

Just start drilling holes into the child rapists heads until we discover the exact location of thier controls, and cut it out.
Firstly if there was a certain part of the brain that was paedophillic, to get to it you would have to &#39;drill&#39; through other parts of the brain. Secondly, there is no such part(i assume this is what you mean by &#39;controls&#39;), as has been explained its a mental illness. As you yourself say,
Chemical Castration is good, but if it is a pyschological disorder, they can still be motivated to rape.

Crime is anti-social.
(from the first post) I nearly missed this. Could you explain how this is so?

Not only do you wound society by committing your crime, but then you add insult to injury by making us pay to support them while they sit around and watch Opara
You seem to here be talking about how things currently are. Yet how is it that the actions of people such as Sherman Austin or Mumia Abu-Jamal have &#39;wounded&#39; society? They have done the opposite, helping society by bringing it to more peoples attention the problems of Capitalism and its true actions. I&#39;m confused as to what you mean, i think you&#39;re muddling Capitalism and Socialism - You talk of the USSR and China, but then you use criticisms based on how things supposedly are now. Either way, whether under Capitalism or Socialism, the methods you suggest to reduce crime i disagree with.

[Saint-Just]

What you suggest is trying to detter crime, rather than stopping the want to commit crime in the first place.

There are of course other factors involved to maintain law and order. Prisoners require rehabilitation so they do not continue to commit offenses once they complete their sentence. Also a more cohesive society with disciplined, moral individuals would decrease crime.

In capitalist society we have an abundance of poverty, lack of care, ill behaviour, immorality, social division, and a lack of state officials and funding for them.

These facets of capitalism I cited, if brought to and end, will stop people committing crimes in the first place. In addition I do agree that a small level of crime is often unavoidable.

[Urban Rubble]

There will always be murderers, no matter what you do. Sure, you may greatly reduce the numbers of them, but it will never be totally gone. I ask you, what do we do with these people once they have shown they can&#39;t be "fixed". What if you send him to your (imaginary) rehab center and he gets it all done, then goes back out and kills. What then ?

I don&#39;t think this topic should even be discussed by someone who hasn&#39;t had person they love be a victim of violent crime. Punishment is absolutely neccessary in ANY society. Of course we need less punishment and more education/rehab, but punishment MUST be there.

[Anti-Fascist]

Sure, you may greatly reduce the numbers of them, but it will never be totally gone. I ask you, what do we do with these people once they have shown they can&#39;t be "fixed". What if you send him to your (imaginary) rehab center and he gets it all done, then goes back out and kills. What then ?

There are places in the world without a single case of aggression or violence.


I don&#39;t think this topic should even be discussed by someone who hasn&#39;t had person they love be a victim of violent crime.

What ridiculous individualism. Do you know why this is unsound? This is 100% irrelevant. I do know people who have been "victims" of violent crimes. Even if I did not, this would be a fact irrelevant.


Punishment is absolutely neccessary in ANY society. Of course we need less punishment and more education/rehab, but punishment MUST be there.

You are only restating the thesis in question.

[kylie]

I ask you, what do we do with these people once they have shown they can&#39;t be "fixed".
All murderers can be &#39;fixed&#39;. Thats the point, its not neccessary for there to be detterants. Why punish the person when you could help them stop having this psychological dysfuntion?

What if you send him to your (imaginary) rehab center and he gets it all done, then goes back out and kills. What then ?

Either the rehabilitation is not working correctly, and needs improving, or other external factors have pushed them back into the position where they murder, these factors needing to be identified and stopped.


I don&#39;t think this topic should even be discussed by someone who hasn&#39;t had person they love be a victim of violent crime
I doubt there is anyone on this board who has not had someone close be a victim of serious crime. Though even so, this is wrong, its like saying only people who have been victims of police prejudice in the US may comment on whether the US police force is equal in who it focuses on. Were you in Germany in the 30&#39;s and 40&#39;s? No, so i guess that means you can&#39;t discuss them, using your way of thinking.

[Saint-Just]

Originally posted by Urban [email protected] 7 2003, 03:18 AM
There will always be murderers, no matter what you do. Sure, you may greatly reduce the numbers of them, but it will never be totally gone. I ask you, what do we do with these people once they have shown they can&#39;t be "fixed". What if you send him to your (imaginary) rehab center and he gets it all done, then goes back out and kills. What then ?

I don&#39;t think this topic should even be discussed by someone who hasn&#39;t had person they love be a victim of violent crime. Punishment is absolutely neccessary in ANY society. Of course we need less punishment and more education/rehab, but punishment MUST be there.
I agree that many criminals can&#39;t be &#39;fixed&#39;, then they society must be protected from them. In addition, punishment is necessary as a deterrent. Some people who we have not identified as criminals may then be more likely to commit crimes because there is little punishment for it. Also, punishment is the most important part of rehabilitation; it shows a person that what they have done is wrong.

It is difficult to tell if people are rehabilitated.

then goes back out and kills

I would suggest anyone who commits murder would never be let out of a work camp.

don&#39;t think this topic should even be discussed by someone who hasn&#39;t had person they love be a victim of violent crime

This is both a benefit and a hinderance. If you see violent crime at first hand, perhaps inflicted on yourself or on a loved one you get a far more realistic view of the nature of criminals. The harsher the punishment the more society shows its intolerance for violent crime. However, witnessing experiencing it first hand stop you having an objective view of it.