An Eye For An Eye? - What do you believe?

[JoYKiLLaH]

An eye for an eye, a hand for a thief, etc. I want as many opinions on the matter.

I believe in a Communist society this is best implemented. There wouldn't be any exceptions, no 10 appeals to the supreme court. You steal, bye bye hand. You kill someone, adios amigo.

It wouldn't be barbaric, it would be sustaining life.
If people had oppurtunities to do this shit, communism would fail for a few reasons. 1.) The inside would become corrupt from it all. 2.) People who are greedy would buy favors from someone with a little status. 3.) Having the current justice system in Canada and most of the U.S.A gives the criminals too much freedom. Too much freedom in a communist society, means too many power-hungry individuals.

[mentalbunny]

Hmmm, now this is complicated because I'm all for forgiveness and mercy. However I think that death is to merciful for some people and they should have to live with the guilt of what they have done. it's very complicated but I don't think punishments should be as harsh as you are suggesting, sometimes things liie stealing are psychological so I don't think cutting a hand off is the best approach. I think we should keep prison sentences but makle the whole punishment experience more unpleasant and the rehabiliation more effective. I don't knwo how to do this as I'm no expert but I'm sure that enogh "experts" could come up with a good solution. It may not be perfect but you must remember that nothing ever is, and if we take the approach youi suggest then people would probably protest, i'd be suprised if they didn't, quite frankly.

[Kehoe]

"An eye for an eye only makes the world blind."-Gandhi.

What part of chopping,cutting or sawing a perfectly healthy hand from a persons arm do you consider as non-barbaric?What materialistic possession is of such value that a man must lose a portion of his body much less his life?

There are unfortunately circumstances wherein a life must be silenced due to anti-social acts of malice,and in such cases execution must be carried out in a manner that causes the least amount of suffering.

The goal of a true humanity must be the transformation of the human mind ... not the killing of the human body.Violence and aggressive can never be eliminated entirely,what must be done is to minimize these to the greatest extent possible by the most humane means conceivable to man.

Comrade JoYKiLLaH says,"Too much freedom in a communist society, means too many power-hungry individuals." ... it is not freedom but the lack thereof that assists power-hungry individuals.Perhaps you should study the cases of Stalinist Russia,Maos China,etc.Comrade JoYKiLLaH ... upon reading your post and considering its content it would seem that your personality is a somewhat complex mixture of an Islamic fundamentalist,political conservative and neo-fascist,although its quite possible that you truly want whats best for society and that in time you will realize that your initial instincts need refinement.

Truth is constant while we are constantly changing,todays beliefs may be tomorrows fables,we often miscalculate and must readjust from time to time ... we either evolve or become extinct.There are certain fundamental beliefs that I personally cling to;however,were someone to prove them to be nothing more than false assumptions I see no cause to commit suicide.Take care that opinions dont become rigid and unforgiving else you both may perish. - Karo

[new democracy]

JoYKiLLaH, have you met Mazdak yet? i think you and him will become best friends.

[Nic8]

How is killing people and cutting off their hands sustaining life?

To much freedom in a communist society means to much power hungry individuals? First of all, you can not have to much freedom in a communist society. Communism means abaolute freedom. Second of all, I think you are implying that we should have a totalitarian society, somewhat similar to the Soviet Union of Maoist China. Are you saying that those societies did not have power hungry individuals? Stalin and Mao were some of the most curropt and power hungry people ever, comparable to Hitler. It is a lack of freedom that creates power hungry individuals. If there is no, or little, freedom, no one can go against the leader. The leader gets more and more power and becomes corrupt by it.

I take it you are Canadian because you mentioned Canada. Our prison system here in Canada is corrupt. A fifteen year old can be tried as an adult and can be in jail for 20+ years. What happens when he/she gets out? He/she become more pissed off at society and will likely kill again. Punishing criminals does not work. Crime is a social problem, and we have to cut it at it's root. Let's taking stealing as an example. People steal because they need to (if you are starving, you will steal food). The best way to solve theft is not by killing crimminals (or choping off their hands), it is by solving poverty. House the homeless, feed the starving, employ the unemployed, etc., and you will have solved theft. If you just cut off a crimminals hand, and there are still poor people, their will still be people stealing.

I do not understand why people still believe that deterrence works in solving crimes. The states with the highest death rates also have the most murders. If severe punishments actually worked, wouldn't the murder rate go down instead of up? The countries with the most rehab-based crimminal system (Scandanavia) has the lowest crime rates.

[nz revolution]

Cutting off someones hand? What kind of nonsense is that?

It is some rule/law that obviously is used to enforce the private property idea.

Grow up

[mentalbunny]

Quote: from Nic8 on 4:46 pm on Dec. 4, 2002


Let's taking stealing as an example. People steal because they need to (if you are starving, you will steal food). The best way to solve theft is not by killing crimminals (or choping off their hands), it is by solving poverty. House the homeless, feed the starving, employ the unemployed, etc., and you will have solved theft. If you just cut off a crimminals hand, and there are still poor people, their will still be people stealing.


Although I agree with your sentiment I have to disagree with this particular statement as some people steal because of psychological problems. I don't know much aobut it but people who need nothing go out and steal, i suppose it might be to do with the thrill of breaking the law and trying not to get caught.

However I think a truly effective system would be more re-hab than punishment based, like your example of Scandanavia. I certainly disagree with JoYKiLLaH on that, but we need tougher punishment for some crimes, like dealing hard drugs like heroin and killing. Life should mean life, not just 15 or 20 years. But execcution is not an option. I believe there is nothing after this life so what does cutting their life sshort do? Nothing really except permenently preventing them from offending again, I think having to live with the guilt, as I said beofre, is a worse punishment.

[Xvall]

Eye for an eye? Hah. If someone even looked at my eye three times; I would kill them.

[redstar2000]

I associate myself with the views of comrade Nic8. Crimes against "property" are, I think, close to 100% determined by the unequal distribution of wealth. Equalize wealth, even approximately, and crimes against property will disappear. That actually HAPPENED in Cuba; theft and burglery have only reappeared in Cuba since the island became a tourist destination...with some Cubans having access to hard currency and others not, inequalities have reappeared and so has crime.

Crimes of violence are a trickier matter--there are real psychological disorders involved. The more humane environment of communism ought to reduce such crimes by a significant amount, but probably won't eliminate them entirely.

So, what to do? I confess sympathy for the outlook of the Spanish anarcho-syndicalists in this matter: since it was their view that imprisoning a person was a monstrous crime in and of itself, they carried out capital punishment for forcible rape and murder.

I think, but do not know for sure, that they were also aware of the effect of lengthy prison sentences on the GUARDS; if your job is to keep human beings in cages, how long does it take you to conclude that ALL other people besides yourself are "animals"? It is not an accident of history that the biggest supporters of California's infamous "three convictions = life imprisonment" law are the members of the prison guards union.(!)

A possibly more humane alternative would be exile: a useless wilderness area of at least several thousand square kilometers fenced in and heavily guarded. The convicted violent offender would be sterilized, given some basic camping gear, and sent into the wilderness to live like the savage he/she is. Every so often, a helicopter would fly over and drop food rations and basic medical supplies (mainly pain-killers); otherwise, the human species would have nothing more to do with them...ever!

It would be important to emphasize the necessity of clear and convincing forensic evidence of guilt...instead of the semi-feudal battle of legal technicalities and attorney eloquence that we have now. Did X murder Y? If X is clearly guilty, death or exile seem to me to be the best options.

(There will be no "hard drug" dealers to punish, since ANY drug will be freely available at your friendly neighborhood Red Flag Drug Emporium. Enjoy!)

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

No offense to you people who support the idea of an eye for eye.

This is very barbaric and will lead nowhere. The answer is not to kill a criminal, but to house, feed, employ, rehabilitate, give therapy, whatever.
What is more valuable than a person's life or body part? Another body? Maybe then, but why should the criminal be painfully executed, what will society or any man gain from that? It surely will make no difference to the dead person.
A criminal commits these acts, sometimes for food or necessities, but other times for greed, which comes from phycological damage or a lack of freedoms.
No man has a right to take the life of another.
In communism, the lack of necessities will be no problem, the lack of freedoms will also be no problem. The only problem that might arise would be some phycological damge.
Violence towards criminals only perpetuates the violence and creates hateful individuals.

"An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind"-Ghandi

[JoYKiLLaH]

ok I was too harsh, that was basically to get everythings true feelings on it. When you be radical, you make people state there minds, which is what I thoguht I would do.

My true feelings as I've stated to many of my close friends is, it should be up to society itself to decide. Having a jury and judge is bullshit, everybody is pregudiced(sp) in a way, it can never be totally fair. There is always in almost everything a margin of failure that can happen, and in the history and future, all of this will happen.

The eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, hand for a thief is all about true justice. If you do that to others, think about it, you should pay for what you did.

My true thoughts which are always being altered are that if you steal, punishment should mean having something taken from you (not your body but a material possession), something dear to you, so that you see what stealing does to people, it would all depnd on the severity of the crime.
Then there's rehabilitation. Counciling in my opinion is mostly bullshit, the person needs to make the choice by himself, which leads me to my point of confinement. Not jail, they can be by themselves, totally by themselves, for a day or 2 or a week, as long as it takes, for them to truly decide where there values lie.

In a communistic state, they should have no reason to steal, I know why people steal in places like USA and Canada.


Another point : A Big Brother sort of thing.

If people were kept an eye on, and an incident occured, there would be proof, no reasonable doubt bullshit.

Some of you may say, it infringes our privacy, but does it really? When you commit a crime, it infringes someone else or something. There would be privacy in it wouldn't be watched by anybody for no reason at all. But if something happened, theyd pull up the area's video sort of thing, and the time it happened, and see exactly what happened.

THese are some things that have been bothering me, feel free to discuss, not criticize as I'm one person trying to find where his values lie, your debating and discussion and information help make the person and the way I am. This is the reason I signed up for the boards, all of the stuff I read, I had my own opinion I wanted to be discussed.

[Nic8]

Greed is taught. People are not born greedy. Private property teaches people to be greedy. Get rid of private property and you will also get rid of greed. This will stop people who do not need to steal from stealing.

Somebody said something about rape. From what I have read, rape is not a sex crime. It is a power crime. The capitalist system makes people feel powerless. Rape is a desperate attempt to get power. If you gave individuals power, I think you would get rid of most rape.
Punishimg rapists won't prevent future rapes. Empowering people will.

I don't think that there would be a law in a communist society, so there would be no thrill in breaking it.

Most of these psychological problems are not inherrent. People are not born with a genetic makeup that makes them want to break laws. It is a result of social conditions. We have to find what makes people commit crimes and change that part of society so people will not continue to commit crimes.

I don't think that dealing heroin should be a big sentance. I mostly agree with restar2000. I think we should have special centers for heavy drug use. People can only do heavy drugs in the center and only leave when they are sober. People would also have free rehab access in the drug center. I meen, who are we to tell individuals what they can and can not do with their own body?

The forest idea is not so bad. Maybe it, along with death, should be the option of the crimminal. But, I think we should have rehab centers instead. Have secured centers that teach people how to act in society. People would be under the constant review of psychologists. They would not be allowed out untill they are determined ready to by the team of psychologists. There would be no preset sentances.

[Nic8]

I hope that you do not think that I am critisising you, as that was not my intent. If you feel that way, I apologise.
As with you, I am here to debate and find my personal values as well. By the way, where abouts in Canada are you?

[chamo]

[agreeing with victorcommie]

capital punishment only continues the circle of inhumanity
it gives nothing to society and gives nothing to the victims
its totally barbaric and shouldn't be acceptable in a civilised society and the developed world
criminals show be looked after and changed to be reintroduced back into society, if they commit again, they should be put back in prison again but for a longer sentence. they need to be told how they are not benfiting anyone and they should help others instad of stealing
if a man steals bacause he has to and not out of greed he has to be looked after and cared and provided for. releasing him back into a society where he has no opportunities or choices will not do anything to change his ways. he needs to be educated and given more opportunities

[JoYKiLLaH]

I am in Edmonton Alberta.

All of you people here bring up realy good points, I need time to ponder.

[mentalbunny]

Nic8, I disagree with your statement that greed is taught, look at little kids.

Ok, maybe those kids are only selfish like any animal is but still this can progress into greed very quickly, unlike any other animal in nature.

What do you say to that? I think humans are the worst things to evolve, look at us, we're a mess!!

[Nic8]

Happyguy is 100% right.

Mantalbunny, little kids have been taught to be greedy. They see it everywhere. This society is totally based on greed. I really don't think that babies are born with a desire for more then they need.

Many native societies were almost greed free. They had no private property, everything was shared. If someone 'had' a pot and was not using it, another person could take it and use it. In many early languages, the verbe "to have" or "to own" did not even exist. These people shared things because they were taught to, and they were not taught to be greedy. This is what Engels refferred to as primitive communism.

If you can not eliminate greed, how do you propose a communist/anarchist society would work or look like?

[JoYKiLLaH]

we shuld all live in the bush, and get along.

ya right, thatll never fuckin happen, what we can do is just keep trying to push communism on people.

there's enough socialists and commies in the world for us to make a difference.

[mentalbunny]

Thing is though if we have a violent revolution the aftermath will be so chaotic and it will be too easy for the capis to get a hold again. We have to do it subtly but it will take a long time, andI have a horrible feeling it will get worse before it gets better...

[JoYKiLLaH]

so its a evlution sted of a revolution , what im saying is its just too fuckin easy for criminals in present day justice in canada and usa

[truthaddict11]

i believe if the death penalty must be used (though i am against it) only is cases of tourture or genocide

[JoYKiLLaH]

why? they take 8 peoples lives so they must be killed, but if they take 1 it shuldnt? what kind of bullshit is that? its still someones life gone, some kids dad or mom or son or daughter gone, just not as many

[truthaddict11]

i am not talking about 8 people i mean what people like Milosilvic, Hitler and Pinochet and others have done those are the crimes that if a society does have the death penalty it should be used for.
I am against the death penalty though

[JoYKiLLaH]

alright, thanks for clearing that up man