AsburySkinsFan Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Yep, and let the kid be brought before a court of law. Both sides were in the wrong, it's a lose-lose situation. Yep, something I've maintained the entire time. Others here seem to think that physical violence is the key to fixing all the problems in our country. It reminds me of the Far Side cartoon of the horse hospital there are all kinds of horses with different ailments and the cure is always the same; "Shoot It". Only here its always Beat it senseless. The saddest thing about this whole discussion is that with each passing page I'm more and more scared about ever having a jury of my peers, because some of my "peers" got issues. This thread has been done for quite some time, I'm done. Feel free to tazer yourselves to your heart's content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLeVan Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Well, who wins. No one. I don't think the kid should get the crap beaten out of him, but he wasn't the docile victim you make him out to be either. I see it more as a matter of perspective than peer issues. Well, that and interpretation of the posters article, versus the video. It wasn't until the very end of the video that I could see the suspect restrained in cuffs, at which point he was more than willing to cooperate. We see the video differently, and with our own biases. Heck, it's hard to see anything at all in the video, and only the audio lends a bit of insight to the things we don't see. If you're scared about each passing page, don't be so confrontational and ask people why they think the way they do. I don't mean that as an attack, more as a challenge. Not as a challenge to your opinion, but a challenge to try and understand where people that oppose you are coming from. Why do people think this way?, why is such force used?, when is it appropriate to use force?. I'm interested in what you think. On a grander scope, where will this lead us. Obviously it's not a black and white situation, if it were that easy this would have been solved ages ago. I get the feeling I never should have kept this thread alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 it is better to have your people love the law than it is for them to fear the law. this is now way to gain respect. I will totally disagree, Packer. FEAR is a much better way to get people to comply with something than Love is. It always has been and always will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLeVan Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Fear is a short term solution, respect is a long term one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Fear is a short term solution, respect is a long term one. Personally, I think you ahve that backwards. Love and Respect are concepts that lose their power over time. Especially once they become the standard and are no longer "new". Fear, properly reinforced at certain intervals is forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rincewind Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Personally, I think you ahve that backwards. Love and Respect are concepts that lose their power over time. Especially once they become the standard and are no longer "new". Fear, properly reinforced at certain intervals is forever. Personally, I think you ahve (sic) that backwards. Fear is a concept that loses it power over time. Especially once it becomes the standard and is no longer "new". Love and respect, properly reinforced at certain intervals are forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Personally, I think you ahve (sic) that backwards. Fear is a concept that loses it power over time. Especially once it becomes the standard and is no longer "new". Love and respect, properly reinforced at certain intervals are forever. exactly. people live in fear long enough and they WILL revolt. they will over-throw their fear-mongering dictators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Dude, you are a complete joke. The guy intentionally disobeyed their orders. The situation got out of control because HE let it get out of control. The whole situation could have been avoided, but the guy had it coming. In my opinion, he got off easy. I would have beat him senseless with a club if I were there. I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure the penalty for failing to show your ID in a fricking library is NOT getting beaten senseless. Though I could be wrong on that. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdowwe Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Let these cops be brought before a court of law...then we'll see what the *******s have to say about the "rule of law" Judge will say to the kid, why didnt you obey them. Kid will say because Im representing the liberal professors who taught me the Patriot Act is bad and Ill cry to the ACLU if I want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Judge will say to the kid, why didnt you obey them. Kid will say because Im representing the liberal professors who taught me the Patriot Act is bad and Ill cry to the ACLU if I want to. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 Personally, I think you ahve (sic) that backwards. Fear is a concept that loses it power over time. Especially once it becomes the standard and is no longer "new". Love and respect, properly reinforced at certain intervals are forever. I disagree, expecially when it comes to legal matters. Fear of spending time in jail. Fear of possible execution. Fear of public ridicule and scorn. These are the things that have kept people from committing crimes and other socially unacceptable activities over time.... not love or respect for laws or social precepts. Personally, I'm for a system that severly punishes those people who step out of line with the laws of society. Regardless of their social, racial, political, or religious backgrounds. Unfortunately we now have a society where the criminal has more rights than the victim, and any level of punishment is considered cruel and inhumane. Maybe if we got back to being a little more cruel and inhumane we wouldn't have some of these issues. I'd be REALLY interested in seeing what results sitting a group of violent offending teenagers in the front row of a public hanging of an adult violent offender might have on their desire to continue committing violent offenses; for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 These are the things that have kept people from committing crimes and other socially unacceptable activities over time.... not love or respect for laws or social precepts. No, you need people to RESPECT the law. well, not contradictions there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Nothing is more important in a civilized society as the rule of law. Without it, there is chaos in the streets. This guy was ASKED to comply and he refused. He suffered the consequences. There is nothing "fascist" about what was done, as some in this thread have said. Which is why those cops should be prosecuted for breaking it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 No, you need people to RESPECT the law. They don't have to like it or fear it. It's obvious in this particular example that the guy was taking an adversarial stance from the very beginning. It's also obvious that he wasn't very bright either. Ooh, "taking an adversarial stance". Now that sounds like justification for multiple assaults to me. BTW, where exactly do you live? [/sarcasm tag inserved for the clue challenged] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Yep, and let the kid be brought before a court of law. Both sides were in the wrong, it's a lose-lose situation. Um, I'm not aware of exactly what law the kid broke. (Although, aparantly, some folks think "being liberal" has somehow been made illegal.) By refusing to show ID, the cops (IMO) would have been perfectly justified in arresting him on a charge of trespass. But once he's been ID'd, then he had permission to be in that library. Failing to prove you're not trespassing is (IMO) grounds for arrest, but not for prosecution. (As far as I'm aware, "Trespass" is "being someplace without the owner's permission". It's not "being someplace where you have permission, but refusing to prove it".) (Might be a good enough reason for some academic punishment, though.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I disagree, expecially when it comes to legal matters. Fear of spending time in jail. Fear of possible execution. Fear of public ridicule and scorn. These are the things that have kept people from committing crimes and other socially unacceptable activities over time.... not love or respect for laws or social precepts. Personally, I'm for a system that severly punishes those people who step out of line with the laws of society. Regardless of their social, racial, political, or religious backgrounds. Unfortunately we now have a society where the criminal has more rights than the victim, and any level of punishment is considered cruel and inhumane. Maybe if we got back to being a little more cruel and inhumane we wouldn't have some of these issues. I'd be REALLY interested in seeing what results sitting a group of violent offending teenagers in the front row of a public hanging of an adult violent offender might have on their desire to continue committing violent offenses; for example. Ooook. You know the death penalty doesn't deter murders right? Or is that another thing you refuse to accept because it doesn't fit your view? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Ooook. You know the death penalty doesn't deter murders right? Or is that another thing you refuse to accept because it doesn't fit your view? I'll believe it when you find me a SINGLE person, anywhere in the world, at any point in history who committed another crime of ANY type after being executed for a previous crime. The death penalty IS a deterent to those who are executed and works perfectly from what I've seen. I believe if used properly it COULD also be much more of a deterent to those who are thinking about committing certain types of crimes. Unfortunately for people like you that would mean using it MUCH more frequently, for a larger list of crimes, and doing it in both a very public and nowhere near as "civilized" manner as we do currently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I'll believe it when you find me a SINGLE person, anywhere in the world, at any point in history who committed another crime of ANY type after being executed for a previous crime. The death penalty IS a deterent to those who are executed and works perfectly from what I've seen. Show me one person who was sentenced to life without parole who committed another crime. Of course there have been people who escaped but that's on the prison. Not on the sentence. If monitored properly they aren't committing another crime. Also if it works "perfectly" then why are murder rates in states that do enforce capital punishment the same as states who don't? It seems like if it was a true deterent the crime rates would be lower. I believe if used properly it COULD also be much more of a deterent to those who are thinking about committing certain types of crimes. Unfortunately for people like you that would mean using it MUCH more frequently, for a larger list of crimes, and doing it in both a very public and nowhere near as "civilized" manner as we do currently. Explain the "people like you" remark please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Show me one person who was sentenced to life without parole who committed another crime. Of course there have been people who escaped but that's on the prison. Not on the sentence. If monitored properly they aren't committing another crime. Also if it works "perfectly" then why are murder rates in states that do enforce capital punishment the same as states who don't? It seems like if it was a true deterent the crime rates would be lower.Explain the "people like you" remark please. pinko commie liberal? :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 pinko commie liberal? :whoknows: Well they better hurry up and execute me then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Well they better hurry up and execute me then. haha, i just re-edited to make my post match up to your quote. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 haha, i just re-edited to make my post match up to your quote. :laugh: :laugh: There. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Show me one person who was sentenced to life without parole who committed another crime. Of course there have been people who escaped but that's on the prison. Not on the sentence. If monitored properly they aren't committing another crime. Also if it works "perfectly" then why are murder rates in states that do enforce capital punishment the same as states who don't? It seems like if it was a true deterent the crime rates would be lower. Show me the BILL to house even one of those worthless wastes of flesh and oxygen compared to the $12 (max) of rope required to hang the son of a *****. Explain the "people like you" remark please. People like you... those people who have a greater interest in Legality than JUSTICE or PUNISHMENT. Who are more interested in whether some clerk typed the ****ing search warrant application correctly than whether the SOB is guilty of what he's being charged with. Who have more interest in the "rights" of a killer than of the family who they took a loved one from. Does that explain it well enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 I'll believe it when you find me a SINGLE person, anywhere in the world, at any point in history who committed another crime of ANY type after being executed for a previous crime. The death penalty IS a deterent to those who are executed and works perfectly from what I've seen.I believe if used properly it COULD also be much more of a deterent to those who are thinking about committing certain types of crimes. Unfortunately for people like you that would mean using it MUCH more frequently, for a larger list of crimes, and doing it in both a very public and nowhere near as "civilized" manner as we do currently. Mass_, ever consider moving to the Middle East and joining the Taliban? Their concept of retributive justice - death to adulterers, amputate a hand for theft - seems to fit with your point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted November 20, 2006 Share Posted November 20, 2006 Mass_, ever consider moving to the Middle East and joining the Taliban? Their concept of retributive justice - death to adulterers, amputate a hand for theft - seems to fit with your point of view. I'll tell you there are some parts of that type of law enforcement system that I find VERY interesting, Dan. I'm not sure I'd want to all the way to their style of doing things, but I'd definitely prefer something much closer to their way of doing things than to the gutless, nobody held accountable system we currently have in place here in the United States when it comes to punishment after conviction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.