|
dex_sda posted:This is anathema to retribution, though. The loss of freedom isn't retributive?
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
Pissflaps posted:The loss of freedom isn't retributive? I would argue that in a rehabilitation based system which gives excellent conditions to inmates, no. As in, retribution is not the reason for the loss of freedom.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:The loss of freedom isn't retributive? In an ideal world it's preventative and protective while rehabilitation is happening. Retribution doesn't really achieve all that much apart from a fleeting sense of satisfaction, but one that's ultimately empty. http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/06/revenge.aspx
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
believing that a purely-retributive loss of freedom is appropriate for a modern society makes you a rabid animal that should be put down, flaps
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:believing that a purely-retributive loss of freedom is appropriate for a modern society makes you a rabid animal that should be put down, flaps I'm comfortable with you holding this point of view. Pesmerga posted:In an ideal world it's preventative and protective while rehabilitation is happening. Retribution doesn't really achieve all that much apart from a fleeting sense of satisfaction, but one that's ultimately empty. I'm not sure if would be fleeting for those affected by their acts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I don't consider efficiency to be an important consideration when meting out justice. If you really desire retribution you should be willing to enact it yourself, if you want to slake a desire for violence then you should favour it far more intimate and bloody than sending someone to prison via the apparatus of state. You also shouldn't couch it in words like justice because vengeance is not justice. It may be more pleasing but it isn't the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I'm not sure if would be fleeting for those affected by their acts. You didn't read the link, did you?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If you really desire retribution you should be willing to enact it yourself, if you want to slake a desire for violence then you should favour it far more intimate and bloody than sending someone to prison via the apparatus of state. Why? There's lots of things I really want that I expect the state to deliver. Healthcare, roads, the welfare state etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
XMNN posted:lol I bet the first draft had a star of david instead of a pentagram There were quite a few Jewish folks in that building, weren't there?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:
I can't decide whether I should make an edit of this or not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I'm comfortable with you holding this point of view. It is, as many studies have now demonstrated. That's pretty much what the linked article says, if you had bothered to read it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
ThaumPenguin posted:I can't decide whether I should make an edit of this or not. You're living in a post-Brexit reality, nothing is impossible!
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:Oh, look the Labour right have decided that parroting UKIP talking points is too tame and are just going to start taking their cues from the Republican Party's playbook now. Sweet. Dammit, my money was on Harman letting the facade slip first. TERFs have always had a worrying amount of influence in some parts of Labour. Related to the whole Guardian/New Statesman/Blairite circlejerk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Why? Because if you want to do violence to people I think it is important to really understand what you're doing. It's not as if it requires specialist knowledge or training, if you wouldn't be willing to hurt people personally and intimately I don't really think you should be asking the state to do it for you. If you want retributive justice you either don't understand justice or you don't understand violence. If it's really suffering you want you should internalize that and really understand what you're asking for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
Pesmerga posted:It is, as many studies have now demonstrated. That's pretty much what the linked article says, if you had bothered to read it. That article seems more concerned with 'eye for an eye' acts of revenge rather than a long term prison sentence. Your 'pretty much' is doing a lot of work. I can believe that the former only offers temporary relief, but I don't support corporal or capital punishment. I do support long term, humane loss of liberty where the crime justifies it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Because if you want to do violence to people I think it is important to really understand what you're doing. It's not as if it requires specialist knowledge or training, if you wouldn't be willing to hurt people personally and intimately I don't really think you should be asking the state to do it for you. Let me know when you're personally prepared to do everything that you want others to do for you then I might take this nonsense seriously.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Dammit, my money was on Harman letting the facade slip first. LGBT is not a homogenous block and there's no reason whatsoever to expect gay people to understand the plight of trans people. There's nothing about being gay or a feminist that stops FYGM applying. I like the term TERF because I like the way it pisses off TERFs but it's essentially a meaningless acronym. Oh look, feminists can be poo poo people who don't understand feminism. This is all much easier to understand and prevent with proper class-based analysis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
The Labour campaign in Richmond Park appears to be going well. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Maybe turning the other cheek would be the Christian thing to do but if one of my loved ones was murdered I'd rather the perpetrator spent a considerable amount of their life without their liberty in austere surroundings than on a shed building residential. Presumably because the next person they murder, after spending "a considerable amount of their life without their liberty in austere surroundings", would be mathematically unlikely to be another one of your loved ones? Since you don't give a gently caress about rehabilitation or reducing recidivism you clearly also don't give a gently caress about subsequent potential victims unless you happen to know them personally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
Julio Cruz posted:Presumably because the next person they murder, after spending "a considerable amount of their life without their liberty in austere surroundings", would be mathematically unlikely to be another one of your loved ones? Since you don't give a gently caress about rehabilitation or reducing recidivism you clearly also don't give a gently caress about subsequent potential victims unless you happen to know them personally. Easily fixed. Only let them out when they're also rehabilitated and are no longer a threat to the public.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Julio Cruz posted:Presumably because the next person they murder, after spending "a considerable amount of their life without their liberty in austere surroundings", would be mathematically unlikely to be another one of your loved ones? Since you don't give a gently caress about rehabilitation or reducing recidivism you clearly also don't give a gently caress about subsequent potential victims unless you happen to know them personally. This is the entire drive behind all retributive systems. Lowering crime doesn't matter, it's entirely about you feeling better by crushing someone with the state. The worldview of such people is never beyond their locality, which is why flaps still preposterously claims he's working class.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Go and ask other working class people what they think and let me know whose opinions match theirs more closely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
The fact that lots of people think the death penalty (the extreme end point of retributive justice) is okay doesn't actually make it ok.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Go and ask other working class people what they think and let me know whose opinions match theirs more closely. Working class people are dumb and don't know what's good for them, which is why the socialist vanguard is necessarily comprised of
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Working class people are controlled and don't know what's good for them, which is why the socialist vanguard is necessarily comprised of violent intellectuals. fixed for accuracy
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Easily fixed. Only let them out when they're also rehabilitated and are no longer a threat to the public. That's what the prison service is trying to do right now, and every tabloid in the land whips itself into a froth whenever they fail and someone's daughter gets knifed by someone who was just let out on parole. You can't prove someone's no longer a threat to the public, unless by "no longer a threat to the public" you mean "dead", which I suspect you do. Would you apply the same rules to thieves? How about drug offenders? How do you feel about someone who got locked up for petty theft potentially spending decades in prison because someone has them marked down as "likely to reoffend"? (which is in itself a self-fulfilling prophecy)
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Working class people are dumb and don't know what's good for them, which is why the socialist vanguard is necessarily comprised of Less stupid & more false consciousness.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I think retribution is a valid reason for incarceration. Even if it were, aren't we doing a disservice to the ~innocent public~ and ~victims of crime~ by simply throwing criminals into a system that leaves them even more brutalized and without non-criminal prospects when they're released? Even if you don't give a single solitary poo poo about criminals or what happens to them, rehabilitation-based systems are better for non-criminals.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Labour are briefing that they are expecting Zac Goldsmith to win tonight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
I'm the guy in the working class who thinks he's better than the guys in the working class
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
namesake posted:The fact that lots of people think the death penalty (the extreme end point of retributive justice) is okay doesn't actually make it ok. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Namtab posted:I'm the guy in the working class who thinks he's better than the guys in the working class false consciousness or whichever name of the phenomina you prefer always applies to the self. The idea that I or noam chomsky or hegel are immune to it is not part of the theory. For example, I was falsely under the belief that the country isn't a giant pedo ring until a few years ago. Had I not been under this false belief, I would have behaved differently. You can attempt to undo specific propaganda on the self but you can't stop it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
My hot take on crime and punishment is that prison and the related loss in freedom's is nessecary for serious crimes against the person but not for crime against the property
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Working class people are dumb and don't know what's good for them, which is why the socialist vanguard is necessarily comprised of Working class people are so smart they often manage to simultaneously vote selfishly in only their own interest and vote against their own interest at exactly the same time* *it seems to work a bit like relativity, in that it depends on the observer... specifically on what point they're trying to make in their Guardian column that week.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Julio Cruz posted:Would you apply the same rules to thieves? How about drug offenders? How do you feel about someone who got locked up for petty theft potentially spending decades in prison because someone has them marked down as "likely to reoffend"? (which is in itself a self-fulfilling prophecy) No i won't be coming out with a suite of prison tariffs for various offences to illustrate my broad point. Mister Adequate posted:Even if it were, aren't we doing a disservice to the ~innocent public~ and ~victims of crime~ by simply throwing criminals into a system that leaves them even more brutalized and without non-criminal prospects when they're released? Even if you don't give a single solitary poo poo about criminals or what happens to them, rehabilitation-based systems are better for non-criminals. I think i've already said I want to see prison conditions improved.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Labour are briefing that they are expecting Zac Goldsmith to win tonight. Namtab posted:My hot take on crime and punishment is that prison and the related loss in freedom's is nessecary for serious crimes against the person but not for crime against the property The only crime involving property is having property because property is theft. Pissflaps posted:I wonder by how much Labour have increased their vote share since 2015? Probably down by about 5% is my guess based on nothing. Look forward to you pretending a constituency where the Liberals are the 2nd party is representative of the rest of the country. (not really) forkboy84 fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Labour are briefing that they are expecting Zac Goldsmith to win tonight. I wonder by how much Labour have increased their vote share since 2015?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:No i won't be coming out with a suite of prison tariffs for various offences to illustrate my broad point. Who said anything about tariffs? I was asking if your "no release until there's no risk to the public" policy applied to all criminals. Since I take it that it doesn't, does the risk of non-murderers reoffending not worry you? Or is that only when it's your house they're breaking into or your car they're stealing?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
Pissflaps is an idiot who says he wants a prison system with good conditions that rehabilitates people because he wants retribution. His ideal system appears to be no different from one designed by someone who doesn't want retribution. It's a pointless argument.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 04:47 |
|
|
Focus resources on eliminating poverty and treating addictions and you'll see the crime rate plummet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:32
|
|
