Decent people don’t delight in vigilantism. Decent people don’t maim other people. Decent people don’t cheer on those who maim others.
No matter the person’s crime, he did not give up his right to be treated lawfully by the society incarcerating him.
Who cares about prisoners’ rights? I do. And that’s because I’m a decent person.
[QUOTE=Monty]
Decent people don’t delight in vigilantism. Decent people don’t maim other people. Decent people don’t cheer on those who maim others.
No matter the person’s crime, he did not give up his right to be treated lawfully by the society incarcerating him.
Who cares about prisoners’ rights? I do. And that’s because I’m a decent person.
[/QUOTE]
Heh. I agree with you, but I thought I’d point out that this sounds like a political ad. Seriously - read it out loud.
I don’t care if it sounds like a political ad. Human rights are, apparently, a political issue.
To those who think the “tattoist” is right: I’ve been falsely accused of a crime. Should the others in the lock-up while I was waiting to be released have had free reign on determining the punishment?
[QUOTE=Cisco]
I agree. Someone said that committing suicide would be the only decent thing this guy had ever done. Give me a fucking break. This guy could’ve been a SAINT a few years ago for all we know. The fact is we don’t know. I have an uncle who was literally an Eagle Scout and served 2 terms in US Navy before doing 18 years in federal maximum security prison for a laundry list of crimes including murder.
There but for the grace of god go all of us, indeed.
[/QUOTE]
How about that he had a meth lab, was afraid Kaitlyn found out about it and would tell, abducted her and decided to kill her. But he thought that he would rape her first. Somehow, I think they don’t give out merit badges for that.
[QUOTE=Monty]
Interesting assertion. I have yet to see that in US law.
Personally, I’m against the death penalty. It is not a form of maiming, though. The person executed is not forced to live out his life minus parts of his body removed without his consent or with whip scars or other tattoos applied. This is irrelevant in this case as the victim of the vigilante was not sentenced to death. He is serving a life sentence.
[/QUOTE]
Since this is the pit - stick it up your ass Monty.
How dare you suggest we should give 2 shits what happens to a child killer.
A proper punishment would have been to have the bastard executed and his organs donated to need law-abiding citizens.
Why the fuck should anyone care if a sub-human got a little street justice in prison?
Boo-hoo-hoo! :rolleyes:
Ech! Screwed up the quote, and that should’ve been “needy” law-abiding citizens. If a mod is so inclined, please fix.
Scratch that, the current mod seems to be on Monty’s side, I’ll pass on the edit.
Any of you dickheads ever heard of the 8th amendment? You think that shit was thought up on a whim? You think the founding fathers took it lightly? You think they put it in there for their own amusement?
Yeah, I know it doesn’t legally apply here, but think of the spirit of it, not the letter.
“How dare you suggest we should give 2 shits what happens to a child killer”?
Fuck you. I know you’re too dense to get this, but Monty is not defending a child killer. He is defending human rights.
[QUOTE=BwanaBob]
Since this is the pit - stick it up your ass Monty.
[/quote]
Why? Because I have the temerity to suggest that people be treated lawfully? Oh, the horror!
Because the prison, as an agent of the people, is responsible for ensuring the safety of its charges.
That would be your opinion. The law, on the other hand, stipulated a different penalty which, not surprisingly, does not include tattoing or extra-judicial execution.
Because he’s not sub-human. He’s a human being. Yes, he broke the law and yes, he obviously committed a heinous crime.
And that excuses the commission of another heinous crime…how, exactly?
[QUOTE=Cisco]
Any of you dickheads ever heard of the 8th amendment? You think that shit was thought up on a whim? You think the founding fathers took it lightly? You think they put it in there for their own amusement?
Yeah, I know it doesn’t legally apply here, but think of the spirit of it, not the letter.
“How dare you suggest we should give 2 shits what happens to a child killer”?
Fuck you. I know you’re too dense to get this, but Monty is not defending a child killer. He is defending human rights.
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, my compassion goes out the window when it involves a child killer.
If you’re a parent you should feel the same way.
If you’re not, you can’t imagine the living hell that girl’s parents are going through.
What’s your response going to be if it turns out that Cicsco happens to be a parent? Are you going to trot out a “No True Scotsman” argument?
I appreciate the sentiment, BwanaBob, but next time you want to tell me how I should feel, please go fuck yourself instead.
I guess we’ll have disagree on this.
And you’re right, I shouldn’t suggest how you should feel or even give a shit how you feel.
On the long list of issues that are important to me, keeping prisoners “safe” is at the bottom.
[QUOTE=Monty]
Decent people don’t delight in vigilantism. Decent people don’t maim other people. Decent people don’t cheer on those who maim others.
[/QUOTE]
I would say that decent people might do these things, just as decent people can have blind spots about all sorts of things. But I do consider it a blind spot. I do think people can get carried away in hatred, in revenge, always assuming that the perpetrator is so unlike we decent folk, that we are so far above them, when in reality we can all be pretty monstrous.
It is very very easy to convince ourselves a rapist or murderer or molester isn’t human, and isn’t deserving of any rights or respect.
[QUOTE=BwanaBob]
Ech! Screwed up the quote, and that should’ve been “needy” law-abiding citizens. If a mod is so inclined, please fix.
[/quote]
Your quote was messed up because Monty messed up his quote. I’ve fixed that, and I’ve removed the piece from your quote that was not Monty’s.
[QUOTE=BwanaBob]
Scratch that, the current mod seems to be on Monty’s side, I’ll pass on the edit.
[/QUOTE]
Stick it up your ass, shithead.
[QUOTE=Monty]
Decent people don’t delight in vigilantism. Decent people don’t maim other people. Decent people don’t cheer on those who maim others.
No matter the person’s crime, he did not give up his right to be treated lawfully by the society incarcerating him.
Who cares about prisoners’ rights? I do. And that’s because I’m a decent person.
[/QUOTE]
I take delight in justice. I don’t take delight in maiming others. I don’t cheer on those who maim others.
What you choose to call vigilantism I choose to call a little extra justice. It wasn’t perfect justice, but neither was the sentence handed down by the court. Perfect justice is impossible in this case, as it is in most other cases of abduction, rape, and murder of a child.
Who doesn’t care about this shitbags rights? I don’t. And I’m still a decent person.
[QUOTE=Frank]
That said, the fact that the guy in this thread is despicable scum does not relieve me of my responsibility to treat him ethically and humanely, nor does it relieve the justice system, as my agent, of its responsibility to do the same. The system is not to provide vengeance, revenge, or to assuage bloodlust, it is to provide justice.
[/QUOTE]
You’re extrapolating; I did not say I endorsed this particular act, given that the guy is already in jail for life, etc etc. I was responding specifically to your question about court-ordered branding as part of a judge’s sentence. I would have no problem with that; little good is accomplished, IMO, by just locking someone away for three or five or twenty years and hoping they’ve changed when they get out.
I don’t see what good is done by putting away a date-rapist for five years, for example. A small little R branded on the arm, however, will remind him every day about what he’s done (not all that different from the victim) and provide a nice conversation piece for all his future dates, while still giving him the possibility of reforming his life and repaying his debt in a constructive way.
[QUOTE=50million]
I take delight in justice. I don’t take delight in maiming others. I don’t cheer on those who maim others.
[/quote]
In the same posting in which you make this assertion, you prove that this assertion is false.
What does the law call it?
My point is that the sentence handed down by the court is the sentence the laws under which we live stipulated be handed down by the non-prisoner, non-violent, non-felon, productive member of society, the judge.
Perfect justice would be that any abduction, any rape, and any murder of any kind never happen in the first place.
Right. A “decent person” who supports vigilantism meted out by violent felons. That’s mighty decent of you, isn’t it? :rolleyes:
To those who feel the murderer forfeited his rights as a human and thus the assault and ensuing tattoo by the other violent felon is a good thing, I have a question for you: So, he’s forfeited his humanity; what’s your excuse for abandoning yours?
Well, after reading this thread, I see a problem:
Most people willing to respond are saying “Good. The bastard got something resembling real justice.”
A couple of people are saying “Uh, this isn’t justice, this is revenge. Humane people, decent people, will not support this.”
Well, perhaps the world is made up of mostly inhuman, mostly non-decent people. Chiding, lecturing, shaming…clearly it isn’t doing anything to change the general opinion. So what is next?
[QUOTE=Monty]
The tattooist was serving time for armed robbery, wasn’t he? What tattoo should he have carved into his forehead? He, after all, is also a violent felon?
[/QUOTE]
“Gimme yer dough!”