What would be the best way to punish criminals?

[marharth]

There is no need to be so darned rude, marharth.

 

I would be in favour of the death penalty for incontrovertibly proven cases of murder where there are absolutely no mitigating circumstances, and am at something of a loss as to why Phoney Blair abolished it for High Treason (you could murder the Sovereign or the Government and yes, it has been tried, and receive a sentence no worse than an armed robber) and Piracy (might make those Somali pirates think twice.

 

All the same, Darius, I find the idea that anyone could even contemplate preferring the modus operandi of Felix Dherzhinsky and his equally vile successors to the thousand years of developed judicial process to which Aurelius refers, profoundly disturbing. I would say I would like to see you say that to my uncle who spent years in Siberia for a crime he didn't commit, except that he drank himself to death, unable to forget the terrible experience. You advocate the kind of totalitarian, police state that is one of the main reasons for the current uprisings in the Middle East (see another thread.)

What I was saying was people were posting only about the death penalty.

 

I am going to go ahead and bump that topic though since everyone is starting to talk about it.

[DariusMoranda]

There is no need to be so darned rude, marharth.

 

I would be in favour of the death penalty for incontrovertibly proven cases of murder where there are absolutely no mitigating circumstances, and am at something of a loss as to why Phoney Blair abolished it for High Treason (you could murder the Sovereign or the Government and yes, it has been tried, and receive a sentence no worse than an armed robber) and Piracy (might make those Somali pirates think twice.

 

All the same, Darius, I find the idea that anyone could even contemplate preferring the modus operandi of Felix Dherzhinsky and his equally vile successors to the thousand years of developed judicial process to which Aurelius refers, profoundly disturbing. I would say I would like to see you say that to my uncle who spent years in Siberia for a crime he didn't commit, except that he drank himself to death, unable to forget the terrible experience. You advocate the kind of totalitarian, police state that is one of the main reasons for the current uprisings in the Middle East (see another thread.)

 

My words are taken as they are, but they weren't that exactly.

 

'I would be in favour of the death penalty for incontrovertibly proven cases of murder where there are absolutely no mitigating circumstances'<<<

 

This is exactly what my point was. Well, quite similar, I only expressed my opinion on a hard case criminals, not petty purse chasers, of course.

 

And I am not advocating totalitarianism at all, I was speaking about law and justice department only, without interfering into another state sectors. As I mentioned above and I will again give an example, if I were a ruler , I would hire Picasso for culture, Tesla for science, Michael Jordan for sports, von Hayek for economy, etc,etc.. And yes, for the law, it would be someone cold and merciless. That person would not have any other power except the one at his office. Each one in their own sector, that was the point.

 

I am sorry about your grandfather and I didn't wish to insult you, madam, it is indeed sad to hear such a tragedy.

 

It is just my opinion of how the things should be ran.

 

Because I saw young innocent people beheaded and tortured , humiliated and punished for no reason, in such ways that are beyond human imagination. As for me, that kind of 'people' have no use in this planet and doesn't deserve freedom to breath the air of all the honest, fair, kind and good people.

 

Therefore , I expressed my view of how the criminals should be punished.

 

As for marthart's response, it is not something that I didn't expect, no worries. I will just say this - people who advocate more democratic and softer approach to the matter are the same when it comes to the tolerance towards the people who have a different opinion, like I have. That simple example in his statement pointed to the people who participated in this thread and who share the same opinion as mine, is breaking the whole theory about freedom of speech.

 

Freedom of speech is what I abandoned long time ago because it is a myth, so I accepted it as it is and turned my world into black and white, without having an illusion that there is a middle in between.

 

So, I think like that. If I want my land to be more beautiful , more literate , more attractive,I would hire gardeners, designers , writers, painters.., for that kind of job.

 

If I want my land safe with criminal activity reduced and, peaceful streets and cities without citizens being worried about organized crime and serial killers, I would hire a the most coldblooded, ruthless ex military and police personel. Again saying, not someone like Himmler or Beria or anyone else similar to those sociopaths. Just someone one track minded, state and state only, someone dedicated to his/her call.

 

That would be the best way to punish the crime. Strike fast and strong, give them no time to escape and then at the end, give the them a lot of time to think about what they've done.

 

Stay cool, lady. :)

 

Moranda

[DariusMoranda]

"We represent in ourselves organized terror -- this must be said very clearly."

Those are the words of Dzerzhinsky himself. He was a madman and a free-handed murderer of intellectuals, political dissidents, and priests.

 

Winston Churchill, one of the biggest and most respected political figures in the 20th century had millions of innocent people's lives on his hands, by setting up foundations for Cold War, also, he exploited and mercilessly used helpless and poor in the former colonized states by the British Empire, the most sophisticated tyrant, hidden behind the safe curtain of democracy. But, of course, you won't read about this anywhere.

 

See? We are different people with different opinions , all of us. I respect that and I will respect that always, because I always try to see the best of a person, not the worst.

[Aurielius]

"We represent in ourselves organized terror -- this must be said very clearly."

Those are the words of Dzerzhinsky himself. He was a madman and a free-handed murderer of intellectuals, political dissidents, and priests.

 

Winston Churchill, one of the biggest and most respected political figures in the 20th century had millions of innocent people's lives on his hands, by setting up foundations for Cold War, also, he exploited and mercilessly used helpless and poor in the former colonized states by the British Empire, the most sophisticated tyrant, hidden behind the safe curtain of democracy. But, of course, you won't read about this anywhere.

 

See? We are different people with different opinions , all of us. I respect that and I will respect that always, because I always try to see the best of a person, not the worst.

I beg to differ, Stalin set up the conditions for the Cold War by imprisoning eastern Europe behind barbed wire. Churchill simply recognized earlier than anyone else what was happening, his hands are clean in that regard. As for the colonies you might want to look at the divestiture that Britain held of her territories after WWII, in fact the only colonial empire that ever dissolved itself. Darius, you are just plain wrong.

[ginnyfizz]

"We represent in ourselves organized terror -- this must be said very clearly."

Those are the words of Dzerzhinsky himself. He was a madman and a free-handed murderer of intellectuals, political dissidents, and priests.

 

Winston Churchill, one of the biggest and most respected political figures in the 20th century had millions of innocent people's lives on his hands, by setting up foundations for Cold War, also, he exploited and mercilessly used helpless and poor in the former colonized states by the British Empire, the most sophisticated tyrant, hidden behind the safe curtain of democracy. But, of course, you won't read about this anywhere.

 

See? We are different people with different opinions , all of us. I respect that and I will respect that always, because I always try to see the best of a person, not the worst.

 

Oh great, Brit bashing again, the only apparently acceptable form of racism on the planet. Clearly you have been listening to the distorted anti-British Empire views of President Obama. One certain Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, on the other hand, quite openly admitted that only the British Empire was benign enough to let him and his movement go ahead and protest. Other colonial powers would have brutally suppressed them, and foreign observers at the time also said as much. Of course there were some terrible episodes. But comparing the British Empire with the Red Terror? Comparing Winston Churchill with a homicidal maniac like Dherzhinsky? That is not a valid debating argument because it is just so risible.

 

I guess we have the Mother of Parliaments, Magna Carta and an evolved system of justice where everyone has a right to a fair trial because we are such a bunch of megalomaniac tyrants.

[marharth]

"We represent in ourselves organized terror -- this must be said very clearly."

Those are the words of Dzerzhinsky himself. He was a madman and a free-handed murderer of intellectuals, political dissidents, and priests.

 

Winston Churchill, one of the biggest and most respected political figures in the 20th century had millions of innocent people's lives on his hands, by setting up foundations for Cold War, also, he exploited and mercilessly used helpless and poor in the former colonized states by the British Empire, the most sophisticated tyrant, hidden behind the safe curtain of democracy. But, of course, you won't read about this anywhere.

 

See? We are different people with different opinions , all of us. I respect that and I will respect that always, because I always try to see the best of a person, not the worst.

 

Oh great, Brit bashing again, the only apparently acceptable form of racism on the planet. Clearly you have been listening to the distorted anti-British Empire views of President Obama. One certain Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, on the other hand, quite openly admitted that only the British Empire was benign enough to let him and his movement go ahead and protest. Other colonial powers would have brutally suppressed them, and foreign observers at the time also said as much. Of course there were some terrible episodes. But comparing the British Empire with the Red Terror? Comparing Winston Churchill with a homicidal maniac like Dherzhinsky? That is not a valid debating argument because it is just so risible.

 

I guess we have the Mother of Parliaments, Magna Carta and an evolved system of justice where everyone has a right to a fair trial because we are such a bunch of megalomaniac tyrants.

Wait what? Obama is anti British?

 

That's news to me o.o

[DariusMoranda]

"We represent in ourselves organized terror -- this must be said very clearly."

Those are the words of Dzerzhinsky himself. He was a madman and a free-handed murderer of intellectuals, political dissidents, and priests.

 

Winston Churchill, one of the biggest and most respected political figures in the 20th century had millions of innocent people's lives on his hands, by setting up foundations for Cold War, also, he exploited and mercilessly used helpless and poor in the former colonized states by the British Empire, the most sophisticated tyrant, hidden behind the safe curtain of democracy. But, of course, you won't read about this anywhere.

 

See? We are different people with different opinions , all of us. I respect that and I will respect that always, because I always try to see the best of a person, not the worst.

 

Oh great, Brit bashing again, the only apparently acceptable form of racism on the planet. Clearly you have been listening to the distorted anti-British Empire views of President Obama. One certain Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, on the other hand, quite openly admitted that only the British Empire was benign enough to let him and his movement go ahead and protest. Other colonial powers would have brutally suppressed them, and foreign observers at the time also said as much. Of course there were some terrible episodes. But comparing the British Empire with the Red Terror? Comparing Winston Churchill with a homicidal maniac like Dherzhinsky? That is not a valid debating argument because it is just so risible.

 

I guess we have the Mother of Parliaments, Magna Carta and an evolved system of justice where everyone has a right to a fair trial because we are such a bunch of megalomaniac tyrants.

 

Actually, I never listen to President Obama, as he carried on with the same politics towards my people, same as those who preceded him. And I don't bash Brits, Churchill was a random example.

 

This is the same thing to you as it is to me when I hear that someone of my blood is declared as a murderer and a tyrant. I just pointed an example, not that I share opinion about Churchill, in fact , I don't care about him at all.

 

Second, this is a debate on a punishment for criminals, not a discussion on morality of historical characters.

 

But when we got a hit on that subject, I will be short.-

 

Red Terror wasn't under Felix, it started with Genrikh Yagoda, who was later removed and replaced by someone who was pitiless unlike Yagoda, and that was Nikolai Yezhov. He fought to stay at the top of NKVD with killing innocent people for no reason and giving reports about a fake anti state activities of his victims, just to keep the things busy and to look like he is really doing the right thing. When Stalin noticed that his conference room is half empty after a couple of years , he then removed Yezhov and had him executed. Under Yezhov, a term was developed 'Yezhovshchina'. After him , Lavrenti Beria came and the killing stopped , never to return in such amount as it was under that dwarf Yezhov. Though Beria was a bad choice too, as he was a complete psychopath , when it comes to other things aside to his job.

 

Before the Red Terror, there was Dzerzhinsky and Cheka, being ruthless, but pretty balanced in a comparison to NKVD years. He created the police , removed those who threatened the new rule and then he stopped completely with rigorous actions.

 

This is just a short explanation of how the things worked back then. Source- years and years of studying history.

 

I have nothing against Great Britain , never did, I have friends from over there and my cousin is working in London. Even that- Great Britain bombed my country, ruined my city, both in WW2 (for no reason, we were allies til 1944) , even that Great Britain military boot is on the soil of my land, against the will of my people, even that we are trashed and humiliated in public and media constantly, presented as savages and uncivilized brutes.

 

I don't mix politics with people, see? Never did. I am open minded person with open heart, and I accept anyone who is fair , honest and good, no matter of the nationality , race or religion.

 

And no, I am not politically oriented either, especially not a communist. I just have colorful opinions on some matters and that is all. And speaking about communism, I grew up in one, and all of my friends and myself grief for those times as we had happy childhood and lived in comfort, unlike now. It wasn't bad , neither for one second , like it was written in western books. You have to actually live and see something , then to speak about it.

 

I think you misread my previous answer and saw only a comment of mine towards Churchill.

 

As I've said, we are different people and have different opinions, I don't judge others for their opinions, why would I be judged for mine?

 

The point is, both Churchill and Dzerzhinsky are long dead and they won't get up to join us in discussion, they did their time.

 

It is a present time, and in today's day, I wish that someone is taking his job seriously, with passion and without self interests, like in the old days.

 

No, I don't want someone like Ghandi to be police minister, I would rather take that person to be a spiritual leader. I want an iron figure for a policeman, judge or a prosecutor.

 

As Aurelius said in the death penalty debate , speaking of those who doesn't have any morality and compassion for humans, those who will kill and torture people for their own amusement, I have neither one piece of regret. And neither the guy who takes care of them should have, either. Did those brutal criminals had mercy for their victims? No. With that ignorance, they earned the same treatment.

 

Simple as that.

 

Darius

 

Darius

[JimboUK]

 

Wait what? Obama is anti British?

 

That's news to me o.o

 

It's not gone unnoticed over here.

[Nadimos]

It should be pointed out that incarnation is relatively a new concept, prior to that a prison was just a holding cell until trial..usually death, ransom or freedom.

 

Actually, incarnation is not a new concept at all. It can be found all around the world and is very old. In the beginning they very well had incarnation also here as a "concept". And in other parts they still do to this day. Just noting.

 

Purely as historical fact.

 

Basicly we have the whole of asia, china, japan, india, australia, africa, egypt, almost the whole of europe, north america, south america and did i forget something? Quite frankly i dont know.

Probably some islands in the pacific. ^^

 

It is kinda unfortunate, when poeple cannot remember anymore on what soil they walk, because history always kinda gives of itself even now. ^^

 

Be it agricultural wisdom, which we seem to ignore or i dont know. Just so much. ^^

It is all layed out there.

 

Yet some dont listen.

Like they voted for this bush. Again pure historical. "War is gonna get cheap! Oil is gonna pay back for it!" Rediculous.

And his grandfather who dealed in auschwitz. Seriously.

The guy i think not to long ago even wrote a book, where he said, that he directly commanded poeple to be tortured.

 

That guy is gonna be put infront of a trial, if he comes out of the usa. In switzerland, i red, he most likely would have been, which is why he did not went there. And i dont believe in this poeple. You may and all that punishment. I dont as it is fragile. And also theft.

 

Altho i guess in the end we cannot really say, if it might be better to kill someone or leave him/her in prison for the rest of his/her life. I would think rehab now would be best. Making yourself usefull and stuff. Just making it somehow livable in the sense that it also goes back to society, you know. ^^

 

There are ways to that.

 

If it benefit america, great!

If it dont, well replace the guy.

 

Betterment in that sector, altho i dont know as much, would be great i think.

What i know is, it is the largest prison sector in the world and lots of money goes into that and there are always some vampires somewhere, and so it has to be seen.

 

Maybe have a honest study on how well are we rehabitating(?) poeple and at what rate, what really helps.

Again so much to say, but i think this is already quite the epic wall of text here.

Edited February 20, 2011 by Nadimos

[ginnyfizz]

Darius, I do not need a history lesson about those times in Russia, for I have enough relatives who either suffered under those "people" you mention, or shipped out in time to escape them, to be well aware of who Dherzhinsky, Yagoda, Yezhov and Beria were. I also have some very hefty history tomes in my bookcase which I read regularly. It is yourself who brought in the example of Iron Felix the butcher as a paragon of effective policing and how to deal with criminals. God help us. And you then proceeded, when someone disagreed, to drag in Churchill and the British Empire, thus it is you who brought in the morality of historical figures.

 

Thus, I am certainly in a position to state that the Dherzhinsky way would be a total disaster for the world as we know it. Remember, he had people butchered for who they were as much as what they had (or in many cases had not) done. No presumption of innocence for old Felix, just off to the cellar and a bullet in the back of the neck. Do we really want that kind of regime? Do we wish to exchange fear of crime for fear of the state and tyranny? Good Lord, even we notoriously laid back Brits had a Civil War and deposed a King because he was getting too big for his boots and operating outside the rule of law and the wishes of Parliament, and trying to impose his own form of justice. Shortened him by a head too, and a generation later chased off his son because he was heading the same way. THAT is what you get eventually when you try the iron fist approach. Violence begetting violence.

 

No, I prefer to stick with Maimonides, Blackstone and Benjamin Franklin. Not to mention Winston...

 

*Whispers at Nadimos...pssst no religious debate...*