Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #25  
Old 12-13-2005, 05:35 AM
bills217 bills217 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 89
Default Re: Comment on this statement relating to crime and punishment

[ QUOTE ]
I think the point that we are disagreeing with you is that one can cavalierly accept that an innocent person is going to be given a punishment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if it cannot be avoided, then why can't I cavalierly accept it? I don't harm anyone in the process, do I?

[ QUOTE ]
And I am not on principle against increasing penalties for specific crimes, though I think mandatory castration for all first-time sex offenders is a bit absurd. But that's just my value judgment.

[/ QUOTE ]

*in a whisper* Don't tell anyone else posting in this thread, but do I really think first-time castration for all convicted sex offenders, regardless of the specifics of the case, is a good idea? I don't know.

But I'm making the argument for it as a way of illustrating my larger point.

When you negotiate something, you always argue for a little more than you actually want, so you'll have a better chance of getting what you actually want.

Although this argument is not as simplistic or trivial as negotiating the price on a car, I hope you get my meaning. If I have influenced anyone that it might be a good idea to toughen penalties for convicted sex offenders, then I have accomplished my objective.

I will say that my value judgment definitely leaves castration open as a possibility depending on the circumstances. I definitely do not see it as cruel or unusual as long as the death penalty is not considered cruel or unusual.

Basically, my argument is: we already do x, which is worse than y, and less beneficial than y, so why not y?

We already have the death penalty for convicted murderers, which is worse than castrating convicted sex offenders, and serves no real purpose other than to act as a deterrent (assuming lifetime imprisonment), while castration of sex offenders would act as a deterrent and also tangibly prevent repeat offenses, so how is castrating sex offenders somehow wrong while the death penalty is ok?

Edited to add: bold content, shortly after initial post.
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.