the only thing dumb in this thread is the amount of unfunny fucks ruining what could have been a decent conversation
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Death Penalty for Sexual Offenders
- Thread starter DracoMihawk
- Start date
Death penalty for anything is inappropriate and stupid
only thing that needs to be said
Death penalty for wearing hats in school
Death penalty for wearing hats in Team Fortress 2
Entire population of game is dead
just because an OP is bad doesn't mean the topic needs to be doomed to fail by trolls who's only goals are to get it locked instead of just shutting up and letting it run it course naturally.
Newsflash guys: These kinds of threads usually only get locked because certain dumbasses like to regularly write things like "It is what it is /end thread", post pictures of cats with squinty eyes with captions that say "I see what you did there", or do something else that they think makes them look cool and funny. It isn't because of the OP that they get locked. If the a forum populace as a whole was less stupid, then fewer threads would be locked and even shitty OPs could end up leading to decent threads.
Newsflash guys: These kinds of threads usually only get locked because certain dumbasses like to regularly write things like "It is what it is /end thread", post pictures of cats with squinty eyes with captions that say "I see what you did there", or do something else that they think makes them look cool and funny. It isn't because of the OP that they get locked. If the a forum populace as a whole was less stupid, then fewer threads would be locked and even shitty OPs could end up leading to decent threads.
Or maybe no one can take the idea of killing people for something like internet predation seriously.
Sexual offenses are absolutely serious, but we're talking about death here, about taking a person's life. Frankly, that's even more serious imo, especially when the death penalty doesn't even sit well with many in the first place.
Sexual offenses are absolutely serious, but we're talking about death here, about taking a person's life. Frankly, that's even more serious imo, especially when the death penalty doesn't even sit well with many in the first place.
Its an awesome cat, come on.
I can think of plenty of reasons why the death penalty may be considered a useful punishment for sexual predators. Ask Jerry Sandusky's victims and their parents how they feel about it.
And I never said the OP was the greatest conversation starter, but that doesn't give a bunch of dimwitted fucks the right to shit all over the topic.
im sorry
One argument I've heard for not having a death penalty (in fact, it was for not having equal punishments for sex crimes and murder in Australia, but given the US has death penalties for murder the distinction is not relevant at present):
If we awarded the death penalty for rape, then a person who commits rape has no incentive not to kill the victim; if they don't get an extra punishment, why not do so? Surely most people would rather have been raped and survive than be killed, so we should try and maintain incentives for rapists to leave their victims alive.
I can think of a few reasons why this argument isn't the greatest, though.
1) Most rapes are not random stranger attacks and are committed by people the victim knows, often in a context where the perpetrator can exert power over the victim to make sure they don't tell anyone. Consequently, many rapes go entirely undiscovered and unreported - noone but the perpetrator and victim even know that the crime has taken place. With a murder, while you're removing some evidence (i.e. the witnesses testimony) and improving your chances of being identified etc, if it wasn't a random stranger attack then you're also vastly increasing the chance of the crime being discovered because the person goes missing.
2) Many sex crime offences are defended on the basis of whether or not there was consent (and in some places, whether or not you knew it). This is generally a much easier fight to win as it is usually a he-said-she-said argument of credibility, and the system favours the perpetrator by limiting the extent that their sexual history can be brought in as evidence and not limiting the adducibility evidence of the victim's sexual history (i.e. if the defendant can make the victim look promiscuous, juries are often willing to believe "she was asking for it/she said yes").
3) It is very easy to argue that the level of punishment for serious crimes is either not contemplated by the perpetrator at all (crime of passion, e.g.) or if it is, is weighted very low because the probability of being caught, brought to trial, and convicted is perceived as being very low. That is, people don't commit these crimes because the punishment is not heavy enough, but because the perpetrator doesn't believe they will be punished for it at all. If that's the case, it doesn't matter what the difference between sex crimes and capital crimes is in terms of punishment, because the perpetrator doesn't consider it relevant in the first place.
If we awarded the death penalty for rape, then a person who commits rape has no incentive not to kill the victim; if they don't get an extra punishment, why not do so? Surely most people would rather have been raped and survive than be killed, so we should try and maintain incentives for rapists to leave their victims alive.
I can think of a few reasons why this argument isn't the greatest, though.
1) Most rapes are not random stranger attacks and are committed by people the victim knows, often in a context where the perpetrator can exert power over the victim to make sure they don't tell anyone. Consequently, many rapes go entirely undiscovered and unreported - noone but the perpetrator and victim even know that the crime has taken place. With a murder, while you're removing some evidence (i.e. the witnesses testimony) and improving your chances of being identified etc, if it wasn't a random stranger attack then you're also vastly increasing the chance of the crime being discovered because the person goes missing.
2) Many sex crime offences are defended on the basis of whether or not there was consent (and in some places, whether or not you knew it). This is generally a much easier fight to win as it is usually a he-said-she-said argument of credibility, and the system favours the perpetrator by limiting the extent that their sexual history can be brought in as evidence and not limiting the adducibility evidence of the victim's sexual history (i.e. if the defendant can make the victim look promiscuous, juries are often willing to believe "she was asking for it/she said yes").
3) It is very easy to argue that the level of punishment for serious crimes is either not contemplated by the perpetrator at all (crime of passion, e.g.) or if it is, is weighted very low because the probability of being caught, brought to trial, and convicted is perceived as being very low. That is, people don't commit these crimes because the punishment is not heavy enough, but because the perpetrator doesn't believe they will be punished for it at all. If that's the case, it doesn't matter what the difference between sex crimes and capital crimes is in terms of punishment, because the perpetrator doesn't consider it relevant in the first place.
First I find it very plausible that a rapist can at the same time not be a murderer.
Second and probably most importantly, the rapist has yet not been caught and doesn't plan to be at the moment of the crime. If anything, killing the victim in many situations is often a safer route towards avoiding to get caught. The "incitive to kill" already exists.
i find it difficult to agree with the death penalty at anytime
rotting in jail forever is a worse punishment imo
rotting in jail forever is a worse punishment imo
Oh my god that is the most ridiculous thing I have heard in my life. This is not even hyperbole in any way, that is the most back-asswards shit I have heard in my life. So people need an incentive not to kill the people they rape. This is why there can't be discussion, because there will always be logic like this which only serves to shake my faith in the intelligence and overall positive nature of the human race. I mean, seriously...
To be honest, I believe that a lot of rapists do not kill their victims due to the control that they gain over them if they let them live. They get off on their fear. However, that's mainly for serial rapists with sociopathic tendencies and such. I agree with you, Indigo, in that there needs to be some sort of incentive to make people "stop while they're ahead". In a casual rape scenario, if someone knew they were going to die if their acts got out into the public they will very likely kill their victim out of pure fear in order to cover it up. I think that the mindset of "well, at least I didn't kill her so I should just let her be and just make her shut her trap and hope I don't get caught" has saved a lot of rape victims in that regard.
Also masterful you are literally the most annoying and ignorant person that has ever existed. Everything you post is inflammatory and only serves to call people out without any legitimate foundation as to why they are wrong. Please stop forcing your insecurities onto other posters.
Also masterful you are literally the most annoying and ignorant person that has ever existed. Everything you post is inflammatory and only serves to call people out without any legitimate foundation as to why they are wrong. Please stop forcing your insecurities onto other posters.
"dumb" is harsher than "not the greatest" imo
This thread is symptomatic of the problems with "a forum" on the whole, the serious threads in particular, but also the silly ones to an extent. For whatever reason, every 14 year old with an account feels compelled to post their uninformed opinion and then characterize their opposition as the devil.
And as for the "haha im gonna post a joke in this thread thats what a forum is all about people!!!!" all you are doing is making fools of yourselves. None of these jokes are humorous or insightful or intelligent in any fashion. It feels like, because you don't have anything to add, you're just spewing shit to have a post in the thread. It isn't cute or endearing or a cool gimmick, it's just stupid and irritating.
Maybe I'm being a little snobby here, but I think it's really pathetic that threads that could have yielded discussion are crushed under mounds of ignorant and unfunny shitposts. If you haven't noticed, I personally rarely post in "serious" topics because when I recognize I have nothing to offer a thread, rather than piling garbage onto it, I don't post.
If you're going to post, at least put some effort into it. It doesn't have to be Huckleberry fucking chaos, but it doesn't have to be whatever stupid bullshit was the first thing that popped into your head upon reading the thread. Go do some cursory research, read over your post a few times to make sure it says what you want it to say, and make sure it contributes something to the discussion at hand beyond "LOL LOOK AT THIS CAT XDDDD"
Sorry for this huge blowup but I like this forum and you guys are kind of pissing me off.
And as for the "haha im gonna post a joke in this thread thats what a forum is all about people!!!!" all you are doing is making fools of yourselves. None of these jokes are humorous or insightful or intelligent in any fashion. It feels like, because you don't have anything to add, you're just spewing shit to have a post in the thread. It isn't cute or endearing or a cool gimmick, it's just stupid and irritating.
Maybe I'm being a little snobby here, but I think it's really pathetic that threads that could have yielded discussion are crushed under mounds of ignorant and unfunny shitposts. If you haven't noticed, I personally rarely post in "serious" topics because when I recognize I have nothing to offer a thread, rather than piling garbage onto it, I don't post.
If you're going to post, at least put some effort into it. It doesn't have to be Huckleberry fucking chaos, but it doesn't have to be whatever stupid bullshit was the first thing that popped into your head upon reading the thread. Go do some cursory research, read over your post a few times to make sure it says what you want it to say, and make sure it contributes something to the discussion at hand beyond "LOL LOOK AT THIS CAT XDDDD"
Sorry for this huge blowup but I like this forum and you guys are kind of pissing me off.
the joke, like most jokes, made me smile the first time.
then i saw the same joke fifteen more times by the end of the first page.
we elect governments to protect us. their job is to remove from society those members who would do us harm - that is, rape, assault, or steal from us. but: those members are people of society too. it is the government's job to protect them as much as anyone else.
if the government is the one doing the killing, we might as well revert to anarchy. (luckily, this isn't an issue in modern countries.)
then i saw the same joke fifteen more times by the end of the first page.
we elect governments to protect us. their job is to remove from society those members who would do us harm - that is, rape, assault, or steal from us. but: those members are people of society too. it is the government's job to protect them as much as anyone else.
if the government is the one doing the killing, we might as well revert to anarchy. (luckily, this isn't an issue in modern countries.)
most "debates" here end up being a few posters spouting out uniformed, ignorant crap and the rest of the posters spending page after page correcting and refuting all of the "points" they bring up, and there's never an actual debate taking place anyway
this topic would almost assuredly have turned into something similar
this topic would almost assuredly have turned into something similar