There should be a room in a prison with two security guards and one doctor. If you are a victim of rape or are the family of someone who was murdered, you are allowed to have a beat down of the murderer/rapist. The security guards are there to prevent you from killing the prisoner or taking any head shots. After the beatdown, the prisoner will begin their sentence.
shareYes because violence solves everything
not
In this case, I believe it doesn't solve it, but is the closest thing. Three reasons:
1. I don't think the government should get to decide what sentence they find appropriate for what someone did to my body or a family member's. We see all too often of murderers are rapists getting light sentences and the family is just supposed to accept it.
2. There is a way to allow victims and families to blow off steam first-hand. The way it is now, prisoners are being punished in a cell where the victims and families can't witness them suffering.
3. Knowing that citizens are in charge of assaults to the extent of being beaten to a bloody pulp, it could make criminals think twice.
I think the prison should provide non-lethal beat-down aids, or should allow people to bring their own.
No guns, knives, or baseball bats. But things like bullwhips, cheese graters, strap-on dildoes, or soldering irons would make sense, because not everyone can deliver an adequate beat-down with their bare hands.
I agree. No guns or anything like that, but like shocks and some heat inducing torture.
shareA simple role of duct tape could provide hours of appropriate entertainment! Of course you can kill someone with duct tape, but that's why the doctor is there, because while a person can do anything with duct tape, all the lethal uses take a few minutes.
I presume there would be a time limit, though. So maybe just the soldering iron.
Nope, I don't.
shareAny reasons why? As long as you don't kill them, I don't see the problem. Their family will suffer for what their child did, the same I would suffer for what their child did to mine.
shareBecause it wouldn't give me peace, and then I would have to live with what I'd done on top of what had to been done to me. I also wouldn't want any of my family members to resort to violence to right something that had been done to me.
An eye for an eye and the world goes blind. Where would it end?
Is our justice system just? No. Especially not when it comes to rape and sexual assault, but I don't think that your solution is an answer.
I'm with you on this one sslssg
shareNever really thought of it that way.
shareI would have no problem with that, especially murderers.
shareNo, definitely can't agree with that. If we're saying the crime of violence is wrong, then it has to be wrong, it can't be conditionally wrong or sometimes wrong or wrong until it suits you for it to be right. It also doesn't make sense in this case because the criminal offender has been brought to justice, they're being punished. If this was someone who got away with a crime, I think you'd have a better argument for why the beat down would be justifiable, since justice failed and therefore the law shouldn't be upheld.
shareBut it's justice in the eyes in the law. For example: I went to school with a girl who died in a car accident along with her 3 children because of a reckless driver who had over 10 previous driving violations. The judge gave him 14 years. Her husband now has to deal with losing his wife and 3 kids for the rest of his life while the asshole who killed them will be out in 14 years.
If we're saying the crime of violence is wrong, then it has to be wrong
No it isn't justice because it's not legal. Even if the situation you described was legal, I'd still have a hard time seeing it as moral or even having a point? What would be achieved by hurting the driver? Would it stop him from being on the road in 14 years? No.
Also, the driver in your story isn't alone in being at fault. He sounds like he had an alcohol problem, and the law is who failed the most because it failed to keep the driver off the road and to protect anyone who had to share the road with him. Are you saying all the lawyers and judges up to that point, including the one who sentenced the offender to 14 years, should also be locked up in a room and beaten? That's the problem in this case. Everyone who should be punished under the law isn't being punished, they're getting away with keeping a dangerous man on the road until he murdered 4 people, and then only convicting him for 14 years, while they get nothing. A beat down won't stop the driver from doing what he did previously, nor would it prevent any of the legal professionals in this case from continuing to be unprofessional and allow more crime to go unpunished.
Adding more crime to the whole situation wouldn't make it better.
I'd still have a hard time seeing it as moral or even having a point? What would be achieved by hurting the driver?
That's not a good argument for it. Being in a state of emotional turmoil isn't the best headspace to make good decisions regarding violence and certainly not any that should be agreed to by the law. But hey, that's your opinion, so I respect it even if I don't agree with it.
shareDecent point. I just feel like the only people who lose in the situation we are in now is the victims and it doesn't feel right.
shareAbsolutely. The law sucks and it doesn't work in favour of victims usually, while completely bowing down to the wealthy. There's rarely winning when it comes to victims - best they can hope for is that the wrong doers get caught and then convicted, but even just caught is a hard task.
shareWhat happens if the murderer/rapist turns out to be innocent?
Who does s/he get to beat down?
Well, if an innocent party spends 30 years in jail, should the judge and jury spend 30 years in jail for getting it wrong?
I think the innocent party would be entitled to a hell of a lot of money.
Not what I said. Your new idea would result in a state sanctioned physical assault. Why wouldn't the victim and their family get a pound of flesh for that too?
shareCapital punishment exists which can be considered state sanctioned physical assault. I am actually drawing the line at murdering and allow them to live.
shareBut I'm talking about those who get the beat down, but then they are found innocent later. Why don't those innocents (and their family) get to assault those who hurt them? Not money, blood for blood again. Is rape worse than being wrongly imprisoned, then beaten to a pulp just short of death?
shareBut what if the person who died from capital punishment gets proven innocent later? I'm not saying that you're pro-capital punishment, but the fact that it exists, I don't see why a beatdown can't.
shareSo your new idea is essentially akin to capital punishment, but without the lethal part? So you'd have the death penalty, then a step down would be the brutal assault penalty, then down a few more levels to the excessive tickling penalty?
shareTickling wouldn't be a penalty grieving families would want. You can bring anything down to a few level to the extent where anything sounds ridiculous. "You don't want people incarcerated, but you want them on house arrest? What's next, a first class trip to the Bahamas?"
shareI think the innocent party would be entitled to a hell of a lot of money.
It's possible that could happen, but I think it would be extremely rare and difficult to pull off. You'd also need a fall guy.
shareThinking more about it, yes, it would be extremely rare because it can be difficult.
The fall guy would be the person trying to 'game' the judicial system for a later payout.
samoanjoke.
shareARE YOU OKAY,BUDDY?...YOUR POSTS HAVE BEEN KIND OF DARK AND MEAN-SPITRITED LATELY.🫤
shareMean-spirited to murderers and rapists?
shareTHE OVERALL AURA AND SUBTEXT OF YOUR POSTS HAS BEEN KIND OF SPOOKY.
shareNah, fuck them murderers and rapists.
shareYOU CAN IF YOU WANT TO...JUST WEIRD THAT YOUR MIND IS ON PHYSICAL RECOMPENSE AGAINST MURDERERS AND RAPISTS.
shareWhy do you keep defending sex offenders?
shareTHAT HAS NOT HAPPENED...WHY ARE YOU STALKING ME?🙂
shareHow the hell I stalking you?
shareHOW THE HELL DO YOU EXPLAIN REPLYING HATRED TO ME ON POSTS I MADE 9 MONTHS AGO?...2 YEARS AGO?...ON THE REGULAR...ADMIT IT...YOU ARE OBSESSED WITH ME...I GET IT...I AM AWESOME.
share"HOW THE HELL DO YOU EXPLAIN REPLYING HATRED TO ME ON POSTS I MADE 9 MONTHS AGO?"
I love Last Action Hero.
Extremely common Boromir W.
shareit's really great movie. Best Schwarzenegger movie.
shareIt's fun, but you get a W for going after Kowalski.
shareYou welcome
shareALL HE DOES IS PICK RANDOM OLD KOWALSKI POSTS AND THROW PATHETIC WHINING AND BITCHING INTO A REPLY...NEVER ON TOPIC OF THE THREAD EITHER...WHICH IS FUNNY SINCE HIS BIG GO TO IS THAT I AM A TROLL WHO DERAILS THREADS BY BEING OFF TOPIC.
I CAN'T BE MAD...HE'S SO DAMN CUTE...AND I ENJOY THE ATTENTION...I JUST WISH HE WAS PUT A LITTLE MORE EFFORT INTO HIS EFFORTS.
Stop referring to yourself as "Kowalski".
shareBTW, the fact that your user name in small letters proves that your whole thing about capital letters is just for trolling.
Nah, again fuck them murderers and rapists.
share"...dark and mean spirited..."
Yet it's not ok for me to call out a relentless attention whore on this board without having to create an entire thread about the subject!🤔🙄