Author Topic: Guilty Until Proven Innocent  (Read 3807 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9752
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« on: August 26, 2016, 10:07:44 AM »
I think there needs to be new implementation on the Justice system, where...in extremely violent and outright evil cases (examples linked below) these people are guilty until proven innocent and when they can't prove their innocence all rights to appeals are revoked and they are executed within a week. None of this 25-30 years of living and waiting for your death sentence.

Cases like below cannot be defended and people who do things like rape kids, punch babies to death, cold blood murder where there is absolute 'no doubt' of their guilt...In my opinion they don't deserve to live.

Too Extreme? Certainly doesn't coincide with what my Faith tells me but then again, we've been asked to remove Faith from any decisions regarding the running of our country so I'm not trying to start a Faith debate.

My simple opinion and belief is that if we start executing these types of people instantly when they can't prove their innocence then this type of crap would begin to stop. The largest problem in my eyes with the death penalty not being a good deterrent is that it takes entirely too long to execute the sentence. And, in cases like below there is absolutely no doubt of their guilt....the people that do this type of thing should be punished by death immediately.




Utterly no defense for this...none. They should be executed tomorrow.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3757737/Albuquerque-police-3-face-charges-childs-death.html 



Same...this dude no longer deserves to breathe...

http://ktla.com/2016/08/25/man-told-toddler-to-put-up-his-fists-before-beating-boy-to-death-prosecutor/


Life without Parole for this piece of dirt....really? He deserves to continue to breathe?

http://www.wave3.com/story/14874546/life-without-parole-for-man-who-killed-children-raped-wife


Really...child support sends you over the edge?

http://www.celebtricity.com/man-kills-girlfriend-child-support-was-taking-mcdonalds-check/


another oxygen thief...

http://abc7ny.com/news/houston-pd-man-kills-mother-of-his-children-tells-witness-to-raise-kids/1375029/


Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline antigoon

  • Not Elvis
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 10134
  • Gender: Male
  • This was a triumph.
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2016, 10:35:11 AM »
The criminal justice system is certainly flawed in many ways but it's not because we somehow give too many privileges to the accused. The presumption of innocence is a foundational principle in American society, and it rightly applies (in theory) to everyone. If the state really comes across a 'no doubt' case, it's their responsibility to prove it to the public. You really can't just go making exceptions to this. It's too important.

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 24323
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2016, 10:47:15 AM »
I'm going to go ahead a disagree. I don't believe passion should play any role in the justice system and it feels like that is the driving force behind your arguments.

Removal of harm should be top priority, not seeking vengeance or harming those we deem evil.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9752
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #3 on: August 26, 2016, 10:53:37 AM »
I'm going to go ahead a disagree. I don't believe passion should play any role in the justice system and it feels like that is the driving force behind your arguments.

I think you're correct in this diagnosis. Stories like the ones i linked, especially the child centered ones....make my blood boil. I just dont see how people who can do those things deserve to continue to live after actions like that.

I know I'm in small company on this.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 24323
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #4 on: August 26, 2016, 11:05:29 AM »
I mean, you're not in small company. That's why we used to have horrible public executions and lynch mobs (not the racist ones). Because people could not tolerate letting those they deemed evil to live. It also shows why it's a bad idea, how far it can go and what doors it opens.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40221
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #5 on: August 26, 2016, 11:30:41 AM »
The criminal justice system is certainly flawed in many ways but it's not because we somehow give too many privileges to the accused. The presumption of innocence is a foundational principle in American society, and it rightly applies (in theory) to everyone. If the state really comes across a 'no doubt' case, it's their responsibility to prove it to the public. You really can't just go making exceptions to this. It's too important.
This exactly.

Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline kaos2900

  • Posts: 1745
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #6 on: August 26, 2016, 11:56:07 AM »
I'm going to go ahead a disagree. I don't believe passion should play any role in the justice system and it feels like that is the driving force behind your arguments.

I think you're correct in this diagnosis. Stories like the ones i linked, especially the child centered ones....make my blood boil. I just dont see how people who can do those things deserve to continue to live after actions like that.

I know I'm in small company on this.

I'm with you. You must have missed the story about the family friend who kidnapped, rapped, and murdered their 5 year old daughter in Minnesota. That guy tried to kill him self and unfortunately he failed.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9752
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #7 on: August 26, 2016, 12:33:02 PM »
I'm going to go ahead a disagree. I don't believe passion should play any role in the justice system and it feels like that is the driving force behind your arguments.

I think you're correct in this diagnosis. Stories like the ones i linked, especially the child centered ones....make my blood boil. I just dont see how people who can do those things deserve to continue to live after actions like that.

I know I'm in small company on this.

I'm with you. You must have missed the story about the family friend who kidnapped, rapped, and murdered their 5 year old daughter in Minnesota. That guy tried to kill him self and unfortunately he failed.

No, I saw that one as well. Still think he should be hung tomorrow no questions asked.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline kaos2900

  • Posts: 1745
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #8 on: August 26, 2016, 12:57:21 PM »
I'm going to go ahead a disagree. I don't believe passion should play any role in the justice system and it feels like that is the driving force behind your arguments.

I think you're correct in this diagnosis. Stories like the ones i linked, especially the child centered ones....make my blood boil. I just dont see how people who can do those things deserve to continue to live after actions like that.

I know I'm in small company on this.

I'm with you. You must have missed the story about the family friend who kidnapped, rapped, and murdered their 5 year old daughter in Minnesota. That guy tried to kill him self and unfortunately he failed.

No, I saw that one as well. Still think he should be hung tomorrow no questions asked.
I'd prefer rapidly anally penetrated with a hot poker until dead, but I'd take hanging as well.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18242
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #9 on: August 26, 2016, 01:02:16 PM »
I'm not going to bother explaining all of the many reasons why this is wrong. Everybody knows it anyway. I'm just posting to comment how fucking disgusted I am over the very notion.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14667
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #10 on: August 26, 2016, 01:32:28 PM »
The whole concept of bail is supposed to help with this, I believe, although the bail system is far from perfect.  However, innocent until proven guilty is pretty important IMO.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9752
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #11 on: August 26, 2016, 02:41:34 PM »
I'm just posting to comment how fucking disgusted I am over the very notion.

I don't see the absurdity in thinking someone who beats a defenseless child to death needing to prove to us why he/she is innocent? And, when they can't (because they aren't) they are permanently removed from the populous.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18242
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #12 on: August 26, 2016, 02:43:32 PM »
The whole concept of bail is supposed to help with this, I believe, although the bail system is far from perfect.  However, innocent until proven guilty is pretty important IMO.

Bail only serves to further fuck the poor. Whether or not that's by design depends on who you ask, I suppose, but it is the reality. Frankly, I consider it one of the very biggest flaws in our sham CJ system. Bail should only be required if there's a legitimate risk of flight, or the commission of further crimes, and if either of those are true, then there probably shouldn't be bail in the first place. Instead, you're held on bail by default, unless you can afford a hotshot attorney (and then you could probably afford the bail anyway). If you're broke, then not only do you not get to make bail, you most likely lose your job, your car, and plenty more while you tick away in jail for 6 months waiting for your speedy trial. If the bail is reasonable enough that you can scrape together 10%, then you can bond out. You lose that money even if you're innocent, and you forfeit due process by doing so. If you ever want an argument for ways in which the system keep the poor down, here you go.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18242
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #13 on: August 26, 2016, 02:45:36 PM »
I'm just posting to comment how fucking disgusted I am over the very notion.

I don't see the absurdity in thinking someone who beats a defenseless child to death needing to prove to us why he/she is innocent? And, when they can't (because they aren't) they are permanently removed from the populous.
As much as you and I despise these people, and I am right there with you, you must treat the worst of the worst fairly if you wish to treat the innocent fairly. It's just the nature of the beast. Furthermore, you must never combine justice with passion. The latter negates the former by its very nature.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14667
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #14 on: August 26, 2016, 02:53:17 PM »
The whole concept of bail is supposed to help with this, I believe, although the bail system is far from perfect.  However, innocent until proven guilty is pretty important IMO.

Bail only serves to further fuck the poor. Whether or not that's by design depends on who you ask, I suppose, but it is the reality. Frankly, I consider it one of the very biggest flaws in our sham CJ system. Bail should only be required if there's a legitimate risk of flight, or the commission of further crimes, and if either of those are true, then there probably shouldn't be bail in the first place. Instead, you're held on bail by default, unless you can afford a hotshot attorney (and then you could probably afford the bail anyway). If you're broke, then not only do you not get to make bail, you most likely lose your job, your car, and plenty more while you tick away in jail for 6 months waiting for your speedy trial. If the bail is reasonable enough that you can scrape together 10%, then you can bond out. You lose that money even if you're innocent, and you forfeit due process by doing so. If you ever want an argument for ways in which the system keep the poor down, here you go.

Yea, I didn't realize how bad the bail system was until I caught the Last Week Tonight segment on it.  That's why I was saying it's far from perfect without going into the details.

Offline RuRoRul

  • Posts: 1421
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #15 on: August 26, 2016, 02:55:08 PM »
I'm just posting to comment how fucking disgusted I am over the very notion.

I don't see the absurdity in thinking someone who beats a defenseless child to death needing to prove to us why he/she is innocent? And, when they can't (because they aren't) they are permanently removed from the populous.
But how do you know that a person is "someone who beats a defenseless child"? I'm fairly sure that if we lived in some magical world where people already just "knew" exactly what happened, then we wouldn't need any trials to determine guilt or innocence, because we would already know. The whole point of a trial is to determine if there is enough evidence to consider a person to be "someone who did this". If it was guilty until proven innocent, rather than the other way around, then if someone says "gmillerdrake beat a defenceless child to death" then we may as well just execute you sharpish to be safe, since the crime you are presumed to be guilty of (without proof) is so heinous.

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14667
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #16 on: August 26, 2016, 03:01:10 PM »
I'm just posting to comment how fucking disgusted I am over the very notion.

I don't see the absurdity in thinking someone who beats a defenseless child to death needing to prove to us why he/she is innocent? And, when they can't (because they aren't) they are permanently removed from the populous.
But how do you know that a person is "someone who beats a defenseless child"? I'm fairly sure that if we lived in some magical world where people already just "knew" exactly what happened, then we wouldn't need any trials to determine guilt or innocence, because we would already know. The whole point of a trial is to determine if there is enough evidence to consider a person to be "someone who did this". If it was guilty until proven innocent, rather than the other way around, then if someone says "gmillerdrake beat a defenceless child to death" then we may as well just execute you sharpish to be safe, since the crime you are presumed to be guilty of (without proof) is so heinous.

If there ever was a case of this though, I feel like people such as the Colorado movie theater shooter would fall into this category. 

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18242
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #17 on: August 26, 2016, 03:32:19 PM »
I'm just posting to comment how fucking disgusted I am over the very notion.

I don't see the absurdity in thinking someone who beats a defenseless child to death needing to prove to us why he/she is innocent? And, when they can't (because they aren't) they are permanently removed from the populous.
But how do you know that a person is "someone who beats a defenseless child"? I'm fairly sure that if we lived in some magical world where people already just "knew" exactly what happened, then we wouldn't need any trials to determine guilt or innocence, because we would already know. The whole point of a trial is to determine if there is enough evidence to consider a person to be "someone who did this". If it was guilty until proven innocent, rather than the other way around, then if someone says "gmillerdrake beat a defenceless child to death" then we may as well just execute you sharpish to be safe, since the crime you are presumed to be guilty of (without proof) is so heinous.

If there ever was a case of this though, I feel like people such as the Colorado movie theater shooter would fall into this category.
Doesn't he get the chance to prove that he's looney-tunes, though? Guilt isn't he only consideration, that is if we're wanting to appear civilized.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18242
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #18 on: August 26, 2016, 03:37:31 PM »
And I want to revisit the passion aspect of this. The lead scumbag story the other day was the 9 year old girl who thought her name was Idiot due to years of physical abuse. I despise these two parents every single bit as much as Gary does. The irrational subconscious Barto wants to see them strung up. The rational side understands that it's in everybody's best interest not to do so. GMD didn't start this thread because he has concerns that their might be things to work out within the CJ system. He started it because he's genuinely pissed off that these people aren't getting what they deserve. I very definitely appreciate his frustration. I just also understand the myriad dangers of allowing passions to dictate actions.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 358
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #19 on: August 26, 2016, 03:42:52 PM »
I'm just posting to comment how fucking disgusted I am over the very notion.

I don't see the absurdity in thinking someone who beats a defenseless child to death needing to prove to us why he/she is innocent? And, when they can't (because they aren't) they are permanently removed from the populous.


Because what separates a civil society from a savage one is affording the same basic standard of human rights and protection of the rule of law to even its worst and most undeserving citizens. It is understandable to be disgusted by the stories you've linked, but to call for the suspension of our values so as to kill them faster serves only to satisfy your own desire for revenge.

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14667
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #20 on: August 26, 2016, 03:53:31 PM »
I'm just posting to comment how fucking disgusted I am over the very notion.

I don't see the absurdity in thinking someone who beats a defenseless child to death needing to prove to us why he/she is innocent? And, when they can't (because they aren't) they are permanently removed from the populous.
But how do you know that a person is "someone who beats a defenseless child"? I'm fairly sure that if we lived in some magical world where people already just "knew" exactly what happened, then we wouldn't need any trials to determine guilt or innocence, because we would already know. The whole point of a trial is to determine if there is enough evidence to consider a person to be "someone who did this". If it was guilty until proven innocent, rather than the other way around, then if someone says "gmillerdrake beat a defenceless child to death" then we may as well just execute you sharpish to be safe, since the crime you are presumed to be guilty of (without proof) is so heinous.

If there ever was a case of this though, I feel like people such as the Colorado movie theater shooter would fall into this category.
Doesn't he get the chance to prove that he's looney-tunes, though? Guilt isn't he only consideration, that is if we're wanting to appear civilized.

Sure, I wasn't trying to say that he didn't deserve a fair trial, more so that his case is an example of where the guilt is proven without needing a court to prove it.  Sort of "caught red handed".  But I agree with your point there.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9752
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #21 on: August 26, 2016, 04:16:10 PM »
GMD didn't start this thread because he has concerns that their might be things to work out within the CJ system. He started it because he's genuinely pissed off that these people aren't getting what they deserve.

I probably should have just said that....because you hit the nail squarely on the head with that statement. Certainly it may be the 'wrong' way to think...and I know it conflicts with my Faith big time...but I simply don't think that anyone who beats a defenseless child to death....or any other cold blood murder to where there is absolute evidence (every story I linked was absolute and there are countless more like that) should be allowed to live at all. and they certainly shouldn't be allowed to live for 25-30 years after they've been convicted to die. It should be immediate...within hours of the sentence. There is no rehabbing people like that...at all.

I'd go as far as to say as well any man (or woman) whose convicted of rape or molesting a kid...the man not only should spend the rest of his life in solitary confinement but he should also be made a eunuch..to the point of no balls OR shaft....just a little tiny hole for pi$$ to fall out of. And, whatever the equivalent of that is for a woman...same deal. Rapists and molesters are just as bad in my eyes as murderers due to the mental anguish the victims will suffer the remainder of their lives.


But how do you know that a person is "someone who beats a defenseless child"?

No doubts...at all.

http://www.kmov.com/story/28500194/police-stepfather-beats-1-year-old-st-louis-girl-to-death-for-stealing-piece-of-cake


Same...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/04/21/you-are-a-vicious-monster-man-sentenced-for-killing-girlfriends-2-year-old-son/


twenty minutes on Google will pull up countless pieces of crap who've done that and don't even deny it.


I'm not talking about cases where there 'could or coudn't' be this or that....where there is any chance of doubt. But, there are many 'slam dunk'...no questions about it cases where the evil people who do this crap then choose not to be part of the human race and should be obliged.

Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40221
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #22 on: August 27, 2016, 07:23:18 AM »
You aren't talking about justice.  You are talking about vengeance.  And while I understand the desire for vengeance on a personal level (if it was your kid, for example), vengeance has no place in the law.

If we don't follow the law for the worst of us, then the best of us don't deserve the law.

Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9752
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #23 on: August 27, 2016, 08:29:20 AM »
You aren't talking about justice.  You are talking about vengeance.  And while I understand the desire for vengeance on a personal level (if it was your kid, for example), vengeance has no place in the law.

If we don't follow the law for the worst of us, then the best of us don't deserve the law.

Yeah...you're spot on on this and I do know that...I get why our justice system is set up the way it is.  But I have a REAL hard time convincing myself the people who perform these horrific crimes on children deserve any defense at all and in a lot of instances I feel like our justice system works to the advantage of these monsters rather than truly punishing them. 
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 25080
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #24 on: August 27, 2016, 08:39:29 AM »
When I saw the title of this thread, I thought it was going to be about social justice and how social media vilifies people nowadays immediately before we know all of the facts, ala the Michael Brown death.

That aside, Gary, I get where you are coming from, and I am sure many others share your frustration when violent criminals get off on technicalities, but innocent until proven guilty in court is a very important thing, and must be protected and kept that way.

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16072
  • Gender: Male
    • Hopped on Pop
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #25 on: September 10, 2016, 08:14:32 AM »
The criminal justice system is certainly flawed in many ways but it's not because we somehow give too many privileges to the accused. The presumption of innocence is a foundational principle in American society, and it rightly applies (in theory) to everyone. If the state really comes across a 'no doubt' case, it's their responsibility to prove it to the public. You really can't just go making exceptions to this. It's too important.

I'm in full agreement. Everyone is entitled to at least an adequate defense and other protections offered by the Constitution and its amendments. End of story.
I am an SJW (Super Jewish Warrior)
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline Prog Snob

  • Posts: 16526
  • Gender: Male
  • As above, so below
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #26 on: September 10, 2016, 09:38:19 AM »
You aren't talking about justice.  You are talking about vengeance.  And while I understand the desire for vengeance on a personal level (if it was your kid, for example), vengeance has no place in the law.

If we don't follow the law for the worst of us, then the best of us don't deserve the law.

Yeah...you're spot on on this and I do know that...I get why our justice system is set up the way it is.  But I have a REAL hard time convincing myself the people who perform these horrific crimes on children deserve any defense at all and in a lot of instances I feel like our justice system works to the advantage of these monsters rather than truly punishing them. 

It's because people have become soft. They erroneously believe the justice system lives up to its name, so they treat it like the system is filled with altruism and continue to go about like it's alright as they hold on to some antiquated notions. Things need to change. If I have to read about one more pedophile getting a slap on the wrist, I'm going to lose it.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8169
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #27 on: September 12, 2016, 07:40:15 AM »
You aren't talking about justice.  You are talking about vengeance.  And while I understand the desire for vengeance on a personal level (if it was your kid, for example), vengeance has no place in the law.

If we don't follow the law for the worst of us, then the best of us don't deserve the law.

Yeah...you're spot on on this and I do know that...I get why our justice system is set up the way it is.  But I have a REAL hard time convincing myself the people who perform these horrific crimes on children deserve any defense at all and in a lot of instances I feel like our justice system works to the advantage of these monsters rather than truly punishing them. 

It's because people have become soft. They erroneously believe the justice system lives up to its name, so they treat it like the system is filled with altruism and continue to go about like it's alright as they hold on to some antiquated notions. Things need to change. If I have to read about one more pedophile getting a slap on the wrist, I'm going to lose it.

I don't think that's the dynamic exactly.  People are soft, but it's not soft about "justice" and the "system", it's soft about personal accountability.   If I kill someone, I have to be held accountable.  No excuses, no "but..."'s, no "it wasn't his fault".    We have this need lately to make excuses for others and ourselves and it undermines the fact that we have an obligation, a duty, to the rest of society to operate in a certain manner.    Even in the most egregious cases we should start with the premise that everyone is responsible for their own actions, and every actor has the opportunity to break the causal chain.  We have to take more care and more discipline in excusing people for not breaking that chain.    Argue "race" all you want, argue the psychology all you want, but in almost any situation there are countless people that have found themselves in that situation and HAVE broken the chain.  Not every person that has been abused by an elder turns into a child molester.   Not every person that has found themselves in the position f Michael Brown has opted to attack the police officer in front of them (not excusing the police, and not trying to open that can of worms). 

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18242
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #28 on: September 12, 2016, 12:12:56 PM »
You aren't talking about justice.  You are talking about vengeance.  And while I understand the desire for vengeance on a personal level (if it was your kid, for example), vengeance has no place in the law.

If we don't follow the law for the worst of us, then the best of us don't deserve the law.

Yeah...you're spot on on this and I do know that...I get why our justice system is set up the way it is.  But I have a REAL hard time convincing myself the people who perform these horrific crimes on children deserve any defense at all and in a lot of instances I feel like our justice system works to the advantage of these monsters rather than truly punishing them. 

It's because people have become soft. They erroneously believe the justice system lives up to its name, so they treat it like the system is filled with altruism and continue to go about like it's alright as they hold on to some antiquated notions. Things need to change. If I have to read about one more pedophile getting a slap on the wrist, I'm going to lose it.

I don't think that's the dynamic exactly.  People are soft, but it's not soft about "justice" and the "system", it's soft about personal accountability.   If I kill someone, I have to be held accountable.  No excuses, no "but..."'s, no "it wasn't his fault".    We have this need lately to make excuses for others and ourselves and it undermines the fact that we have an obligation, a duty, to the rest of society to operate in a certain manner.    Even in the most egregious cases we should start with the premise that everyone is responsible for their own actions, and every actor has the opportunity to break the causal chain.  We have to take more care and more discipline in excusing people for not breaking that chain.    Argue "race" all you want, argue the psychology all you want, but in almost any situation there are countless people that have found themselves in that situation and HAVE broken the chain.  Not every person that has been abused by an elder turns into a child molester.   Not every person that has found themselves in the position f Michael Brown has opted to attack the police officer in front of them (not excusing the police, and not trying to open that can of worms).
There are several reasons why I generally disagree with this, but for the time being I'll go with the role of the penal system. You imply punishment, and that's at best a lesser role, IMO. Granted, it seems to be the only role people care about nowadays, as demonstrated by this thread, but by focusing solely on the punitive aspect you're actually creating the timidness people have about holding people accountable. Of course people are going to be trying to get at whether or not somebody was mentally competent when the result determines whether or not he's eventually destroyed as a human being.

Quote
Even in the most egregious cases we should start with the premise that everyone is responsible for their own actions, and every actor has the opportunity to break the causal chain.  We have to take more care and more discipline in excusing people for not breaking that chain.
In a causal chain you can find any number of links. In a perfect world you can address all of them. In this situation it seems you want to hold one person accountable for the entire effect because one link was his. The other links don't exist?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 24323
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #29 on: September 12, 2016, 12:32:37 PM »
I'm going to agree with The Bart. Punishment is such a minor part of justice, and only a means to an end, it shouldn't be the end goal itself. But, sadly it is. People get off on seeing others get punished. To be fair, it's the one morally acceptable way we can express pleasure at another human being harmed.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8169
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #30 on: September 12, 2016, 12:36:20 PM »
There are several reasons why I generally disagree with this, but for the time being I'll go with the role of the penal system. You imply punishment, and that's at best a lesser role, IMO. Granted, it seems to be the only role people care about nowadays, as demonstrated by this thread, but by focusing solely on the punitive aspect you're actually creating the timidness people have about holding people accountable. Of course people are going to be trying to get at whether or not somebody was mentally competent when the result determines whether or not he's eventually destroyed as a human being.

I don't know that my response only involves "punishment".  I'm okay with the other roles as well (rehabilitation, vengeance, and incentive, to name three), but the point is that personal accountability is inherent in ALL of them.   You can't rehab someone that doesn't take responsibility for their actions.   Incentive is lost if you push the idea that "we all have our excuses".  Honestly, I don't care about the methodology; the idea for me is that whatever system you have, when you measure the start and the finish that you have less people committing the crimes at hand, less people being victimized by the crimes at hand, and less people interrupted from their daily lives by the crimes at hand.

Quote
In a causal chain you can find any number of links. In a perfect world you can address all of them. In this situation it seems you want to hold one person accountable for the entire effect because one link was his. The other links don't exist?

No, just the opposite; I want to hold ALL persons accountable.  The guy with the badge doesn't get a pass because he has a badge, and the guy in the street doesn't get a pass because he's of color.   "Tend Your Own Garden".   I can't control you, I can only control myself.  So if I account for all our interactions as if I am responsible, and you do the same (for the same reasons) we've greatly reduced our chances for conflict. 

Offline Prog Snob

  • Posts: 16526
  • Gender: Male
  • As above, so below
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #31 on: September 12, 2016, 12:54:21 PM »
I'm going to agree with The Bart. Punishment is such a minor part of justice, and only a means to an end, it shouldn't be the end goal itself. But, sadly it is. People get off on seeing others get punished. To be fair, it's the one morally acceptable way we can express pleasure at another human being harmed.

I was going to respond later, but after reading this I almost fell off my chair. I don't know anyone who "gets off" on seeing others punished. Is it suddenly now a crime to see others get what's coming to them? You seem to be more concerned about the criminal than the victim. It's not about "getting off". It's about having faith in a system that works. The problem is the deterrent (punishment) isn't effective enough. A slap on the wrist needs to be a bat to the skull, metaphorically speaking...sometimes.  ;)

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18242
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #32 on: September 12, 2016, 01:12:13 PM »
There are several reasons why I generally disagree with this, but for the time being I'll go with the role of the penal system. You imply punishment, and that's at best a lesser role, IMO. Granted, it seems to be the only role people care about nowadays, as demonstrated by this thread, but by focusing solely on the punitive aspect you're actually creating the timidness people have about holding people accountable. Of course people are going to be trying to get at whether or not somebody was mentally competent when the result determines whether or not he's eventually destroyed as a human being.

I don't know that my response only involves "punishment".  I'm okay with the other roles as well (rehabilitation, vengeance, and incentive, to name three), but the point is that personal accountability is inherent in ALL of them.   You can't rehab someone that doesn't take responsibility for their actions.   Incentive is lost if you push the idea that "we all have our excuses".  Honestly, I don't care about the methodology; the idea for me is that whatever system you have, when you measure the start and the finish that you have less people committing the crimes at hand, less people being victimized by the crimes at hand, and less people interrupted from their daily lives by the crimes at hand.
Fair enough. In American justice when I hear personal accountability I assume vengeance. Sadly, that is the nature of things. However, even applied to rehabilitation and deterrence, I still think there need to be degrees of accountability. As with so many things, I think it's the conflict between simple and complex that set people apart. Accountability isn't binary, at least in my opinion, and a whole lot of people get pissed off when it isn't demonstrated as such.

Quote
Quote
In a causal chain you can find any number of links. In a perfect world you can address all of them. In this situation it seems you want to hold one person accountable for the entire effect because one link was his. The other links don't exist?

No, just the opposite; I want to hold ALL persons accountable.  The guy with the badge doesn't get a pass because he has a badge, and the guy in the street doesn't get a pass because he's of color.   "Tend Your Own Garden".   I can't control you, I can only control myself.  So if I account for all our interactions as if I am responsible, and you do the same (for the same reasons) we've greatly reduced our chances for conflict.
But there are links that exist beyond accountability to a specific case. One of my favorite examples is Henry Lee Lucas. We fault him for not breaking his link, but there were dozens of others well outside his control. We hold him accountable for not stopping something that myriad other factors put into play? On the basis that others might have?

And as to your greater end, I think that's a largely systemic problem, where our present mechanism fails quite hard. Personal accountability might be one of the problem points, but not a particularly large one in the grand scheme of things.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18242
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #33 on: September 12, 2016, 01:17:19 PM »
I'm going to agree with The Bart. Punishment is such a minor part of justice, and only a means to an end, it shouldn't be the end goal itself. But, sadly it is. People get off on seeing others get punished. To be fair, it's the one morally acceptable way we can express pleasure at another human being harmed.

I was going to respond later, but after reading this I almost fell off my chair. I don't know anyone who "gets off" on seeing others punished. Is it suddenly now a crime to see others get what's coming to them? You seem to be more concerned about the criminal than the victim. It's not about "getting off". It's about having faith in a system that works. The problem is the deterrent (punishment) isn't effective enough. A slap on the wrist needs to be a bat to the skull, metaphorically speaking...sometimes.  ;)

Setting aside the people who celebrate executions, I think the problem is the degree to which people lament when denied their pound of flesh.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8169
  • Gender: Male
Re: Guilty Until Proven Innocent
« Reply #34 on: September 12, 2016, 02:00:52 PM »
Fair enough. In American justice when I hear personal accountability I assume vengeance. Sadly, that is the nature of things. However, even applied to rehabilitation and deterrence, I still think there need to be degrees of accountability. As with so many things, I think it's the conflict between simple and complex that set people apart. Accountability isn't binary, at least in my opinion, and a whole lot of people get pissed off when it isn't demonstrated as such.

Next time I see you and there is beer involved, maybe we can talk about this aspect more, because I have really come to the conclusion - I've been thinking this for a while but it's really been rammed home in the last year - that NOTHING is binary, except light switches and computers.  When you have a very complex - too complex to fully understand - system, sometimes it helps to bite off small chunks and think of them in binary terms, and you can worry about the nuances and the greys later.  Like with a car that won't start.   Get it running, and from that point you can trouble shoot why it's not purring like a kitten.   I think we've reached the point where we know enough - about human nature, about natural law, about our society - that we are starting to do harm by "forcing" a binary approach to things.   


Quote
But there are links that exist beyond accountability to a specific case. One of my favorite examples is Henry Lee Lucas. We fault him for not breaking his link, but there were dozens of others well outside his control. We hold him accountable for not stopping something that myriad other factors put into play? On the basis that others might have?

And as to your greater end, I think that's a largely systemic problem, where our present mechanism fails quite hard. Personal accountability might be one of the problem points, but not a particularly large one in the grand scheme of things.

To the first point, I think I'm talking about a form of "joint and several liability".  Holding Henry accountable doesn't absolve anyone else of THEIR accountability.  And certainly in the punishment phase there can and should be a discussion - as there supposed to be now - of the relative merits of the possible outcomes for each of the possible players.   I just think the pendulum is on the far side of "rest" at this point in terms of giving people a lot of leeway for their context.