Total Posts:223|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Jerry Sandusky found guilty of child abuse

airmax1227
Posts: 13,241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.
Debate.org Moderator
daytonanerd
Posts: 6,769
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 11:55:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.

I too have no sympathy. What were the 3 charges he was found not guilty on?
#FeeltheFreezerBern
airmax1227
Posts: 13,241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 12:02:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 11:55:22 PM, daytonanerd wrote:
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.

I too have no sympathy. What were the 3 charges he was found not guilty on?

The victims are being kept private for good reason. I expect there was not enough evidence for a couple of the cases.
Debate.org Moderator
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 3:33:39 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
F*ck Jerry Sandusky.

That's really all I can think to say. F*ck him for being such a sick, despicable excuse for a human being. He deserves to be separate from society for the rest of his life- at the absolute least.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 8:45:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I doubt he's actually going to prison. He's really just going to a resort. Meanwhile, the homeless guy who symbolically robbed a bank for $1 (vis a vis passing a note to the teller and quietly sitting in the waiting area of the police) because he had no access to medical care is going to actual prison.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:18:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I hope he gets some lovin' from some BBC
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 4:29:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.

What the hell is the point of that? Why lock someone up and pay for them to live for the rest of their lives? All that does is cost money with literally no benefit to society. Hang him. Publicly.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 4:52:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 4:29:10 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.


What the hell is the point of that? Why lock someone up and pay for them to live for the rest of their lives? All that does is cost money with literally no benefit to society. Hang him. Publicly.

The pivotal point of this is a disagreement on capital punishment. Clearly this man deserves a lot more than a public hanging.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 4:53:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 4:52:41 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:29:10 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.


What the hell is the point of that? Why lock someone up and pay for them to live for the rest of their lives? All that does is cost money with literally no benefit to society. Hang him. Publicly.

The pivotal point of this is a disagreement on capital punishment. Clearly this man deserves a lot more than a public hanging.

And by a lot more... I mean a lot worse than a public hanging.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 4:57:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 4:53:10 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:52:41 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:29:10 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.


What the hell is the point of that? Why lock someone up and pay for them to live for the rest of their lives? All that does is cost money with literally no benefit to society. Hang him. Publicly.

The pivotal point of this is a disagreement on capital punishment. Clearly this man deserves a lot more than a public hanging.

And by a lot more... I mean a lot worse than a public hanging.

I don't know, I just dont see the point of keeping someone alive just to make them suffer. To me, if a crime cant be repaid (he cannot ever repay those children) than the logical course is to just kill him before he harms anything else (like you know, wasting other peoples money).

Now if the victims decide that they want the man to be tortured, then that's fine, they have every right to demand and receive that. It just isnt something I would do. And we both know that prison is nowhere near torture, even at its most hellish moments. There are good reasons that 95+% of inmates fight their death sentences tooth and nail.

This was not justice, it's more injustice.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 5:09:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 4:57:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:53:10 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:52:41 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:29:10 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.


What the hell is the point of that? Why lock someone up and pay for them to live for the rest of their lives? All that does is cost money with literally no benefit to society. Hang him. Publicly.

The pivotal point of this is a disagreement on capital punishment. Clearly this man deserves a lot more than a public hanging.

And by a lot more... I mean a lot worse than a public hanging.

I don't know, I just dont see the point of keeping someone alive just to make them suffer. To me, if a crime cant be repaid (he cannot ever repay those children) than the logical course is to just kill him before he harms anything else (like you know, wasting other peoples money).

Now if the victims decide that they want the man to be tortured, then that's fine, they have every right to demand and receive that. It just isnt something I would do. And we both know that prison is nowhere near torture, even at its most hellish moments. There are good reasons that 95+% of inmates fight their death sentences tooth and nail.

This was not justice, it's more injustice.

Well, like I said, this is just a disagreement on whether the government should be allowed to execute people. If our justice system were less imperfect and biased, I would be happy to see this man executed. We're in complete agreement on what this disgusting man deserves. But too many are not executed, but murdered, by the government for me to feel comfortable agreeing that he should be executed. I'm not down with the "wanna make an omelette, gotta break some eggs" mentality. The government should not have the power to imprison and murder innocent people- which will inevitably happen at times in our system as it stands. I also dislike that black people are more likely to receive the death penalty for the same crime. The system is too flawed and biased to be dishing out death sentences.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 5:12:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Also, as unfortunate as it is that we have to pay to keep him alive, there are ways prisoners could work for society. I know that they do in some places.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 5:17:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 5:09:42 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:57:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:53:10 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:52:41 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:29:10 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.


What the hell is the point of that? Why lock someone up and pay for them to live for the rest of their lives? All that does is cost money with literally no benefit to society. Hang him. Publicly.

The pivotal point of this is a disagreement on capital punishment. Clearly this man deserves a lot more than a public hanging.

And by a lot more... I mean a lot worse than a public hanging.

I don't know, I just dont see the point of keeping someone alive just to make them suffer. To me, if a crime cant be repaid (he cannot ever repay those children) than the logical course is to just kill him before he harms anything else (like you know, wasting other peoples money).

Now if the victims decide that they want the man to be tortured, then that's fine, they have every right to demand and receive that. It just isnt something I would do. And we both know that prison is nowhere near torture, even at its most hellish moments. There are good reasons that 95+% of inmates fight their death sentences tooth and nail.

This was not justice, it's more injustice.

Well, like I said, this is just a disagreement on whether the government should be allowed to execute people. If our justice system were less imperfect and biased, I would be happy to see this man executed. We're in complete agreement on what this disgusting man deserves. But too many are not executed, but murdered, by the government for me to feel comfortable agreeing that he should be executed.

I don't get it. You're uncomfortable because you feel that innocents might slip through, but you also think it's wrong to execute the obviously guilty, but it would be ok with you if we had a perfect justice system. Shouldn't your advocacy then be for raising the evidence standards needed for capital punishment if you agree with it in principle?

I'm not down with the "wanna make an omelette, gotta break some eggs" mentality.The government should not have the power to imprison and murder innocent people- which will inevitably happen at times in our system as it stands.

Then it follows that we should have no justice system at all

I also dislike that black people are more likely to receive the death penalty for the same crime. The system is too flawed and biased to be dishing out death sentences.

Who cares? Just because whites unjustly slip through doesn't mean that blacks should be allowed to either.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 5:34:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 5:17:05 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 5:09:42 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:57:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:53:10 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:52:41 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:29:10 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.


What the hell is the point of that? Why lock someone up and pay for them to live for the rest of their lives? All that does is cost money with literally no benefit to society. Hang him. Publicly.

The pivotal point of this is a disagreement on capital punishment. Clearly this man deserves a lot more than a public hanging.

And by a lot more... I mean a lot worse than a public hanging.

I don't know, I just dont see the point of keeping someone alive just to make them suffer. To me, if a crime cant be repaid (he cannot ever repay those children) than the logical course is to just kill him before he harms anything else (like you know, wasting other peoples money).

Now if the victims decide that they want the man to be tortured, then that's fine, they have every right to demand and receive that. It just isnt something I would do. And we both know that prison is nowhere near torture, even at its most hellish moments. There are good reasons that 95+% of inmates fight their death sentences tooth and nail.

This was not justice, it's more injustice.

Well, like I said, this is just a disagreement on whether the government should be allowed to execute people. If our justice system were less imperfect and biased, I would be happy to see this man executed. We're in complete agreement on what this disgusting man deserves. But too many are not executed, but murdered, by the government for me to feel comfortable agreeing that he should be executed.

I don't get it. You're uncomfortable because you feel that innocents might slip through, but you also think it's wrong to execute the obviously guilty, but it would be ok with you if we had a perfect justice system. Shouldn't your advocacy then be for raising the evidence standards needed for capital punishment if you agree with it in principle?

It's not that I "feel innocents might slip through," it's that they actually do. My advocacy is that we should raise evidence standards needed for capital punishment. But how would we go about that? And why aren't we doing it already? (honest questions)
I'm not down with the "wanna make an omelette, gotta break some eggs" mentality.The government should not have the power to imprison and murder innocent people- which will inevitably happen at times in our system as it stands.

Then it follows that we should have no justice system at all

haha No that doesn't follow at all, really. There is a big difference between imprisonment/fines/probation, etc. and murder. And I think our system is pretty shoddy in general being that it is essentially based on sophistry and, most importantly, money. It's a joke. A total overhaul is really what it needs. But I mean... how is that going to work? I've got no answers. So as it stands, I have to say that death sentences shouldn't be given. It isn't nearly a reliable enough system for giving out punishments that take away lives.

I also dislike that black people are more likely to receive the death penalty for the same crime. The system is too flawed and biased to be dishing out death sentences.

Who cares? Just because whites unjustly slip through doesn't mean that blacks should be allowed to either.

Huh? So you're advocating death across the board, basically. I don't really have anything to say to that sentiment. Read above.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 5:44:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 5:34:00 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 5:17:05 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 5:09:42 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:57:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:53:10 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:52:41 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 4:29:10 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/22/2012 11:28:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
...He was found guilty on 45 of the 48 counts filed against him. It is believed that he will likely spend the rest of his life in Prison.

Though this thread could have been put in 'sports' as that is what Sandusky is known for, being the assistant coach at Penn state behind Joe Paterno, it seems that in this case, Sandusky's time in prison will likely make the punishment fit the crime.

While I generally think a prison sentence could potentially be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment (though there isn't yet a better alternative) for some crimes, (especially for lesser crimes like drug possession) in this case, I have no sympathy at all for Sandusky. Good riddance.


What the hell is the point of that? Why lock someone up and pay for them to live for the rest of their lives? All that does is cost money with literally no benefit to society. Hang him. Publicly.

The pivotal point of this is a disagreement on capital punishment. Clearly this man deserves a lot more than a public hanging.

And by a lot more... I mean a lot worse than a public hanging.

I don't know, I just dont see the point of keeping someone alive just to make them suffer. To me, if a crime cant be repaid (he cannot ever repay those children) than the logical course is to just kill him before he harms anything else (like you know, wasting other peoples money).

Now if the victims decide that they want the man to be tortured, then that's fine, they have every right to demand and receive that. It just isnt something I would do. And we both know that prison is nowhere near torture, even at its most hellish moments. There are good reasons that 95+% of inmates fight their death sentences tooth and nail.

This was not justice, it's more injustice.

Well, like I said, this is just a disagreement on whether the government should be allowed to execute people. If our justice system were less imperfect and biased, I would be happy to see this man executed. We're in complete agreement on what this disgusting man deserves. But too many are not executed, but murdered, by the government for me to feel comfortable agreeing that he should be executed.

I don't get it. You're uncomfortable because you feel that innocents might slip through, but you also think it's wrong to execute the obviously guilty, but it would be ok with you if we had a perfect justice system. Shouldn't your advocacy then be for raising the evidence standards needed for capital punishment if you agree with it in principle?

It's not that I "feel innocents might slip through," it's that they actually do. My advocacy is that we should raise evidence standards needed for capital punishment. But how would we go about that? And why aren't we doing it already? (honest questions)

It isn't that hard. Already, the de-facto capital evidence standards are climbing. It should be a relatively simple matter to declare the need for DNA/Forensic evidence to implement capital punishment for murder, and large amounts of sound witnesses for child rape and/or molestation.

I'm not down with the "wanna make an omelette, gotta break some eggs" mentality.The government should not have the power to imprison and murder innocent people- which will inevitably happen at times in our system as it stands.

It doesnt happen now for two reasons: 1. The country is focused on other things (namely the wretched economy) and 2. there is heavy resistance from the anti-DP zealots to making capital punishment effective. In the same way that they want it to be expensive so that they can use price as an argument, they also want evidence standards to be lax and innocents to die so that they can use that as an argument against the DP. It's "for the greater good"

Then it follows that we should have no justice system at all

haha No that doesn't follow at all, really. There is a big difference between imprisonment/fines/probation, etc. and murder.

An innocent condemned to die has a muchhhhhh greater chance of walking away than an innocent sent to LWOP. LWOP cases are virtually always forgotten after the trial, where as all DP cases have incredible scrutiny applied.

And I think our system is pretty shoddy in general being that it is essentially based on sophistry and, most importantly, money. It's a joke.

I agree that our system sucks. Imprisonment is incredibly unjust, forcing victims to pay for the wellbeing of the offenders.

A total overhaul is really what it needs. But I mean... how is that going to work? I've got no answers. So as it stands, I have to say that death sentences shouldn't be given. It isn't nearly a reliable enough system for giving out punishments that take away lives.

Whatever the length of time it takes for the individual to die, you have destroyed their life if you locked them up in prison as well as if you execute them.

I also dislike that black people are more likely to receive the death penalty for the same crime. The system is too flawed and biased to be dishing out death sentences.

Who cares? Just because whites unjustly slip through doesn't mean that blacks should be allowed to either.

Huh? So you're advocating death across the board, basically. I don't really have anything to say to that sentiment. Read above.

For cases that meet the qualifications, absolutely
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
EvanK
Posts: 599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 10:06:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Sandusky should be hung for what he did. Life in prison isn't a strong enough punishment.
The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of people's money."_Margaret Thatcher

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."_Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."_Thomas Jefferson

"It is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled."-Mark Twain
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't see why everyone is so quick to say that Jerry Sandusky should be hanged.

If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value. The reason his actions were wrong was because it harmed people. So, it would then follow that Jerry Sandusky himself has intrinsnic value, and he should not be hung because it will increase human suffering. Perhaps you can make a case for the deterrence effect, but the human suffering will likely offset the deterrence effect.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:08:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I don't see why everyone is so quick to say that Jerry Sandusky should be hanged.

If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value. The reason his actions were wrong was because it harmed people. So, it would then follow that Jerry Sandusky himself has intrinsnic value, and he should not be hung because it will increase human suffering. Perhaps you can make a case for the deterrence effect, but the human suffering will likely offset the deterrence effect.

The intrinsic value is forfeited when you violate another in such a way. All punishments involves certain rights being taken away in deserving retribution, like someone who destroys $1000 worth of property forfeits $1000 when they're caught. If you don't like it, don't commit crimes.

Molesting dozens of children is an act so horrendous that it can never be repaid. Therefore he forfeits all rights he had
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:13:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The intrinsic value is forfeited when you violate another in such a way.
That's a contradiction. If it's intrinsic, then it can't be forfeited.

At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote
If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value.
As I understand it, his crime was rape (real rape, not the statutory kind). You don't have to be an intrinsicist to want a general prohibition on nonconsexual sex, or indeed all initiations of force, to be well-enforced-- you just have to want badly enough not to be next that you want to feed the law a general principle that forbids it. Thus, a general policy-- eliminate the perpetrators of nonconsexual sex/initial force.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:14:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I don't see why everyone is so quick to say that Jerry Sandusky should be hanged.

If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value. The reason his actions were wrong was because it harmed people. So, it would then follow that Jerry Sandusky himself has intrinsnic value, and he should not be hung because it will increase human suffering. Perhaps you can make a case for the deterrence effect, but the human suffering will likely offset the deterrence effect.

But would it increase human suffering if Jerry Sandusky were killed? It would probably make a lot of people very happy if he were dead.

I don't believe in an objective morality and I don't think humans have "intrinsic value" per se... But I do get disgusted with people who cause suffering unnecessarily. This is probably because I have experienced suffering and I also experience empathy. So when someone causes such great suffering for such little reason, I have no inhibitions feeling vindictive toward them. It's as if they have forfeited my respect as a fellow human being because they have done so to others. Also, pedophiles (if I remember correctly) are criminals with the least chance of recovery. His sexual attraction to children will never go away. He is incurable and I also have no pity for him therefore hanging lol That's all I got on this hanging thing. It's basically all emotion.

What do you think should happen to Jerry Sandusky?
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:17:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:13:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
The intrinsic value is forfeited when you violate another in such a way.
That's a contradiction. If it's intrinsic, then it can't be forfeited.

Why not? Your life is intrinsic, but that is still forfeited when you get killed. Maybe forfeit is not the right word


At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote
If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value.
As I understand it, his crime was rape (real rape, not the statutory kind). You don't have to be an intrinsicist to want a general prohibition on nonconsexual sex, or indeed all initiations of force, to be well-enforced-- you just have to want badly enough not to be next that you want to feed the law a general principle that forbids it. Thus, a general policy-- eliminate the perpetrators of nonconsexual sex/initial force.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:21:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:17:27 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:13:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
The intrinsic value is forfeited when you violate another in such a way.
That's a contradiction. If it's intrinsic, then it can't be forfeited.

Why not? Your life is intrinsic
No it's not. The mere existence of those cells doesn't entail life, they need something to metabolize and such.
If you mean right to life, it's still not intrinsic, it's objective-- rights exist in the nature of how rational beings interact-- they exist in motivations, incentives, they are the limits proper to rational beings who have a preexisting choice to live, they don't spring forth from Zeus' gullet for no reason at all
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:23:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:21:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:17:27 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:13:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
The intrinsic value is forfeited when you violate another in such a way.
That's a contradiction. If it's intrinsic, then it can't be forfeited.

Why not? Your life is intrinsic
No it's not. The mere existence of those cells doesn't entail life, they need something to metabolize and such.
If you mean right to life, it's still not intrinsic, it's objective-- rights exist in the nature of how rational beings interact-- they exist in motivations, incentives, they are the limits proper to rational beings who have a preexisting choice to live, they don't spring forth from Zeus' gullet for no reason at all

Oh ok, that makes sense
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:24:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:14:34 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I don't see why everyone is so quick to say that Jerry Sandusky should be hanged.

If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value. The reason his actions were wrong was because it harmed people. So, it would then follow that Jerry Sandusky himself has intrinsnic value, and he should not be hung because it will increase human suffering. Perhaps you can make a case for the deterrence effect, but the human suffering will likely offset the deterrence effect.

But would it increase human suffering if Jerry Sandusky were killed? It would probably make a lot of people very happy if he were dead.

true. An accounting problem of utility can't ever be solved.


I don't believe in an objective morality and I don't think humans have "intrinsic value" per se...

I don't either. That's why I did the *If* qualifier. Although I suppose it doesn't really matter the justification. I don't need to justify why I like ice cream on some deep philosphical level.

But I do get disgusted with people who cause suffering unnecessarily. This is probably because I have experienced suffering and I also experience empathy. So when someone causes such great suffering for such little reason, I have no inhibitions feeling vindictive toward them. It's as if they have forfeited my respect as a fellow human being because they have done so to others. Also, pedophiles (if I remember correctly) are criminals with the least chance of recovery. His sexual attraction to children will never go away. He is incurable and I also have no pity for him therefore hanging lol That's all I got on this hanging thing. It's basically all emotion.

True.

However, If he is in prison for life, then he has no chance of raping children and innocent people anyways.

What do you think should happen to Jerry Sandusky?

Moral nihilist as well, but my preference is life imprisonment.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:27:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:24:17 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:14:34 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I don't see why everyone is so quick to say that Jerry Sandusky should be hanged.

If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value. The reason his actions were wrong was because it harmed people. So, it would then follow that Jerry Sandusky himself has intrinsnic value, and he should not be hung because it will increase human suffering. Perhaps you can make a case for the deterrence effect, but the human suffering will likely offset the deterrence effect.

But would it increase human suffering if Jerry Sandusky were killed? It would probably make a lot of people very happy if he were dead.

true. An accounting problem of utility can't ever be solved.


I don't believe in an objective morality and I don't think humans have "intrinsic value" per se...

I don't either. That's why I did the *If* qualifier. Although I suppose it doesn't really matter the justification. I don't need to justify why I like ice cream on some deep philosphical level.

But I do get disgusted with people who cause suffering unnecessarily. This is probably because I have experienced suffering and I also experience empathy. So when someone causes such great suffering for such little reason, I have no inhibitions feeling vindictive toward them. It's as if they have forfeited my respect as a fellow human being because they have done so to others. Also, pedophiles (if I remember correctly) are criminals with the least chance of recovery. His sexual attraction to children will never go away. He is incurable and I also have no pity for him therefore hanging lol That's all I got on this hanging thing. It's basically all emotion.

True.

However, If he is in prison for life, then he has no chance of raping children and innocent people anyways.

He is still harming innocent people by wasting their money to keep him alive

What do you think should happen to Jerry Sandusky?

Moral nihilist as well, but my preference is life imprisonment.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:28:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:17:27 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:13:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
The intrinsic value is forfeited when you violate another in such a way.
That's a contradiction. If it's intrinsic, then it can't be forfeited.

Why not? Your life is intrinsic, but that is still forfeited when you get killed. Maybe forfeit is not the right word

If humans have intrinsic value, then by definition it's something that can't be taken away. Otherwise to assert otherwise would to state that the person is not human.

For example, an "intrinsic" property of carbon is that it has 6 protons. If it is anything other than 6 protons, then it is no longer protons.

If you say that those who rape do not have value, you can say that life as *conditional* value, but not *intrinsic* value.



At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote
If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value.
As I understand it, his crime was rape (real rape, not the statutory kind). You don't have to be an intrinsicist to want a general prohibition on nonconsexual sex, or indeed all initiations of force, to be well-enforced-- you just have to want badly enough not to be next that you want to feed the law a general principle that forbids it. Thus, a general policy-- eliminate the perpetrators of nonconsexual sex/initial force.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:28:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:24:17 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:14:34 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I don't see why everyone is so quick to say that Jerry Sandusky should be hanged.

If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value. The reason his actions were wrong was because it harmed people. So, it would then follow that Jerry Sandusky himself has intrinsnic value, and he should not be hung because it will increase human suffering. Perhaps you can make a case for the deterrence effect, but the human suffering will likely offset the deterrence effect.

But would it increase human suffering if Jerry Sandusky were killed? It would probably make a lot of people very happy if he were dead.

true. An accounting problem of utility can't ever be solved.


I don't believe in an objective morality and I don't think humans have "intrinsic value" per se...

I don't either. That's why I did the *If* qualifier. Although I suppose it doesn't really matter the justification. I don't need to justify why I like ice cream on some deep philosphical level.

Yeah, I know you don't. That's why I was curious what you thought.
But I do get disgusted with people who cause suffering unnecessarily. This is probably because I have experienced suffering and I also experience empathy. So when someone causes such great suffering for such little reason, I have no inhibitions feeling vindictive toward them. It's as if they have forfeited my respect as a fellow human being because they have done so to others. Also, pedophiles (if I remember correctly) are criminals with the least chance of recovery. His sexual attraction to children will never go away. He is incurable and I also have no pity for him therefore hanging lol That's all I got on this hanging thing. It's basically all emotion.

True.

However, If he is in prison for life, then he has no chance of raping children and innocent people anyways.

What do you think should happen to Jerry Sandusky?

Moral nihilist as well, but my preference is life imprisonment.

Me too. I don't know if you read my posts to thett but I think Sandusky should be imprisoned for life... I just think he deserves a hanging or worse :)

@Ragnar- what do you think should happen to Sandusky?
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
thett3
Posts: 14,348
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:29:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:28:18 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:17:27 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:13:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
The intrinsic value is forfeited when you violate another in such a way.
That's a contradiction. If it's intrinsic, then it can't be forfeited.

Why not? Your life is intrinsic, but that is still forfeited when you get killed. Maybe forfeit is not the right word

If humans have intrinsic value, then by definition it's something that can't be taken away. Otherwise to assert otherwise would to state that the person is not human.

For example, an "intrinsic" property of carbon is that it has 6 protons. If it is anything other than 6 protons, then it is no longer protons.

If you say that those who rape do not have value, you can say that life as *conditional* value, but not *intrinsic* value.

Yeah, you're right ragnar cleared it up already. I misspoke (mis typed?)



At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote
If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value.
As I understand it, his crime was rape (real rape, not the statutory kind). You don't have to be an intrinsicist to want a general prohibition on nonconsexual sex, or indeed all initiations of force, to be well-enforced-- you just have to want badly enough not to be next that you want to feed the law a general principle that forbids it. Thus, a general policy-- eliminate the perpetrators of nonconsexual sex/initial force.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:29:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:27:00 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:24:17 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/23/2012 11:14:34 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/23/2012 10:34:06 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I don't see why everyone is so quick to say that Jerry Sandusky should be hanged.

If you believe that his actions were morally wrong, then your justification would likely be that people have intrinsic value. The reason his actions were wrong was because it harmed people. So, it would then follow that Jerry Sandusky himself has intrinsnic value, and he should not be hung because it will increase human suffering. Perhaps you can make a case for the deterrence effect, but the human suffering will likely offset the deterrence effect.

But would it increase human suffering if Jerry Sandusky were killed? It would probably make a lot of people very happy if he were dead.

true. An accounting problem of utility can't ever be solved.


I don't believe in an objective morality and I don't think humans have "intrinsic value" per se...

I don't either. That's why I did the *If* qualifier. Although I suppose it doesn't really matter the justification. I don't need to justify why I like ice cream on some deep philosphical level.

But I do get disgusted with people who cause suffering unnecessarily. This is probably because I have experienced suffering and I also experience empathy. So when someone causes such great suffering for such little reason, I have no inhibitions feeling vindictive toward them. It's as if they have forfeited my respect as a fellow human being because they have done so to others. Also, pedophiles (if I remember correctly) are criminals with the least chance of recovery. His sexual attraction to children will never go away. He is incurable and I also have no pity for him therefore hanging lol That's all I got on this hanging thing. It's basically all emotion.

True.

However, If he is in prison for life, then he has no chance of raping children and innocent people anyways.

He is still harming innocent people by wasting their money to keep him alive

He paid taxes didn't he? If he paid for his own imprisonment, would you say that he is still harming others?


What do you think should happen to Jerry Sandusky?

Moral nihilist as well, but my preference is life imprisonment.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...