Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
LordSwift
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 13:28:00 -
[1]
I belive i made a post that got a lot of mixed remarks about a previous post about a prison is going to have a high class restaurant for inmates to train etc.
Anyway i think this one is even worse. Luxery Prison
A Prison should be feared not a place to live the good life. Join the brown Coats today!!! |
xBLACKNOVAx
Black Nova Investments
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 13:34:00 -
[2]
I haven't been able to go on holiday this year so thanks for the link. Now to work out if it should be just a random killing or something real special.
P.S. Anyone know if HMP Frankland has Sky Movies?
Originally by: OhYeah Chribba's tears cure cancer. Too bad he has never cried.
|
LordSwift
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 14:00:00 -
[3]
Yeah no wonder crime is on the up Join the brown Coats today!!! |
TrustThePilot
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 14:04:00 -
[4]
Reminds me of that story a year or so ago where a bunch of repeat offenders got sent to Borneo on an adventure holiday (supposedly under the story that it was to teach them responsibility or something) off the taxpayers back. To err is human, to forgive is against corporation policy. |
Al Anders
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 14:04:00 -
[5]
i'm going to move to England to do something really horrible Any suggestions?
|
LordSwift
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 14:23:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Al Anders i'm going to move to England to do something really horrible Any suggestions?
Stabby stabby with a knife sounds like your best bet Join the brown Coats today!!! |
Al Anders
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 14:33:00 -
[7]
Too classical. What about sothing modern? Like dropping a high voltage cable in water near sandy beach filled with people.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 14:35:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 14:36:37 Think of a teenager prison not only as a prison, but as a rehabilitation centre or foster home, too. Then it starts making sense. It is the press that wants you to believe that these kids have a life like in paradise when really they have started their lives with a capital crime and have not yet a real idea of what they have done and yet are expected to take full responsibility for it. To imprison and isolate them while they still need to develop social skills will not make them better people. You want to release them at some point.
And I am sure that the baddies do not get to play in this prison. --
|
Al Anders
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 14:39:00 -
[9]
I thnk US prisones may help to make a panama channel a bid wider. P.S.: Possibly america (north and south) has enought prisoners to do almost any terraformind procedure. Let's call it advanced biomechanical technology
|
Dirk Magnum
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 14:41:00 -
[10]
Quote: The Ministry of Justice said 39 prisoners had absconded from the jail between January 2007 and March this year.
Obviously someone didn't like it there
|
|
Sobach
Gallente Fourth Circle
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 17:54:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 14:36:37 Think of a teenager prison not only as a prison, but as a rehabilitation centre or foster home, too. Then it starts making sense. It is the press that wants you to believe that these kids have a life like in paradise when really they have started their lives with a capital crime and have not yet a real idea of what they have done and yet are expected to take full responsibility for it. To imprison and isolate them while they still need to develop social skills will not make them better people. You want to release them at some point.
And I am sure that the baddies do not get to play in this prison.
If what the worker in the article said was true, then obviously the whole rehab thing isn't working out too well if most came back around for more.
I don't know about you, but I damn well knew killing and ****s are wrong before I was even a teenager. This isn't Somalia buddy, it's the UK for crying out loud. Whatever the circumstances, those people made a choice, and they damn well should take responsibility for it. Teens today aren't as dumb as you think, you give them far too little credit.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 18:36:00 -
[12]
Originally by: LordSwift I belive i made a post that got a lot of mixed remarks about a previous post about a prison is going to have a high class restaurant for inmates to train etc.
Anyway i think this one is even worse. Luxery Prison
A Prison should be feared not a place to live the good life.
You where the one who had problems with prisoners learning something so that after their time in jail they can get a job?
|
ceaon
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 18:43:00 -
[13]
@ OP and other ppl that dont get this concept
you/us/society/majority made some rules and ppl who break them go to prison and this ppl only lose freedom, you know killing, raping, burning some alive or eat other person are ok in some far far away points of this planet and guess what they dont pay taxes for jails
Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
EvE FTW |
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 18:50:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Furb Killer
You where the one who had problems with prisoners learning something so that after their time in jail they can get a job?
No one ever was able to explain to me why even prisoners who got a GED or specialization in prison ended up being repeat offenders.
Also I've got a problem solver for you: Say you are a manager or someone who runs a company and you need to hire some extra help. You've got 2 applicants with equal qualifications and look very promising, but on the applications you notice one has a clean criminal record and one noted that he has been charged for multiple burglaries/thefts. Who would you choose?
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 19:13:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 19:17:42
Originally by: THE L0CK No one ever was able to explain to me why even prisoners who got a GED or specialization in prison ended up being repeat offenders.
Free will, hope, faith and humans are not reprogrammable machines.
Quote: Who would you choose?
I would not choose in this situation. I would count the criminal past as an experience the other one does not posses and add it to his experience, but would also try to find something in the other guy to give him a chance, too. If the guy without the criminal record has a hobby that says something about him as a person (a team player, an organizer, whatever), then I would probably choose the one without the criminal record. I would definitely try not to get into a situation where I have to make this kind of choice. If I then give the guy with the criminal record the job, then I would not give him a position where he could do it again either - for his and my own sake. --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 19:29:00 -
[16]
Edited by: THE L0CK on 27/07/2009 19:28:58
Originally by: Whitehound
I would not choose in this situation.
You are a manager or business owner, you have to make these decisions as each decision means success or failure for your company.
Originally by: Whitehound I would count the criminal past as an experience the other one does not have and add it to his experience, but would also try to find something in the other guy to give him a chance, too. If the guy without the criminal record than has a hobby that says something about him as a person (a team player, an organizer, whatever), then I would probably choose the one without the criminal record.
Fair enough.....if I'm reading that right. The one with the non criminal record may not be as much of a team player while the one with the criminal record may of been part of a group working jobs which makes him an excellent team player if they were successful multiple times.
Originally by: Whitehound I would definitely try not get into a situation where I have to make this kind of choice.
As I stated as a manager or business owner you would have to make these kinds of decisions and you may have to make them often. From the sounds of it though I suspect you'd end up being one of those managers I see who look they are 70 when they are only 40 due to stress after working in that position for so long.
Originally by: Whitehound If I then give the guy with the criminal record of theft the job, then I would not give him a position where he could do it again either - for his and my own sake.
Aside from locking everything down I don't really see how you could prevent it. And in this case how would you work out the trust factor between him and you?
That has me thinking on another problem solver. Say the criminal is actually better qualified than the non criminal across the board but the position requires them to have a set of keys to the place of business like if they were going to open the shop or whatever and they would be there alone for the first several hours of the day?
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 20:30:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 20:31:56
Originally by: THE L0CK You are a manager or business owner, you have to make these decisions as each decision means success or failure for your company.
You are implying that I have no control over the situation. If this would really be the case then I would be a very bad manager and I would quit the job. I would not allow any of my subordinates to drop this onto my table, and any boss who does that to me can find himself a new marionette, and because I do not want to end with an heart attack.
Quote: Aside from locking everything down I don't really see how you could prevent it. And in this case how would you work out the trust factor between him and you?
You are implying that I am paranoid. You cannot prevent it, but you can make the guy's life easier by keeping him away from what may tempt him, and, in case he does steal again do I not want to be the manager who has given him the perfect position to do so. This is why I say "for the sake of both of us".
Quote: Say the criminal is actually better qualified than the non criminal across the board but the position requires them to have a set of keys to the place of business like if they were going to open the shop or whatever and they would be there alone for the first several hours of the day?
They say theft is created by opportunity. I would not want to give the guy this kind of responsibility. Instead, I expect him to say no to the offer and therefore would not even offer it to him. If he is a man then he knows what he has done and that he cannot expect to be given this kind of responsibility with a criminal record of theft. If he is a smart man then he would probably feel offended if I did put this into his hands. Some really weird bosses might probably do this only to test the guy and watch him with a hidden video camera. I would make his criminal record in such a case a disadvantage for him and tell it to his face.
Why would anyone want to hire a cashier with a record of theft for example? Or a medical doctor who has mistreated a patient? The case you have created here sounds more like a conflict in the guys skill sets with his criminal record. Its better to learn a new job. --
|
Riki Halcyon
Caldari Sativa Imports Ltd.
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 20:35:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 14:36:37 Think of a teenager prison not only as a prison, but as a rehabilitation centre or foster home, too. Then it starts making sense. It is the press that wants you to believe that these kids have a life like in paradise when really they have started their lives with a capital crime and have not yet a real idea of what they have done and yet are expected to take full responsibility for it. To imprison and isolate them while they still need to develop social skills will not make them better people. You want to release them at some point.
And I am sure that the baddies do not get to play in this prison.
I completely agree with you Whitehuond. However, having PlayStations in their cells is not going to help them develop social skills...I think our prison systems in the US have it completely wrong though, as far as their lack of rehabilitation.
The Lock, you are asking some good questions, and hard ones to answer....I'm glad I'm not a business owner, because I would want to be considerate of a "criminal's" past, but at the same time I don't think I could trust someone who has been prosecuted of burglary with the keys to my shop. That's tough, because I don't want to be judging people based on their run ins with "the man" but at the same time....idk.
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 20:55:00 -
[19]
Edited by: THE L0CK on 27/07/2009 20:58:56
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: THE L0CK You are a manager or business owner, you have to make these decisions as each decision means success or failure for your company.
You are implying that I have no control over the situation. If this would really be the case then I would be a very bad manager and I would quit the job. I would not allow any of my subordinates to drop this onto my table, and any boss who does that to me can find himself a new marionette, and because I do not want to end with an heart attack.
I am implying the opposite. As a business owner I would hope for the sake of the business that you are in full control and that includes who you do and don't hire. If you are not in control of that then who is?
Originally by: Whitehound You are implying that I am paranoid. You cannot prevent it, but you can make the guy's life easier by keeping him away from what may tempt him, and, in case he does steal again do I not want to be the manager who has given him the perfect position to do so. This is why I say "for the sake of both of us".
Careful would be a better word. But at what point would you think you being careful in preventing opportunities turn into him feeling untrusted? That is my question that I am asking.
Originally by: Whitehound They say theft is created by opportunity. I would not want to give the guy this kind of responsibility. Instead, I expect him to say no to the offer and therefore would not even offer it to him.
Then like many others you have denied him an opportunity at an honest life. And when times get desperate enough he may or would resort to theft once again. Now we understand why these inmates end up being repeat offenders.
Quote: If he is a man then he knows what he has done and that he cannot expect to be given this kind of responsibility with a criminal record of theft.
Then I must ask what is the point of the rehabilitation if the criminal in question can only expect a let down or to not even be able to use what he has learned. It sounds to me like we are the ones setting them up to fail again.
Quote: If he is a smart man then he would probably feel offended if I did put this into his hands.
I don't know, I think I would feel like I jumped some major hurdles and beat the odds that were stacked against me.
Quote: The case you have created here sounds more like a conflict in the guys skill sets with his criminal record. Its better to learn a new job.
Isn't that what the rehabilitation process is supposed to do? The issue that I presented was that a man was put in jail for Burglary and Theft. The sentence that they may have given him could be enough time to take some of the courses they have thus giving him a valuable set of skills that just happen to fit what you are looking for as a manager. Unfortunately as a manager you feel that he shouldn't be in your business leaving him with a new set of skills with no means to use them and that he should learn something else entirely but without money or the means now he can't do much. To support himself the man must now go back to doing what he did best before.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Xrak
Black Nova Corp
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 20:57:00 -
[20]
Hello there, I see you have posted a link to the Mail online.
Would you like to
a) blame those evil asylum seekers? b) blame those liberal hippes? c) blame those nefarious gays? d) read another column on Princess Di?
|
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 21:39:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 21:41:08
Originally by: THE L0CK But at what point would you think you being careful in preventing opportunities turn into him feeling untrusted? That is my question that I am asking.
This depends entirely on the circumstances I guess.
Quote: Then like many others you have denied him an opportunity at an honest life. And when times get desperate enough he may or would resort to theft once again. Now we understand why these inmates end up being repeat offenders.
No. He still can have an honest life. Ask the cashier, who stole money in his past, why one should trust him now and why he did not choose to learn a new job? Did he not know after he left prison that he could not simply go back to his old life, but needs to make some adjustments? Even people who did not commit a crime can fail at a job and should better do something else. A person in a wheel chair knows that there is little chance for becoming a test pilot. A race driver who never won a single race but only crashes the cars is not someone who you would trust to win a race either. Some people had their chance but could not hold on to it for whatever reason. Rehabilitation then does not mean to give them the same chance again and again until they get it right. You then give the chance to someone else before you give it to the same person again. --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 21:57:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Whitehound No. He still can have an honest life. Ask the cashier, who stole money in his past, why one should trust him now and why he did not choose to learn a new job? Did he not know after he left prison that he could not simply go back to his old life, but needs to make some adjustments? Even people who did not commit a crime can fail at a job and should better do something else. A person in a wheel chair knows that there is little chance for becoming a test pilot. A race driver who never won a single race but only crashes the cars is not someone who you would trust to win a race either. Some people had their chance but could not hold on to it for whatever reason. Rehabilitation then does not mean to give them the same chance again and again until they get it right. You then give the chance to someone else before you give it to the same person again.
That is not the question I asked.
The situation that I asked was if a man went to prison for committing a crime involving theft or such similar and during his incarceration he learns skills that suits what you as a business owner are looking for in a potential employee if you would hire him.
The first scenario involved him and another being equal in qualifications but one had the crime and one didn't in which case you put in a maybe but was leaning more to the non offender.
The second involved him actually being better qualified but it would require you as the manager to trust him with the keys in which you outright said no.
What I was detailing was that his old life was a life of crime so of course he was going to have to change it/not go back to it after prison, but instead he learns a set of skills that could change his life around. What I wanted to point out is how you would react to it and it was actually just how I expected. Everyone is up for rehabilitating a criminal until it comes face to face with them. As for the last part of your paragraph I have no clue what you are going on about.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Captain Hudson
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 22:19:00 -
[23]
daily mail. lol
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 22:21:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 22:23:12
Originally by: THE L0CK That is not the question I asked.
I did answer your question. Perhaps ask better questions?
Quote: The second involved him actually being better qualified but it would require you as the manager to trust him with the keys in which you outright said no.
No, you are wrong. You want to see his criminal past seperately from his qualifications. For me does a qualification only show a person's experience and so does a criminal record. Asking me to only hire him because of one set of experience but not the other would not be fair. You said so yourself that it is fair to see it as such. Why not now? --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 22:38:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 22:23:12
Originally by: THE L0CK That is not the question I asked.
I did answer your question. Perhaps ask better questions?
I know you did and that's what I've stated. I don't understand why you are being so defensive.
Originally by: Whitehound
Quote: The second involved him actually being better qualified but it would require you as the manager to trust him with the keys in which you outright said no.
No, you are wrong. You want to see his criminal past seperately from his qualifications. For me does a qualification only show a person's experience and so does a criminal record. Asking me to only hire him because of one set of experience but not the other would not be fair. You said so yourself that it is fair to see it as such. Why not now?
I don't understand what you are trying to say here. The second scenario that I asked was that if the criminal was better qualified than anyone else looking at the position but the position would require him to need a set of keys to the business I wanted to know if you would hire him and you said no which is expected.
The scenario I portrayed had you look at both types of qualifications. The criminal is better suited for the position because of the training he received but as stated, he is a criminal known to steal and giving him keys would be a great risk. Should I or shouldn't I hire? If No was not the answer you wanted then please reread the question carefully and give me another answer.
Personally that was the answer I was expecting and it is a common occurrence called N.I.M.B.Y.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 22:59:00 -
[26]
Originally by: THE L0CK I don't understand what you are trying to say here. The second scenario that I asked was that if the criminal was better qualified than anyone else looking at the position but the position would require him to need a set of keys to the business I wanted to know if you would hire him and you said no which is expected.
How can he be better qualified when he previously failed at this position?
It does not matter how someone failed. An accountant for example can fail at his job, because he is just very bad with maths, and he can fail because he could not withstand the temptation to fake numbers.
If he then leaves jail and has the qualification for being an accountant and is good with maths, but has a record for stealing while being an accountant, too, then the sum of both is worth nothing.
You need to give a better example. --
|
Sazkyen
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 23:04:00 -
[27]
Well, I know that many people commit lesser crimes to get into prison for the winter when they would freeze on the streets. Yeah, unfortunate. This prison looks like a cool place to spend some quality, and I mean quality, time
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 23:06:00 -
[28]
Edited by: THE L0CK on 27/07/2009 23:06:45
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: THE L0CK I don't understand what you are trying to say here. The second scenario that I asked was that if the criminal was better qualified than anyone else looking at the position but the position would require him to need a set of keys to the business I wanted to know if you would hire him and you said no which is expected.
How can he be better qualified when he previously failed at this position?
Read the question again please.
Edit: in the mean time would anyone else care to answer the 2 scenario's?
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 23:14:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 23:17:06
Originally by: THE L0CK Read the question again please.
I did and I do not think that you are asking a fair question.
It is simply not possible for him to be better qualified and to give me a problem at the same time.
Either he is better qualified and that means there is no problem, or he is not better qualified and because there is a problem.
If both candidates give me a problem then I am not going to hire any of them. --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 23:26:00 -
[30]
Edited by: THE L0CK on 27/07/2009 23:27:47
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: THE L0CK Read the question again please.
I did and I do not think that you are asking a fair question.
It is simply not possible for him to be better qualified and to give me a problem at the same time.
Either he is better qualified and that means there is no problem, or he is not better qualified and because there is a problem.
You seem to making it more difficult for yourself than the question is and/or having major translation problems.
This will be the last time I explain this because I honestly am starting to think you are just trolling me again like last time (I haven't forgotten).
Scenario 2:
Let's say you own a small shop that repairs and sells computers and your business is doing well enough that you can afford to hire someone to work part or full time giving you more free time in life.
Now before you are 2 applications.
The first application is your standard Joe. No criminal record but on the same side no real schooling/training for what you are looking for.
Applicant 2 has just been paroled from prison. According to his application he went to prison for several years for burglary or theft, BUT, while he was there he took several computer technology courses that the prison offers making him more knowledgeable and better qualified for your little business.
Now since you want the applicant to open the store for you this would require giving that person a set of keys to the store. Which would you end up choosing and why?
This is Scenario 2. Last time you said no to the criminal. Read the question, ponder it, and detail your answer clearly.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 23:45:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 23:59:49
Originally by: THE L0CK Which would you end up choosing and why?
I am not trolling you. I will simply not allow anyone to put me into a fixed situation which is directed at me making an uninformed decision. I would have to ask the guy what computer courses he had, and I would ask him what he stole and why he did it. I would not ask him if he would do it again, but I need more information than just what you are willing to give me.
So lets just say that he did the courses that make him interesting for me and that I asked him some technical questions and his answers were right.
You can now answer the questions regarding his crime and 1) why he did it, 2) what he stole and 3) what the circumstances were.
And does he have a parole officer or someone like that I can talk to? --
|
Jhagiti Tyran
Mortis Angelus The Church.
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 03:01:00 -
[32]
Tough prisons don't do anything to reduce crime, look at US prisons or even the ones in south America or east Asia some of them keep the inmates in subhuman standards and it does nothing to prevent crime.
British institutions learned several important lessons after incidents like the Strangeways riots key amongst them was that badly treated inmates behave badly which disrupts the operation of the facility, costs money and can cause injuries to the staff. The US doesn't seem to be learning this lesson and just makes things even tougher which causes further degeneration in the smooth functioning of the penal system with almost perpetual violence and regular outbreaks of rioting leading to inmates and staff being injured and killed.
Keep an inmate in relative comfort and give him something to do and work for most will settle down and things become much easier if they think they might loose what little he does have and when things do kick off it wont be as severe, keep them in a cage and treat them like animals first chance they get they will behave like one.
|
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 03:12:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Jhagiti Tyran Tough prisons don't do anything to reduce crime, look at US prisons or even the ones in south America or east Asia some of them keep the inmates in subhuman standards and it does nothing to prevent crime.
British institutions learned several important lessons after incidents like the Strangeways riots key amongst them was that badly treated inmates behave badly which disrupts the operation of the facility, costs money and can cause injuries to the staff. The US doesn't seem to be learning this lesson and just makes things even tougher which causes further degeneration in the smooth functioning of the penal system with almost perpetual violence and regular outbreaks of rioting leading to inmates and staff being injured and killed.
Keep an inmate in relative comfort and give him something to do and work for most will settle down and things become much easier if they think they might loose what little he does have and when things do kick off it wont be as severe, keep them in a cage and treat them like animals first chance they get they will behave like one.
define relative comfort...
Give them a cell, fair wardens, adiquate foo, some****rsize and the opertinity to better themselves and fair rules for them to lose what ever small privileges they may get for infractions. That would be what i consider fair, oh yeah and make them work for privileges beyond the basics.
If its just given to them why would they value it? Oh yeah and make it harder for repeat offenders to gain any privileges at all. ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
Calvin Firenze
Minmatar Demon Theory Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 05:02:00 -
[34]
Murderers and sex offenders should have a bullet through their head the very same day they're convicted. **** keeping inmates on death row for 20+ years.
Everyone else should be on a chain gang breaking rocks with other rocks and being fed bread and water for the duration of their sentence. Slowly buying parts for a new pc, will be back ingame soon...
|
Tallaran Kouros
Caldari Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 08:38:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Calvin Firenze Murderers and sex offenders should have a bullet through their head the very same day they're convicted. **** keeping inmates on death row for 20+ years.
There are plenty of "murderers" and "sex offenders" that are convicted due to shoddy police investigations, intimidated juries and circumstantial evidence.
Look how many innocent people have subsequently been released from death row due to advances in DNA technology.
I would much rather a guilty man go free than an innocent man be****cuted by the state for a crime he did not commit.
|
feiht'd'ero
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 11:13:00 -
[36]
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?Violent_thug_to_sue_after_policeman_swore_at_him&in_article_id=709396&in_page_id=34
Our justice system at full pelt.
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 14:55:00 -
[37]
Originally by: feiht'd'ero http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?Violent_thug_to_sue_after_policeman_swore_at_him&in_article_id=709396&in_page_id=34
Our justice system at full pelt.
barricaded himself in, screaming: 'The first copper in here is getting f*****g killed.
Quote: 'I want to take legal action because they just get a telling off for what they did,' said Francis. 'It upset me to hear someone say that.'
I say they counter sue for the same claim.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Slade Trillgon
Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 15:07:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Tallaran Kouros
Originally by: Calvin Firenze Murderers and sex offenders should have a bullet through their head the very same day they're convicted. **** keeping inmates on death row for 20+ years.
There are plenty of "murderers" and "sex offenders" that are convicted due to shoddy police investigations, intimidated juries and circumstantial evidence.
Look how many innocent people have subsequently been released from death row due to advances in DNA technology.
I would much rather a guilty man go free than an innocent man be executed by the state for a crime he did not commit.
I will have to agree with Tallaran here. The death penalty has killed innocent people and it serves absolutely no purpose unless the executions are public. So untill then all death row inmates get their appeals. Also if the prison systems were not so overfull with petty criminals then it would not be such a bane on the system to imprison people, that deserve it, for life.
Slade
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
Please go sit in the corner, and dont forget to don the shame-on-you-hat!
=v= |
Krystal Vernet
Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 15:31:00 -
[39]
Exercise room with decent equipment (or a yard outside with some equipment, if the security of the place permits it), a library, access to some form of schooling (tutor, classes), and free newspapers are about all the creature comforts I think jails should provide. They've already got free food and water, shelter, and free medical care if they need it (not for boob jobs or something like I've seen articles on before).
|
annoing
Amarr Mortis Angelus The Church.
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 15:48:00 -
[40]
If its in the Daily Fail it must be true
|
|
Jacob Mei
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 17:29:00 -
[41]
We need a prison like the ones featured in Minority report, chronicles of Ricdic and so forth. Do a major crime, get put in a electrically induced coma and stored in a tube for years. Beyond redemption? Get thrown in a hole in the ground with the rest of the trash and let the problem sort itself out. On an unrelated note, Kneel before Zod! |
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 17:39:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 14:36:37 Think of a teenager prison not only as a prison, but as a rehabilitation centre or foster home, too. Then it starts making sense. It is the press that wants you to believe that these kids have a life like in paradise when really they have started their lives with a capital crime and have not yet a real idea of what they have done and yet are expected to take full responsibility for it. To imprison and isolate them while they still need to develop social skills will not make them better people. You want to release them at some point.
And I am sure that the baddies do not get to play in this prison.
No
Just no.
You spank a child who's done wrong, to show them that what they did was wrong.
Why do people have the right idea with puppies, but can't raise kids for **** all? ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Tallaran Kouros
Caldari Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 17:46:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 27/07/2009 14:36:37 Think of a teenager prison not only as a prison, but as a rehabilitation centre or foster home, too. Then it starts making sense. It is the press that wants you to believe that these kids have a life like in paradise when really they have started their lives with a capital crime and have not yet a real idea of what they have done and yet are expected to take full responsibility for it. To imprison and isolate them while they still need to develop social skills will not make them better people. You want to release them at some point.
And I am sure that the baddies do not get to play in this prison.
No
Just no.
You spank a child who's done wrong, to show them that what they did was wrong.
Why do people have the right idea with puppies, but can't raise kids for **** all?
I understand Whitehound's point but I am going to have to agree with you.
I - and everyone else I knew - was perfectly able to tell right from wrong from the age of oh, 5?
By the time I was a teenager I was perfectly aware that it was wrong to murder people or to **** women and I had a full knowledge that I would be punished and send to prison if I committed such a crime.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 17:51:00 -
[44]
Too many people go the strict positive reinforcement, or strict negative reinforcement route.
"What you did was wrong, I'll give you this xbox if you never do it again."
"You got a B on your math exam? Guess you can stay in the next few weekends to study so you do better."
Raising a dog is the same as raising a kid. When they do wrong, you whip 'em with a newspaper and wipe their nose in it. When they do right, you give 'em a scooby snack and a chew toy. When they are not doing wrong, you reinforce your bond with the dog with praise and attention.
There, child rearing in 1 paragraph... go procreate. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 18:35:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Whitehound on 28/07/2009 18:35:46
Originally by: Awesome Possum You spank a child who's done wrong, to show them that what they did was wrong.
You also need to love a child not only spank it or else it will be all it knows. And you should know this, too. --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 18:44:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 28/07/2009 18:35:46
Originally by: Awesome Possum You spank a child who's done wrong, to show them that what they did was wrong.
You also need to love a child not only spank it or else it will be all it knows. And you should know this, too.
Ya mean like how he pointed out in the paragraph above yours?
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Jacob Mei
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 18:59:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Awesome Possum Too many people go the strict positive reinforcement, or strict negative reinforcement route.
And then theirs the third route where the parents dont care one way or another and leave their kids up to their own devices. In my opinion those are the worst. On an unrelated note, Kneel before Zod! |
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 19:57:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Awesome Possum on 28/07/2009 19:58:21
Originally by: THE L0CK Ya mean like how he pointed out in the paragraph above yours?
I was tempted to just flood this thread with facepalm pictures, but can't be ass'ed to really.
Originally by: Jacob Mei And then theirs the third route where the parents dont care one way or another and leave their kids up to their own devices. In my opinion those are the worst.
Heinlein had it right in Starship Troopers, punish the parent along with the child for crimes committed. In public. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 22:08:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Awesome Possum I was tempted to just flood this thread with facepalm pictures, but can't be ass'ed to really.
You want to facepalm? That sure is funny! You would need to to hide your shame.
In case you have never heard of it but some kids only get one beating after another. And guess what? Their parents think just like you that they did something wrong.
And some kids get mistreated in much worse ways. Guess where they all end? No, it is not here in this forum ... --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 22:12:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Awesome Possum I was tempted to just flood this thread with facepalm pictures, but can't be ass'ed to really.
You want to facepalm? That sure is funny! You would need to to hide your shame.
In case you have never heard of it but some kids only get one beating after another. And guess what? Their parents think just like you that they did something wrong.
And some kids get mistreated in much worse ways. Guess where they all end? No, it is not here in this forum ...
Theres a bit of a difference between a spanking and a beating. Actually there is a really big difference between a spanking and a beating. but leave it to the bleeding hearts to stop us from disciplining our children before they turn into career criminals.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 22:19:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Whitehound on 28/07/2009 22:19:36
Originally by: THE L0CK Theres a bit of a difference between a spanking and a beating.
And what is it? Is it the way you hold your hand? The amount of force you put into it?
I would like to see you and Awesome giving me a description of the difference between a spanking and a beating! --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 22:29:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 28/07/2009 22:19:36
Originally by: THE L0CK Theres a bit of a difference between a spanking and a beating.
And what is it? Is it the way you hold your hand? The amount of force you put into it?
I would like to see you and Awesome giving me a description of the difference between a spanking and a beating!
I bet you would dirty boy, but I've spent enough of my time simplifying things for you already. I'm sure you'll be able to figure out which is which on your own.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 22:45:00 -
[53]
Originally by: THE L0CK I bet you would dirty boy, but I've spent enough of my time simplifying things for you already. I'm sure you'll be able to figure out which is which on your own.
Why so defensive? You are the one who always likes to dish out, no? Now say, is spanking a child the same as loving it or can you only make silly comments? --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 22:51:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: THE L0CK I bet you would dirty boy, but I've spent enough of my time simplifying things for you already. I'm sure you'll be able to figure out which is which on your own.
Why so defensive? You are the one who always likes to dish out, no? Now say, is spanking a child the same as loving it or can you only make silly comments?
Defensive I believe would be like pleading the 5th in a scenario I offer. And as I have said before, I fell for your trolling once before, I'm a tad bit more cautious now. You have the power of the internet at your fingertips, go look up the difference.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
northwesten
Amarr Trinity Corporate Services Novus Ordo Mundi
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 23:24:00 -
[55]
I just watch a show here in US called Lockdown. Why can't we do this in UK? I mean wtf? no **** was an ouch but you sent to prison you show lose lot of your right not all but most.
Trinity Corporate Services |
Jhagiti Tyran
Mortis Angelus The Church.
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 01:54:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Awesome Possum
No
Just no.
You spank a child who's done wrong, to show them that what they did was wrong.
Why do people have the right idea with puppies, but can't raise kids for **** all?
When you smack a child you do not teach them that they have done wrong, you teach them that the application of violence makes somebody right.
|
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 02:24:00 -
[57]
They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison
Following the rights movements You clamped down with your iron fists, Drugs became conveniently Available for all the kids, Following the rights movements You clamped down with your iron fists, Drugs became conveniently Available for all the kids,
I buy my crack, my smack, my *****, Right here in Hollywood,
Nearly 2 million Americans are incarcerated In the prison system, prison system Prison system of the U.S.
They're trying to build a prison
They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, for you and me to live in Another prison system, Another prison system, Another prison system.
Minor drug offenders fill your prisons You don't even flinch All our taxes paying for your wars Against the new non-rich, Minor drug offenders fill your prisons You don't even flinch All our taxes paying for your wars Against the new non-rich,
I buy my crack, my smack, my *****, Right here in Hollywood,
The percentage of Americans in the prison system, prison system Prison system, has doubled since 1985
They're trying to build a prison
They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, Another prison system, Another prison system, Another prison system. For you and me, for you and me, for you and me.
They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, For you and me, Oh baby, you and me.
All research and successful drug policy shows That treatment should be increased, And law enforcement decreased, While abolishing mandatory minimum sentences, All research and successful drug policy shows That treatment should be increased, And law enforcement decreased, While abolishing mandatory minimum sentences.
Utilizing drugs to pay for secret wars around the world, Drugs are now your global policy, Now you police the globe,
I buy my crack, my smack, my *****, Right here in Hollywood,
Drug money is used to rig elections, And train brutal corporate sponsored Dictators around the world.
They're trying to build a prison
They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, for you and me to live in Another prison system, Another prison system, Another prison system. (for you and me) For you and I, for you and I , for you and I. They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, They're trying to build a prison, For you and me, Oh baby, you and me.
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 02:49:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 28/07/2009 18:35:46
Originally by: Awesome Possum You spank a child who's done wrong, to show them that what they did was wrong.
You also need to love a child not only spank it or else it will be all it knows. And you should know this, too.
Learn to read dumbass... ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 02:53:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Jhagiti Tyran
Originally by: Awesome Possum
No
Just no.
You spank a child who's done wrong, to show them that what they did was wrong.
Why do people have the right idea with puppies, but can't raise kids for **** all?
When you smack a child you do not teach them that they have done wrong, you teach them that the application of violence makes somebody right.
Don't teach them limits and they don't think they are lmits...it don't matter if its a smack or sitting on the naugty step...it just has to be fairly applied and consistent. ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 08:27:00 -
[60]
Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 08:28:53
Originally by: nahtoh Learn to read dumbass...
You are a chav with an Internet connection. Learn to love yourself. --
|
|
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 13:46:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 10:10:49
Originally by: nahtoh Learn to read dumbass...
You are a chav with an Internet connection. Learn to love yourself, and learn to write.
And you are a total feckwit. ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 13:54:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 13:54:59
Originally by: nahtoh And you are a total feckwit.
You can neither write or spell. --
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 14:24:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 13:54:59
Originally by: nahtoh And you are a total feckwit.
You can neither write or spell.
Nor.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 15:09:00 -
[64]
Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 15:09:38
Originally by: Malcanis Nor.
No, I choose or over nor in this particular case. In an educated conversation would it be wrong, however. --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 15:50:00 -
[65]
Well this thread degenerated real quick into name calling and spelling bee's.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
LordSwift
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 17:06:00 -
[66]
Yeah it has, I thought this thread would be dead already. :) Good arguments though. Basically i think if you commit a crime. Whatever it is. You should have no comforts like TV, Video Games, Internet Access, newspapers. Having those things is not punishment. Man if i got thrown in jail for something and have a ps2 or whatever, get to play it enough. thats not punishment. Oh and there is nothing wrong reading the daily mail site, better than most. But thats just me. Join the brown Coats today!!! |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 17:44:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 17:45:49
Originally by: LordSwift ... Basically i think if you commit a crime. Whatever it is. You should have no comforts ...
And you would probably think that a homosexual in prison has a life like a sex god, too? --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 17:50:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 17:45:49
Originally by: LordSwift ... Basically i think if you commit a crime. Whatever it is. You should have no comforts ...
And you would probably think that a homosexual in prison has a life like a sex god, too?
How do you come up with those wonderful ideas and assumptions?
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 17:59:00 -
[69]
Originally by: THE L0CK How do you come up with those wonderful ideas and assumptions?
It is the same stupid way of thinking.
Even murderers are allowed to read books. Why not give people in prison some comfort? We, who put them behind bars, are not the criminals. Do not forget that. Unlike criminals do we still posses virtues like mercy and forgiveness. It is usually the stupid who end up in prison, and not the merciful and forgiving. --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 18:13:00 -
[70]
I tried and I just can't quite correlate the similarities between restricting privileges and a gay man being a sex god in prison.
But then again you were the one to equate spanking to discipline and beating out of anger as one and the same.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 18:37:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 18:45:34
Originally by: THE L0CK But then again you were the one to equate spanking to discipline and beating out of anger as one and the same.
No, I did not.
I quote:
Originally by: Awesome Possum You spank a child who's done wrong, to show them that what they did was wrong.
You do beat the child. If you cannot see this then you are a horrible father and your children have all my sympathy. --
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 18:38:00 -
[72]
Edited by: Awesome Possum on 29/07/2009 18:40:48
Originally by: Whitehound You are a chav with an Internet connection. Learn to love yourself, and learn to write.
Use of the word chav implies that you are British, and yet your sentence structure and beliefs make it seem like you're French.
In truth, you're just a moron with no understanding of child rearing, morality, or consequences for one's actions. So I guess your nationality doesn't matter.
Quote: No, I did not.
You may not think you did, but your posts implied as such. Perhaps you should learn to clarify your statements more.
edit: nice to know bb codes on eve-o are case sensitive ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 19:00:00 -
[73]
Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 19:02:34
Originally by: Awesome Possum You may not think you did, ...
And still have I not said anything about anger. You are one sad and horrible father to me. You think to know ("imply") what others think and probably do the same with your children, too. --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 19:06:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 19:02:34
Originally by: Awesome Possum You may not think you did, ...
And still have I not said anything about anger. You are one sad and horrible father to me. You think to know ("imply") what others think and probably do the same with your children, too.
What the hell does that even mean?
Although this part Quote: You think to know ("imply") what others think
may very well apply to you to your gay sex god statement up above me thinks.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 19:13:00 -
[75]
Originally by: THE L0CK ...
Who the hell are you talking to? Are you talking to yourself now, or are your comments actually meant for someone to read? --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 19:15:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: THE L0CK ...
Who the hell are you talking to? Are you talking to yourself now, or are your comments actually meant for someone to read?
And he goes back to trolling. Seriously that is all you ever do in every thread I read.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 19:20:00 -
[77]
Originally by: THE L0CK And he goes back to trolling. Seriously that is all you ever do in every thread I read.
You need to get out of here. You are talking to yourself and you have lost the ability to follow the thread. --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 19:29:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: THE L0CK And he goes back to trolling. Seriously that is all you ever do in every thread I read.
You need to get out of here. You are talking to yourself and you have lost the ability to follow the thread.
Don't worry, I'm a patient man. I'll just sit over here and wait until your done with that temper tantrum that has been blatantly obvious on this page.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 19:48:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Whitehound You are one sad and horrible father to me. You think to know ("imply") what others think and probably do the same with your children, too.
That is one of the points of being a parent, knowing exactly what your child is thinking and doing. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 19:51:00 -
[80]
Sorry if this has already come up, but does the story in the OP also feature in some news outlet that doesn't have a whole lot of tabloid rubbish showing on the same page?
|
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 19:56:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Awesome Possum That is one of the points of being a parent, knowing exactly what your child is thinking and doing.
So tell, how do you do this? Are you omni-present and -knowing like a God? --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 20:07:00 -
[82]
Edited by: THE L0CK on 29/07/2009 20:07:50
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Awesome Possum That is one of the points of being a parent, knowing exactly what your child is thinking and doing.
So tell, how do you do this? Are you omni-present and -knowing like a God?
Its one of the joys of having children which seems to open up another sense in your brain so you end up with Sight, sound, touch, taste, smell, and parenting.
It's subconscious and you don't really think about it, you just know that when you are folding laundry and the kids go into quiet mode that most likely they are up to no good.
This ability also maps out your house better then you realize, like knowing when they have moved from the living room to the bathroom right next to the toilet and you know that you have to jump the child gate, dodge the toys and get into the bathroom yourself before they flush whatever it is they intend to flush.
It also allows you to track multiple targets so while you are talking to your friend at the picnic table you know your daughter is on the second level of the playground equipment with her 3 bff's and your son is over at the swing 45 degrees behind you to your left having a field day.
The ability has been attributed to kids thinking their mothers have eyes in the back of their head.
While I may not be a parent myself I tend to watch my niece n nephew far more than their parents because their father is a trucker and he's got primary custody so I baby sit on the days he's out and their mother is a lying cheating ***** that is the size of a whale. I've been at their side since day one.
You'll understand when you grow up and become a parent someday.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Jago Kain
Amarr Ramm's RDI
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 20:19:00 -
[83]
Originally by: THE L0CK ....While I may not be a parent myself....
.....You'll understand when you grow up and become a parent someday.
Hmmm. So, by your own yardstick you can't possibly understand what you're commenting on having no kids of your own.
Sanctimonious twunts make baby Jebus cry.
___________________________________________________ The game will never be over, because we're keeping the meme alive. |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 20:22:00 -
[84]
Originally by: THE L0CK Its one of the ...
I was not asking you, THE L0CK. Now let Awesome Possum answer the question.
Or shall I say "be a good kid"? --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 20:40:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: THE L0CK Its one of the ...
I was not asking you, THE L0CK. Now let Awesome Possum answer the question.
Or shall I say "be a good kid"?
At this part class we would take note that the child is again throwing a temper tantrum and being well, a child. The parent would most likely give them a verbal warning with a possible eye glare. Should the child persist with this attitude that they are copping then a second warning may ensue along with a count down starting at 3. If the attitude persists still then most likely the child will be given a time out usually resulting in staring at a while for several minutes. If the child refuses to go willingly to the wall then the parent may be forced to get up, herd them to the wall, and a single spanking may ensue.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 20:45:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Jago Kain
Originally by: THE L0CK ....While I may not be a parent myself....
.....You'll understand when you grow up and become a parent someday.
Hmmm. So, by your own yardstick you can't possibly understand what you're commenting on having no kids of your own.
Sanctimonious twunts make baby Jebus cry.
What would you like to call me? I'm their Uncle not their father. Their father is a seasonal truck driver which means he doesn't drive for part of the year. When he does drive I take over the parenting role because he is either working or sleeping.
Right now is that season and I have the kids 4 days a week which entails feeding, sleeping, showers, clothing, getting them to school, getting them to appointments, keeping them safe, spending quality time with them, occasionally driving them to their fat ass ***** of a mother for her 6 hours of custody, and any other parenting needs that arise.
So what am I?
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 20:49:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Awesome Possum Edited by: Awesome Possum on 29/07/2009 18:40:48
Originally by: Whitehound You are a chav with an Internet connection. Learn to love yourself, and learn to write.
Use of the word chav implies that you are British, and yet your sentence structure and beliefs make it seem like you're French.
In truth, you're just a moron with no understanding of child rearing, morality, or consequences for one's actions. So I guess your nationality doesn't matter.
Quote: No, I did not.
You may not think you did, but your posts implied as such. Perhaps you should learn to clarify your statements more.
edit: nice to know bb codes on eve-o are case sensitive
Also since the opinions I have put forth in this thread are also very unlikley to have came from a "chav" I would also submit he is a total moron with deluisions of adequacy. ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 20:50:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 13:54:59
Originally by: nahtoh And you are a total feckwit.
You can neither write or spell.
I have a condidion called dyslixia, you seem to have a sever case of anal head insertion. ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
Jago Kain
Amarr Ramm's RDI
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 21:29:00 -
[89]
Originally by: nahtoh
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 13:54:59
Originally by: nahtoh And you are a total feckwit.
You can neither write or spell.
I have a condidion called dyslixia, you seem to have a sever case of anal head insertion.
At the risk of going for the obvious joke, it's actually spelt dyslexia....
...I'll get me coat. ___________________________________________________ The game will never be over, because we're keeping the meme alive. |
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 21:33:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Jago Kain
Originally by: nahtoh
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 13:54:59
Originally by: nahtoh And you are a total feckwit.
You can neither write or spell.
I have a condidion called dyslixia, you seem to have a sever case of anal head insertion.
At the risk of going for the obvious joke, it's actually spelt dyslexia....
...I'll get me coat.
Hey I like those jokes ;)
Heard about the dyslexic devil worshoper?
sold his soul to santa... ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 21:45:00 -
[91]
Edited by: Qui Shon on 29/07/2009 21:45:27
Originally by: Whitehound
No, I choose or over nor in this particular case. In an educated conversation would it be wrong, however.
"it would"
Also, if it's wrong, it's wrong. You can write it incorrectly on purpose if you want, but that doesn't change it's status as wrong.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 22:27:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Qui Shon Also, if it's wrong, it's wrong. You can write it incorrectly on purpose if you want, but that doesn't change it's status as wrong.
Grammar serves us, but we do not serve grammar. If I choose to write something wrong, then I am obviously not doing it to serve grammar but a different purpose. It may not get me applause from a grammar teacher, but if it gets you thinking then it is a superior win. --
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 22:36:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Qui Shon Also, if it's wrong, it's wrong. You can write it incorrectly on purpose if you want, but that doesn't change it's status as wrong.
Grammar serves us, but we do not serve grammar. If I choose to write something wrong, then I am obviously not doing it to serve grammar but a different purpose. It may not get me applause from a grammar teacher, but if it gets you thinking then it is a superior win.
Gets me thinking that I need a Whitehound to English translation script. I guess you win?????
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 22:56:00 -
[94]
I have yet to see how giving prisoners better food, better shelter and better entertainment than someone in the army is a good idea. Prison is punishment not a holiday camp.
|
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 22:59:00 -
[95]
Originally by: baltec1 I have yet to see how giving prisoners better food, better shelter and better entertainment than someone in the army is a good idea. Prison is punishment not a holiday camp.
Its not hard to beat Army food TBH ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 23:00:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 23:05:07
Originally by: THE L0CK Gets me thinking that I need a Whitehound to English translation script.
You need more than that. You would need to stop that train of thought of yours from spinning around in circles. Read a book or watch a movie! --
|
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 23:10:00 -
[97]
We should just let criminals run around free because it's not their fault they were sent to jail. It's the cops fault.
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 23:21:00 -
[98]
Originally by: baltec1 I have yet to see how giving prisoners better food, better shelter and better entertainment than someone in the army is a good idea. Prison is punishment not a holiday camp.
Way back in the older days I've been told by many that the court used to give a person the option of going to jail or going into the military and for the life of me I can't figure out why they stopped this.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 23:24:00 -
[99]
Edited by: Whitehound on 29/07/2009 23:26:13
Originally by: Munchees We should just let criminals run around free because it's not their fault they were sent to jail. It's the cops fault.
I have a better idea! We watch them and if they behave well then we reduce their sentence!
How crazy would this be? --
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 23:26:00 -
[100]
Originally by: nahtoh
Originally by: baltec1 I have yet to see how giving prisoners better food, better shelter and better entertainment than someone in the army is a good idea. Prison is punishment not a holiday camp.
Its not hard to beat Army food TBH
Hey, we used to get pea soup and pancakes on thursdays when at the base. Yum yum. And the curry chicken field dinner thingy was pretty good too. It's not, say, veal with a nice neuf de Pape, but hey, simple things remain throroughly enjoyable and shouldn't be dismissed easily.
|
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 23:28:00 -
[101]
Originally by: THE L0CK
Originally by: baltec1 I have yet to see how giving prisoners better food, better shelter and better entertainment than someone in the army is a good idea. Prison is punishment not a holiday camp.
Way back in the older days I've been told by many that the court used to give a person the option of going to jail or going into the military and for the life of me I can't figure out why they stopped this.
Did you see bad lads army? That show proved without a doubt that dumping them into the army is the best way to change them.
|
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 23:33:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Whitehound
I have a better idea! We watch them and if they behave well then we reduce their sentence!
How crazy would this be?
Because nobody could EVER act good while in jail, and then once free go back to their criminal behavior. The US doesn't want these good people going free or they'd be looking for jobs too.
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
Krystal Vernet
Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 23:34:00 -
[103]
Originally by: THE L0CK
Originally by: baltec1 I have yet to see how giving prisoners better food, better shelter and better entertainment than someone in the army is a good idea. Prison is punishment not a holiday camp.
Way back in the older days I've been told by many that the court used to give a person the option of going to jail or going into the military and for the life of me I can't figure out why they stopped this.
They should bring that back.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 23:45:00 -
[104]
Edited by: Qui Shon on 29/07/2009 23:53:19
Yeah, let's be tough on prisoners, that'll reduce crime, great strategy. Just look at good ol US of A, **** yeah! Toughest sentencing of all the western countries, and also the highest incarceration rates, *by far*. Not to mention the only one still using capital punishment (or has Britain reverted to it's medieval ways also?).
But let's forget USA also have the highest rates of violent crime out of western nations, *by far*. That might make us take a deeper look at whether "tough on crime" policies work, and we wouldn't want that, since it feels *so good* to wish bad things to bad people.
EDIT: The army bit, sure, why not. A bit of structure and order might do hooligans some good. Then again, are you sure you want to give nasty people military training? You don't think that will just create more potent gangbangers in the long run?
Don't professional armies turn down people with a record?
And wasn't "prisoner recruitment" traditionally used to create high risk cannon fodder units? In these piddly wars the west is fighting these days, we don't use those much anymore, at least not unless they're allies from some 3rd world country nobody really cares about.
|
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 00:28:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Qui Shon Edited by: Qui Shon on 29/07/2009 23:53:19
EDIT: The army bit, sure, why not. A bit of structure and order might do hooligans some good. Then again, are you sure you want to give nasty people military training? You don't think that will just create more potent gangbangers in the long run?
Don't professional armies turn down people with a record?
And wasn't "prisoner recruitment" traditionally used to create high risk cannon fodder units? In these piddly wars the west is fighting these days, we don't use those much anymore, at least not unless they're allies from some 3rd world country nobody really cares about.
Yeah I see what your saying about that Qui, perhaps some kind of civil corps? Doing good deeds or hell some kind of reconstruction work in 3rd world countrys or disater relief? ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 00:38:00 -
[106]
Originally by: nahtoh
Originally by: Qui Shon Edited by: Qui Shon on 29/07/2009 23:53:19
EDIT: The army bit, sure, why not. A bit of structure and order might do hooligans some good. Then again, are you sure you want to give nasty people military training? You don't think that will just create more potent gangbangers in the long run?
Don't professional armies turn down people with a record?
And wasn't "prisoner recruitment" traditionally used to create high risk cannon fodder units? In these piddly wars the west is fighting these days, we don't use those much anymore, at least not unless they're allies from some 3rd world country nobody really cares about.
Yeah I see what your saying about that Qui, perhaps some kind of civil corps? Doing good deeds or hell some kind of reconstruction work in 3rd world countrys or disater relief?
Just because you force somebody to do a good deed doesn't make them a good person, nor will it make them a good person.
You people should read (or for those with low attention spans, watch) A Clockwork Orange. He fakes good behavior in order to get into a program that will let him out of jail. Although what happens to him messes up his brain, that gets fixed and he goes back to being a bad person (although at the end of the book he begins to think it might be time to stop his criminal behavior, but only because it's starting to bore him).
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
JordanParey
Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 00:46:00 -
[107]
Originally by: THE L0CK Edited by: THE L0CK on 27/07/2009 23:27:47
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: THE L0CK Read the question again please.
I did and I do not think that you are asking a fair question.
It is simply not possible for him to be better qualified and to give me a problem at the same time.
Either he is better qualified and that means there is no problem, or he is not better qualified and because there is a problem.
You seem to making it more difficult for yourself than the question is and/or having major translation problems.
This will be the last time I explain this because I honestly am starting to think you are just trolling me again like last time (I haven't forgotten).
Scenario 2:
Let's say you own a small shop that repairs and sells computers and your business is doing well enough that you can afford to hire someone to work part or full time giving you more free time in life.
Now before you are 2 applications.
The first application is your standard Joe. No criminal record but on the same side no real schooling/training for what you are looking for.
Applicant 2 has just been paroled from prison. According to his application he went to prison for several years for burglary or theft, BUT, while he was there he took several computer technology courses that the prison offers making him more knowledgeable and better qualified for your little business.
Now since you want the applicant to open the store for you this would require giving that person a set of keys to the store. Which would you end up choosing and why?
This is Scenario 2. Last time you said no to the criminal. Read the question, ponder it, and detail your answer clearly.
My answer is that I would hire the man who went to prison. While I think I would be understandably..cautious about hiring him due to his past experiences, I would see his taking computer classes as trying to reform himself so he could live a good life the legitimate way. Hiring someone who knows NOTHING or next to nothing about how your business runs or the services/goods it provides could prove to be much more disastrous than hiring the ex-con in the first place.
Besides, electronics stores frequently purvey expensive wares in addition to the repair service- I would imagine that they keep very meticulous records on work done, as well as receipts, inventories, employee files and statistics, and data pertaining to the amount of business done in a cycle.
While it may not be possible to monitor the newly-hired excon employee all the time, the real dilemma is how much trust you should put in him. Giving an employee the keys to the store, or the keys to the storage room, or keys to the register, is very serious. Making him feel untrustworthy might push him to steal from you, fudge records, etc. Human decisionmaking processes and rationality become very interesting when faced with opportunities..
|
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 00:57:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Munchees
Originally by: nahtoh
Originally by: Qui Shon Edited by: Qui Shon on 29/07/2009 23:53:19
EDIT: The army bit, sure, why not. A bit of structure and order might do hooligans some good. Then again, are you sure you want to give nasty people military training? You don't think that will just create more potent gangbangers in the long run?
Don't professional armies turn down people with a record?
And wasn't "prisoner recruitment" traditionally used to create high risk cannon fodder units? In these piddly wars the west is fighting these days, we don't use those much anymore, at least not unless they're allies from some 3rd world country nobody really cares about.
Yeah I see what your saying about that Qui, perhaps some kind of civil corps? Doing good deeds or hell some kind of reconstruction work in 3rd world countrys or disater relief?
Just because you force somebody to do a good deed doesn't make them a good person, nor will it make them a good person.
You people should read (or for those with low attention spans, watch) A Clockwork Orange. He fakes good behavior in order to get into a program that will let him out of jail. Although what happens to him messes up his brain, that gets fixed and he goes back to being a bad person (although at the end of the book he begins to think it might be time to stop his criminal behavior, but only because it's starting to bore him).
No it would not, but it would also get some good out of them and may actualy get them thinking about others in way that does not revolve around screwing them over. Might even instill a sense of pride and self worth.
But yeah why try and do anything they might after all wear a boilersuit a bowler hat and and do nasty things... ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 01:00:00 -
[109]
Originally by: nahtoh
No it would not, but it would also get some good out of them and may actualy get them thinking about others in way that does not revolve around screwing them over. Might even instill a sense of pride and self worth.
But yeah why try and do anything they might after all wear a boilersuit a bowler hat and and do nasty things...
True, but if they're raised in an environment that teaches them that stealing and killing people because they are from a different part of the neighborhood is okay, then it will be much harder for them to learn any lesson at all
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
JordanParey
Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 01:00:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Jacob Mei
Originally by: Awesome Possum Too many people go the strict positive reinforcement, or strict negative reinforcement route.
And then theirs the third route where the parents dont care one way or another and leave their kids up to their own devices. In my opinion those are the worst.
I disagree a bit with your last sentence. If one instills ideas of morals and values in their children at a young age, you'd be surprised how kisd left to their own devices turn out.
Take me, for example.
My mother and father were never married, and ended up splitting up when I was about a year old, give or take a few months. This resulted in my mother suddenly becoming a single parent (receiving child support ofc) and having to raise me pretty much by herself for a good portion of my early life. I lived with her from one year old to ten years old. In the meantime, she helped me learn what was wrong and what was right (to an extent) and reinforced these lessons with relatively mild positive and negative reinforcement. I would occasionally go to Sunday School (yawn) but most of the time, I would just sleep in on Sundays and play outside. My mother worked as a schoolteacher during the day and a waitress by night(she had to get to work at 8am, school for me usually started at 7:30, so I was left catching the bus by myself in the morning, and coming home to an empty apartment in the afternoon.)
This left me to my own devices and I rarely, if ever, got into any serious trouble. When I was ten I moved in with my dad and was given more freedom than ever, with my dad working from ten in the morning to around 6:30 or 7 at night. I still never really got into huge trouble, and as a result of my being left alone most of the time I am used to being alone, without getting into trouble (consequences are bad, mm'kay?) and my parents trust me a whole ****ton at 19 (we even discussed my first car being an Infiniti G35 coupe...too bad we couldn't find one in my price range)
This has led me to believe that only mild positive and negative reinforcement are needed. Too much positive reinforcement and the child can become spoiled. Too much negative and the child will grow to be...well.. they'll have a complex or bad behavior of some sort.
Instead of rewarding them for everything, instead let them know that they are doing well and you are proud of them. Being told that my mother/father/grandmother(who is like a second mom to me) usually made me feel better than anything else. Interestingly enough, I've been told that my family would be proud of me whether I became a rocket scientist or mass murderer (we had a good laugh about the fact that I would probably make a much better mass murderer, were I to pursue that career path. Probably has to do with all the reading I do about crimes, espionage, etc etc etc lol)
|
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 01:37:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Awesome Possum That is one of the points of being a parent, knowing exactly what your child is thinking and doing.
So tell, how do you do this? Are you omni-present and -knowing like a God?
Well now.
Real parents are those who are aware of what their children are reading and watching. Real parents are the ones spending quality time with their children, teaching them 'proper' behaviour in private, public, at the table, etc.
So taking that into account, along with all the life experience a parent has already gone through, it should not take omniSCIENT (word you were looking for) parent to know what they're child is thinking and doing at any given time.
By the way. One does NOT have to be a biological father/mother to be a parent. The term is "legal parental guardian" for a reason. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 01:44:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Qui Shon But let's forget USA also have the highest rates of violent crime out of western nations, *by far*. That might make us take a deeper look at whether "tough on crime" policies work, and we wouldn't want that, since it feels *so good* to wish bad things to bad people.
Guess Jamaica, Haiti, Brazil aren't "western" nations, even if they're on the same longitude as the US.
So.. whats your definition of a "western" nation?
As for letting criminals in the Army. Hell no. Right now the Army (and other branches) are over their monthly enlistment quotas. They're turning away all but the best qualified. Why should we lose spots to criminals and degenerates? ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 02:01:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Munchees on 30/07/2009 02:01:24
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Originally by: Qui Shon But let's forget USA also have the highest rates of violent crime out of western nations, *by far*. That might make us take a deeper look at whether "tough on crime" policies work, and we wouldn't want that, since it feels *so good* to wish bad things to bad people.
Guess Jamaica, Haiti, Brazil aren't "western" nations, even if they're on the same longitude as the US.
So.. whats your definition of a "western" nation?
As for letting criminals in the Army. Hell no. Right now the Army (and other branches) are over their monthly enlistment quotas. They're turning away all but the best qualified. Why should we lose spots to criminals and degenerates?
Countries using the Latin Alphabet in their main languages are considered part of the Western World. Guatemala (Spanish) has the highest crime rate of these countries.
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 02:25:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Originally by: Qui Shon But let's forget USA also have the highest rates of violent crime out of western nations, *by far*. That might make us take a deeper look at whether "tough on crime" policies work, and we wouldn't want that, since it feels *so good* to wish bad things to bad people.
Guess Jamaica, Haiti, Brazil aren't "western" nations, even if they're on the same longitude as the US.
So.. whats your definition of a "western" nation?
As for letting criminals in the Army. Hell no. Right now the Army (and other branches) are over their monthly enlistment quotas. They're turning away all but the best qualified. Why should we lose spots to criminals and degenerates?
1950s style National service for repeat offenders.
|
Orion Eridanus
Dakota HeadHunters
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 02:50:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Qui Shon Edited by: Qui Shon on 29/07/2009 23:53:19
Yeah, let's be tough on prisoners, that'll reduce crime, great strategy. Just look at good ol US of A, **** yeah! Toughest sentencing of all the western countries, and also the highest incarceration rates, *by far*. Not to mention the only one still using capital punishment (or has Britain reverted to it's medieval ways also?).
But let's forget USA also have the highest rates of violent crime out of western nations, *by far*. That might make us take a deeper look at whether "tough on crime" policies work, and we wouldn't want that, since it feels *so good* to wish bad things to bad people.
Prime example of correlation does not equal causation
It appears with your second paragraph that the "tough on crime" policy is actually causing more violent crimes. The US population is almost 4 times that of the largest non US western nation (Germany). If you were to increase the population in the other countries to match that of the US then I'm pretty sure they'd be pretty close to matching the US for incarceration rates.
Originally by: Paulo Damarr That is a most Excellent Drake fitting, you are lucky to have survived.
|
Dirk Magnum
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 06:00:00 -
[116]
The US has a lot of badly decaying areas with large population densities where illicit economies can run rampant thanks to a dearth of legitimate alternatives. Some of these people need to be arrested, yes. Illegal gun traders and violent gang leaders are obviously detrimental to society and perpetuate violent crime wherever they go. But the underlying problems that produce these people isn't helped at all by merely rounding them up and imposing harsh sentences, not that I'm saying we shouldn't also do that in the case of violent felons.
There are three main reasons the US prison system is so overpopulated: 1. ridiculous drug laws 2. economic decay from the inner city to rural towns bolstering crime rates of all sorts 3. police forces much better at their job and considerably less corrupt than those in other countries suffering from problems 1 and 2
Crimes of passion and premeditated acts of theft or violence will never be done away with. That said, people in vulnerable areas need to be put to work, which at this point would require a historic effort of bringing back manufacturing jobs en masse to this country. Finding a way to reduce birth rates will only help that much more. The US has a very high birth rate for an industrial 21st century nation, which is a drain on resources and a problem considering the limited job market and dollars available for schools and medicine. But just ensuring that people have access to education and jobs would go a long way towards reducing crime. We know that's true. The crime rates in Europe and America were far higher in pre-industrial times. Violent crime especially.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 06:58:00 -
[117]
Edited by: Whitehound on 30/07/2009 06:58:49
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Originally by: Awesome Possum That is one of the points of being a parent, knowing exactly what your child is thinking and doing.
Real parents are those who are aware of what their children are reading and watching. ...
You still have not answered the question. How do you know what exactly your child is thinking and doing? --
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 07:46:00 -
[118]
Originally by: nahtoh
Yeah I see what your saying about that Qui, perhaps some kind of civil corps? Doing good deeds or hell some kind of reconstruction work in 3rd world countrys or disater relief?
Yes, that sounds good. Most positions in armies aren't for frontline infantry afterall, so there is loads of work they could do.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 07:59:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Guess Jamaica, Haiti, Brazil aren't "western" nations, even if they're on the same longitude as the US.
So.. whats your definition of a "western" nation?
The "west" in western nation refers only to European geography, but the term includes angloamericans as well as Australia and New Zeeland. I.e. west europe + anglos.
So no, Brazil is not a western nation.
I'll try to remember to use the term "developed world" instead, perhaps that will result in less confusion with Americans? Or do you prefer 1st world? One problem with these terms is that they include Japan as well, and then the list of countries with cap punishment grows by one, to two. Then again, some would count Japan among "western" nations as well, using the term as a synonym for "developed", but I'm not so sure that is a good idea.
|
Dirk Magnum
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 08:09:00 -
[120]
Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 30/07/2009 08:10:03 I have no problem with capital punishment in principle. In practice, the US has major problems with sentencing equity when it comes to race and gender, not only for capital crimes but for major offenses in general. Minorities tend to get it worse than whites for the same crimes, and men get it worse than women. Until this is sorted out I'd support a national moratorium on death sentences.
Capital punishment probably doesn't dissuade crime, and I've heard it doesn't help the victims' families feel any sense of relief. But both of those issues are irrelevant to me. The fact of the matter is that forcibly confining someone to a prison for the rest of their lives is cruel, and some criminals are too dangerous to ever be offered so much as the glimmer of a chance of being able to escape incarceration. Some people, quite frankly, need to be removed from society in an assuredly permanent fashion.
|
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 08:12:00 -
[121]
Originally by: Orion Eridanus
Prime example of correlation does not equal causation
It appears with your second paragraph that the "tough on crime" policy is actually causing more violent crimes. The US population is almost 4 times that of the largest non US western nation (Germany). If you were to increase the population in the other countries to match that of the US then I'm pretty sure they'd be pretty close to matching the US for incarceration rates.
Incarceration RATE means per person, total population doesn't matter at all. Also, the population density in the US is 31 people per sq km. Germany? 232. That's SEVEN times the population density. Sure the US has a lot of cities with a lot of people, so does west europe. I checked two cities density, picked randomly from the countries you chose. Los Angeles: 3041/km2 vs Munich: 4370 / km2. That's nearly 1,5 times as densely packed.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 08:17:00 -
[122]
Originally by: Dirk Magnum
There are three main reasons the US prison system is so overpopulated: 1. ridiculous drug laws 2. economic decay from the inner city to rural towns bolstering crime rates of all sorts 3. police forces much better at their job and considerably less corrupt than those in other countries suffering from problems 1 and 2
Don't forget, privatizing prisons. Call me a tinfoil hatter if you want, but if you make a profitable business out of it, you *are* going to get expansion. Lobbyists and special interest groups rule much of the world, after all, albeit indirectly.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 08:25:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Dirk Magnum The fact of the matter is that forcibly confining someone to a prison for the rest of their lives is cruel, and some criminals are too dangerous to ever be offered so much as the glimmer of a chance of being able to escape incarceration. Some people, quite frankly, need to be removed from society in an assuredly permanent fashion.
The cruelty would depend on the prison in question, no?
The biggest problem with "permanent solutions" is that innocents are being removed along with the guilty. Mistakes have, and will continue to be made, despite lenghty processes.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 17:24:00 -
[124]
Originally by: Whitehound How do you know what exactly your child is thinking and doing?
This is why you shouldn't breed.
I have already answered your question. The Lock has already answered your question. Keep your pants on. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Riki Halcyon
Caldari Sativa Imports Ltd.
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 17:32:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Qui Shon
Originally by: Dirk Magnum
There are three main reasons the US prison system is so overpopulated: 1. ridiculous drug laws 2. economic decay from the inner city to rural towns bolstering crime rates of all sorts 3. police forces much better at their job and considerably less corrupt than those in other countries suffering from problems 1 and 2
Don't forget, privatizing prisons. Call me a tinfoil hatter if you want, but if you make a profitable business out of it, you *are* going to get expansion. Lobbyists and special interest groups rule much of the world, after all, albeit indirectly.
Both of you guys hit the nail on the head....I don't know much about the prison systems in Europe, but the US is becoming a prison nation. We have more people per ca pita locked up than any other developed nation in the world and the main two culprits really have nothing to do with crime:
1) drug policy - a little less than %50 of the prisoners in the US are in prison due to non-violent "crimes"... (now if we consider that some of the violent crimes are also related to drugs, we could see how legalizing consensual crimes would help to reduce the prison population by more than half).
2) privatization of prison system - corporate lobby is huge for higher minimum mandatory sentencing and harsher criminal policies. Companies that use prison labor and the companies that run the day to day activities of prisons have a vested interest in prisoners with long stays in prison as the companies' most expensive element is training the workers...so essentially the US has re-created slave labor in the form of prison labor....don't get me wrong, having prisoners do work is great if it is benefiting society or is simply to keep them busy - but to have prisoners due labor for pennies on the hour for the profit of corporations is pure evil.
Here are two sources for population of US prison system, which according to these sources has reached 7.2 million (including parole and probation).
CNN - good quote from article: "The United States has 5 percent of the world's population, but 25 percent of the world's prison inmates, the center said." Another crazy quote: "'Black adults are four times as likely as whites and nearly 2.5 times as likely as Hispanics to be under correctional control. One in 11 black adults -- 9.2 percent -- was under correctional supervision at year-end 2007,' the report said. 'And although the number of female offenders continues to grow, men of all races are under correctional control at a rate five times that of women.'"
And hey the socialist agree with CNN for once!
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 20:18:00 -
[126]
Edited by: Whitehound on 30/07/2009 20:22:23
Originally by: Awesome Possum This is why you shouldn't breed.
I have already answered your question. The Lock has already answered your question. Keep your pants on.
I have now reported you.
Please, give a proper answer. I want to know from you how you can know what exactly a child does and thinks.
I think that you post only BS and that you have no real interest in any discussion. Instead, when you are being ask to take responsibility for your comments do you only side step and bring insults. Frankly, you do not fit into here. --
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 20:41:00 -
[127]
Edited by: Mr Reeth on 30/07/2009 20:42:01 Oh great idea to get the prison population down... legalize drugs!!! We could cut it down even further by legalizing prostitution, robbery and murder!
And does anybody really think judges are handing out harsher punishments because the prisons are corporate run? I was born with a tinfoil hat on but that's too much even for me.
And there is no cause and effect relationship between poverty and crime in a nation where the poorest people are the fattest. Nobody has to make a choice between starvation and a life of crime. Saying that poor=criminal is an insult to the poor. And if it were true wouldn't the opposite be true making all rich people saints?
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 21:00:00 -
[128]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 30/07/2009 20:55:06
Originally by: Awesome Possum This is why you shouldn't breed.
I have already answered your question. The Lock has already answered your question. Keep your pants on.
I have now reported you.
Please, give a proper answer. I want to know from you how you can know what exactly a child does and thinks.
I think that you post only BS and that you have no real interest in any discussion. Instead, when you are being asked to take responsibility for your comments do you only side step and bring insults. Frankly, you do not fit into here.
Its cute when he plays forum moderator. But that is your favorite tactic isn't it, to troll people and get them into saying something out of line and then report them. Although if you really reported what you quoted from Possum then the moderators are going to hate you for wasting their time. I guess I'm gonna get reported as well but oh well, go ahead and cry to moderation when you can't hold your end of a debate. And frankly, YOU do not fit in here. See I can do it too.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 21:19:00 -
[129]
Edited by: Whitehound on 30/07/2009 21:22:46
Originally by: THE L0CK I guess I'm gonna get reported as well ...
Yes, for trolling.
You are no help in this discussion. Instead, do you both have a problem with me and I cannot help you, and the only people who can help you are the moderators. --
|
|
CCP Zymurgist
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 21:36:00 -
[130]
*cough* Play nice.
Discussion of moderation removed.
Zymurgist Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us |
|
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 22:43:00 -
[131]
Edited by: baltec1 on 30/07/2009 22:48:40 Edited by: baltec1 on 30/07/2009 22:45:51 Bah seems the vid wont work, but still there is nothing better than a beasting to get people to conform. No more Sky sports and halloween parties, if they behave then they will having a boring time, if they misbehave they get a beasting.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.30 23:28:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Mr Reeth
And does anybody really think judges are handing out harsher punishments because the prisons are corporate run? I was born with a tinfoil hat on but that's too much even for me.
Not directly obviously, apart from a few corrupt judges perhaps, but rulings are affected not only by new legislation and SC decisions (don't forget that even though it's supposed to be independent, SC is becoming increasingly political, especially during Bush administration) but also by the current political climate and regional government policy. In all these things lobby groups and campaign contributors have influence.
Quote:
And there is no cause and effect relationship between poverty and crime in a nation where the poorest people are the fattest. Nobody has to make a choice between starvation and a life of crime. Saying that poor=criminal is an insult to the poor. And if it were true wouldn't the opposite be true making all rich people saints?
Inequality always leads to higher crime rates, even if the worst off aren't literally starving. It's not the only factor obviously, but it's an important one. That certainly doesn't mean poor=criminal, and I don't think anyone has even suggested that. As for rich people being saints, that's gotta be the joke of the year.
|
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 00:19:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Qui Shon
Not directly obviously, apart from a few corrupt judges perhaps, but rulings are affected not only by new legislation and SC decisions (don't forget that even though it's supposed to be independent, SC is becoming increasingly political, especially during Bush administration) but also by the current political climate and regional government policy. In all these things lobby groups and campaign contributors have influence.
In the end though, the verdict is still decided by a jury of random people.
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
Riki Halcyon
Caldari Sativa Imports Ltd.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 00:34:00 -
[134]
Originally by: Mr Reeth Edited by: Mr Reeth on 30/07/2009 20:42:01 Oh great idea to get the prison population down... legalize drugs!!! We could cut it down even further by legalizing prostitution, robbery and murder!
And does anybody really think judges are handing out harsher punishments because the prisons are corporate run? I was born with a tinfoil hat on but that's too much even for me.
Please read my post carefully - Lobbyist from corporate interests making money off of the prison system lobby for the highest MANDATORY MINIMUM sentences possible. This means the judges have no say and no choice in the matter - it comes directly from legislation.
And yes, imho prostitution should be legal as well - obviously not robbery - again read...consensual acts, meaning those acts that people consent to and that are not harming anyone else other than themselves. Really, though if alcohol can be legal then why not everything else - there really aren't many drugs that are more destructive than alcohol (crystal meth, h*r*in, and crack being three that rival alcohol - but alcohol is the most destructive - accounts for most deaths annually). But m*riju*n* illegal and alcohol legal....please the system is ridiculous.
Originally by: Mr Reeth And there is no cause and effect relationship between poverty and crime in a nation where the poorest people are the fattest. Nobody has to make a choice between starvation and a life of crime. Saying that poor=criminal is an insult to the poor. And if it were true wouldn't the opposite be true making all rich people saints?
Qui Shon did a good job responding to this element in your argument. While we are at it though let's take a look at the difference in sentencing between the sentencing related to two illegal drugs without the US penal system - crack and c*c**ne.
C*c**ne - more expensive, potentially can be turned into more crack than it's own weight - meaning without c*c**ne there is no crack. Yet c*c**ne has much lower mandatory minimum sentences than crack.
Crack - usually associated with poorer people, by weight cheaper, more accessible in poorer communities, and a derivative of c*c**ne, yet for some strange reason by weight has a higher mandatory minimum sentence in our penal system.
Hmm, so one could argue that this is an example of the poor being mistreated by the penal system - but hey maybe not.
And Munchees, yes the verdict is decided by the jury - but not the length of the sentence.
|
Zarro Starkiler
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 02:42:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Al Anders Too classical. What about sothing modern? Like dropping a high voltage cable in water near sandy beach filled with people.
I've tried it, the fatality rate is disapointingly low. My advice, build a Rocket Propelled Chainsaw and fire it at the polition and/or small child of your choice.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 04:37:00 -
[136]
Originally by: CCP Zymurgist *cough* Play nice.
Discussion of moderation removed.
Play nice? You must've never played in sandboxes as a kid. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 05:29:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Mr Reeth Edited by: Mr Reeth on 30/07/2009 20:42:01 Oh great idea to get the prison population down... legalize drugs!!! We could cut it down even further by legalizing prostitution, robbery and murder!
And does anybody really think judges are handing out harsher punishments because the prisons are corporate run? I was born with a tinfoil hat on but that's too much even for me.
And there is no cause and effect relationship between poverty and crime in a nation where the poorest people are the fattest. Nobody has to make a choice between starvation and a life of crime. Saying that poor=criminal is an insult to the poor. And if it were true wouldn't the opposite be true making all rich people saints?
More people die from alcohol than weed. It has never been proven that weed was related in any death (unless it was a drug war, but weed related drug wars wouldn't happen if weed was legal).
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
Evthron Macyntire
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 06:06:00 -
[138]
Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 30/07/2009 08:10:03 I have no problem with capital punishment in principle. In practice, the US has major problems with sentencing equity when it comes to race and gender, not only for capital crimes but for major offenses in general. Minorities tend to get it worse than whites for the same crimes, and men get it worse than women. Until this is sorted out I'd support a national moratorium on death sentences.
Capital punishment probably doesn't dissuade crime, and I've heard it doesn't help the victims' families feel any sense of relief. But both of those issues are irrelevant to me. The fact of the matter is that forcibly confining someone to a prison for the rest of their lives is cruel, and some criminals are too dangerous to ever be offered so much as the glimmer of a chance of being able to escape incarceration. Some people, quite frankly, need to be removed from society in an assuredly permanent fashion.
So a disproportionate number of minorities commit more violent crimes then "white" people, so that makes "the man" a racist? Fact isn't racism. You are a racist for assuming only white people can be racist. You encourage racial divisiveness with that attitude. If I say something negative about someone who does not share my culture/beliefs/race/gender/choice of apparel/orientation MAYBE, just MAYBE it is because I just DON'T LIKE THAT PERSON. But that is too hard to comprehend, being political correct means I am a racist, sexist, w/e.
This is what equality looks like. So shut your face.
Capital punishment MIGHT deter crime if they skip the years of appeals and just get it over with. ------------------------------ Sigs like this. |
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 06:15:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Mr Reeth Edited by: Mr Reeth on 30/07/2009 20:42:01 Oh great idea to get the prison population down... legalize drugs!!! We could cut it down even further by legalizing prostitution, robbery and murder!
I agree with legalizing prostitution. I disagree with legalizing mind destroying substances. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 06:23:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Awesome Possum I agree with legalizing prostitution.
Who needs it? --
|
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 06:53:00 -
[141]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Awesome Possum I agree with legalizing prostitution.
Who needs it?
Don't know about "need", I haven't heard about people dying from lack of call girls, but apparently people do "want" their services. You know that old joke about the oldest profession in the world? Well, it's not a joke. Even if it isn't 100% accurate, as someone had to do something else first, to aquire something to pay with. Oh, trophy wives and all gold diggers = single client prostitutes.
|
Dirk Magnum
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 07:27:00 -
[142]
Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 31/07/2009 07:28:47
Originally by: Evthron Macyntire
Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 30/07/2009 08:10:03 I have no problem with capital punishment in principle. In practice, the US has major problems with sentencing equity when it comes to race and gender, not only for capital crimes but for major offenses in general. Minorities tend to get it worse than whites for the same crimes, and men get it worse than women. Until this is sorted out I'd support a national moratorium on death sentences.
Capital punishment probably doesn't dissuade crime, and I've heard it doesn't help the victims' families feel any sense of relief. But both of those issues are irrelevant to me. The fact of the matter is that forcibly confining someone to a prison for the rest of their lives is cruel, and some criminals are too dangerous to ever be offered so much as the glimmer of a chance of being able to escape incarceration. Some people, quite frankly, need to be removed from society in an assuredly permanent fashion.
So a disproportionate number of minorities commit more violent crimes then "white" people, so that makes "the man" a racist? Fact isn't racism. You are a racist for assuming only white people can be racist. You encourage racial divisiveness with that attitude. If I say something negative about someone who does not share my culture/beliefs/race/gender/choice of apparel/orientation MAYBE, just MAYBE it is because I just DON'T LIKE THAT PERSON. But that is too hard to comprehend, being political correct means I am a racist, sexist, w/e.
This is what equality looks like. So shut your face.
Capital punishment MIGHT deter crime if they skip the years of appeals and just get it over with.
You read something into my post that wasn't there or wasn't intended. Proportionally speaking, minorities and men are given stiffer sentences than whites and women for crimes with similar details. Obviously when the level of brutality and premeditation differ so should the sentence. The fact that certain minorities proportionally appear to commit more crimes than whites is irrelevant to what I was saying, and to be honest crime rates can be tied more closely to economic levels than race... it's just that minorities tend to also occupy the lower economic classes at disproportionately high levels. The non-racist outlook (and the rational one) would be to assume that poor people have more reason to commit crimes, and what race they are has nothing to do with anything. The alternative is that minorities are naturally violent, which is biologically unfounded.
I didn't say anything about culture whatsoever. Race is a cultural construct that varies from country to country, or even within countries. The US system of classifying race is just particularly lacking in nuance, which has its upsides and downsides.
I didn't say anything about political correctness either. I don't even know what that term means anymore, despite hearing both sides of the American political spectrum decrying its evils.
Equality is a term that's actually quite vacuous in this case. Criminal sentencing is supposed to be colorblind. Common offenses warrant common sentences.
As for capital punishment deterring crime better if appeals were, dare I use the term, nerfed, I don't see how. Maybe the appeals process needs reform. I dunno. I do know that killing the ability of defendants to actually have a chance of proving their innocence or showing a reason for clemency doesn't seem like it would have anything to do with deterrence.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 07:48:00 -
[143]
Edited by: Whitehound on 31/07/2009 07:50:20
Originally by: Qui Shon Don't know about "need", I haven't heard about people dying from lack of call girls, ...
I was hoping for "because of Falcon", really.
It is not about what you need, but about what women need. Women do not need it and men shall not be allowed to pay for it. Women will do almost anything to support a family or just their own life. That does not mean there is a market for a new service. --
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 08:38:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Whitehound It is not about what you need, but about what women need. Women do not need it and men shall not be allowed to pay for it. Women will do almost anything to support a family or just their own life. That does not mean there is a market for a new service.
Women may not need it (seriously, you need to stop using that word, as it's useless without a "for x" at the end, or an implicit equivalent) but male heterosexual prostitution certainly exists, even if it isn't nearly as common.
"Men shall not be allowed to pay for it"....Jeez. Men DO pay for it, in so many ways I can't even begin to count them all. And that's BEFORE it becomes what you call prostitution. What you are opposing, is taking the bull**** out of the exchange of "x for sex", making it transparent, honest, direct. X being gifts of various kinds, or summed up as the easy life, if that wasn't obvious.
As for you last sentence, it's certainly not a new service, it's the oldest one in existence, and it is never going to go away, no matter how many laws you come up with. Anti-prostitution sentiments have NOTHING to do with protecting the actual sex-workers or potential workers themselves. The ones opposed to legalized prostitution don't give a crap about those people, they just can't stand the exchange being so direct and in the open. Possible motives for that, in turn, is an interesting subject, but not for this thread.
Oh, and just for the record, I have never used such services, as you define them, nor am I likely to, and that wouldn't change depending on legality. I wouldn't start using pot either if it became legal, though I did my share of experimentation during Uni, but I still think it should be legal.
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 08:43:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Munchees
More people die from alcohol than weed. It has never been proven that weed was related in any death (unless it was a drug war, but weed related drug wars wouldn't happen if weed was legal).
Weed causes all sorts of mental disorders, primarily paranoia. It also has the same effect upon driving as alcohol and can be just as addictive to people.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 08:55:00 -
[146]
Edited by: Whitehound on 31/07/2009 09:08:34
Originally by: Qui Shon Oh, and just for the record, I have never used such services, as you define them, nor am I likely to, and that wouldn't change depending on legality. I wouldn't start using pot either if it became legal, though I did my share of experimentation during Uni, but I still think it should be legal.
If it is of no importance to you then why do you not want it to be illegal and to protect women? You do not want children to prostitute themselves either, do you? There are enough people out there who pay for this, too, and I am sure you never used such a service either or need it ("it" being the service).
And get over your problem of the word "need". I need women. It would be a dead world without them. --
|
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 09:51:00 -
[147]
Edited by: Munchees on 31/07/2009 09:55:20
Originally by: baltec1
Weed causes all sorts of mental disorders, primarily paranoia. It also has the same effect upon driving as alcohol and can be just as addictive to people.
Your only paranoid while on it. Just like while drunk you can't see straight.
Alcohol does just as much, if not more, damage in a faster amount of time to the brain than weed does. You can overdose on alcohol easily. To overdose on weed you would have to smoke/eat almost half your body weight. So why isn't alcohol banned? Because everyone drinks it.
Studies have shown that most people have used weed at least once in their life.
The idea that weed causes mental disorders is old propaganda. Mental disorders result from genetics. A person with schizophrenia was born with it, however, it did not develop/get triggered until a certain time in their life.
Smoking weed causes your mind to go a bit funny for a few hours. But it's nothing like getting hammered. You can remember what you did on weed, and can generally make decisions while on it. However, when you're hammered, you can't even figure out how to stand.
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 10:02:00 -
[148]
Originally by: Munchees Smoking weed causes your mind to go a bit funny for a few hours. But it's nothing like getting hammered.
As soon as you legalize it will people get hammered and stoned. No, but thanks. Alcohol is evil and smoking is, too, but never should they be a reason to legalize other drugs. Instead, it is good that more and more people stop smoking. --
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 12:55:00 -
[149]
Originally by: Mr Reeth Edited by: Mr Reeth on 30/07/2009 20:42:01 Oh great idea to get the prison population down... legalize drugs!!! We could cut it down even further by legalizing prostitution, robbery and murder!
And does anybody really think judges are handing out harsher punishments because the prisons are corporate run? I was born with a tinfoil hat on but that's too much even for me.
You need an extra layer of tinfoil.
It was only a couple of months ago that a US judge was convicted for receiving kickbacks from a company that runs a private prison for juvenile offenders. The judge was sending everyone that came before him to this prison - one girl was imprisoned for sassing her pincipal on her own myspace.
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 13:09:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Munchees Edited by: Munchees on 31/07/2009 09:55:20
Originally by: baltec1
Weed causes all sorts of mental disorders, primarily paranoia. It also has the same effect upon driving as alcohol and can be just as addictive to people.
Your only paranoid while on it. Just like while drunk you can't see straight.
Alcohol does just as much, if not more, damage in a faster amount of time to the brain than weed does. You can overdose on alcohol easily. To overdose on weed you would have to smoke/eat almost half your body weight. So why isn't alcohol banned? Because everyone drinks it.
Studies have shown that most people have used weed at least once in their life.
The idea that weed causes mental disorders is old propaganda. Mental disorders result from genetics. A person with schizophrenia was born with it, however, it did not develop/get triggered until a certain time in their life.
Smoking weed causes your mind to go a bit funny for a few hours. But it's nothing like getting hammered. You can remember what you did on weed, and can generally make decisions while on it. However, when you're hammered, you can't even figure out how to stand.
Latest studies show that after weed was reduces to a class C drug mental health dissorder cases skyrocketed. As a result it is being upgraded to a class B.
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 13:13:00 -
[151]
Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: Munchees
More people die from alcohol than weed. It has never been proven that weed was related in any death (unless it was a drug war, but weed related drug wars wouldn't happen if weed was legal).
Weed causes all sorts of mental disorders, primarily paranoia. It also has the same effect upon driving as alcohol and can be just as addictive to people.
Proof!
|
Dirk Magnum
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 13:18:00 -
[152]
Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 31/07/2009 13:19:05
Originally by: baltec1 Latest studies show that after weed was reduces to a class C drug mental health dissorder cases skyrocketed. As a result it is being upgraded to a class B.
Because as usage increases it exacerbates preexisting psychoses, particularly schizophrenia. The psychoses were already there, but undetected in some of the people until ********* usage increased. The corresponding rise in detected psychoses resulted from this. The weed itself doesn't generate these disorders out of nowhere, or at least that's not proven as far as I know (not an expert.)
People with mental health disorders should never, ever use any drug of any sort that isn't designed to help their conditions. But that doesn't really help people whose symptoms start out so mild that nobody would suspect they even had the disorder until they started using drugs.
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 13:25:00 -
[153]
Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 31/07/2009 13:19:05
Originally by: baltec1 Latest studies show that after weed was reduces to a class C drug mental health dissorder cases skyrocketed. As a result it is being upgraded to a class B.
Because as usage increases it exacerbates preexisting psychoses, particularly schizophrenia. The psychoses were already there, but undetected in some of the people until ********* usage increased. The corresponding rise in detected psychoses resulted from this. The weed itself doesn't generate these disorders out of nowhere, or at least that's not proven as far as I know (not an expert.)
People with mental health disorders should never, ever use any drug of any sort that isn't designed to help their conditions. But that doesn't really help people whose symptoms start out so mild that nobody would suspect they even had the disorder until they started using drugs.
Actualy the way it works is that weed shuts down parts of the brain, over time this causes nural damage.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 14:06:00 -
[154]
Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 31/07/2009 13:19:05
Originally by: baltec1 Latest studies show that after weed was reduces to a class C drug mental health dissorder cases skyrocketed. As a result it is being upgraded to a class B.
Because as usage increases it exacerbates preexisting psychoses, particularly schizophrenia. The psychoses were already there, but undetected in some of the people until ********* usage increased. The corresponding rise in detected psychoses resulted from this. The weed itself doesn't generate these disorders out of nowhere, or at least that's not proven as far as I know (not an expert.)
People with mental health disorders should never, ever use any drug of any sort that isn't designed to help their conditions. But that doesn't really help people whose symptoms start out so mild that nobody would suspect they even had the disorder until they started using drugs.
Actualy the way it works is that weed shuts down parts of the brain, over time this causes nural damage.
Interesting. Link?
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 16:18:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 31/07/2009 13:19:05
Originally by: baltec1 Latest studies show that after weed was reduces to a class C drug mental health dissorder cases skyrocketed. As a result it is being upgraded to a class B.
Because as usage increases it exacerbates preexisting psychoses, particularly schizophrenia. The psychoses were already there, but undetected in some of the people until ********* usage increased. The corresponding rise in detected psychoses resulted from this. The weed itself doesn't generate these disorders out of nowhere, or at least that's not proven as far as I know (not an expert.)
People with mental health disorders should never, ever use any drug of any sort that isn't designed to help their conditions. But that doesn't really help people whose symptoms start out so mild that nobody would suspect they even had the disorder until they started using drugs.
Actualy the way it works is that weed shuts down parts of the brain, over time this causes nural damage.
Interesting. Link?
It was on BBC news 24 the other week.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 19:21:00 -
[156]
Edited by: Qui Shon on 31/07/2009 19:24:34
Originally by: Whitehound
If it is of no importance to you then why do you not want it to be illegal and to protect women? You do not want children to prostitute themselves either, do you? There are enough people out there who pay for this, too, and I am sure you never used such a service either or need it ("it" being the sex service).
Like I said, it's not about protecting the women who do it, and the effects of making it illegal do quite the opposite, actually. It needlessly endangers prostitutes and makes it that much MORE likely they'll end up as "property", rented out by "owners".
When it's legal, you can provide all sorts of safety nets available to the rest of society, including police, legal and health services, as well as control over their own "workplace". When you make it illegal, you take those safety nets away, making it that much easier, more likely, for organized crime control, and profit from them instead.
You're obviously not going to remove prostitution by outlawing it, as it has ALWAYS existed and most likely always will, as long as people have sex drives.
The real problems linked with prostitution, i.e. human trafficking, coercion, violence, slavery, those are illegal everywhere (civilized), but your method increases the likelyhood of them occurring.
Now, those are some reasons I think it should be legal. Then there's the hypocrisy of outlawing it, on grounds of "protecting women", and we don't like hypocrisy, do we? Legitimate reasons for outlawing prostitution are rather slim, hard to find, actually.
It's interesting you bring up children. We limit their right to self-governance because we think they are not mature enough to make certain decisions for themselves. Are you now saying women are like children, that women are also not capable of deciding for themselves? Was universal suffrage a bad idea, should we take that right away from women, since according to you they apparently aren't capable of making decisions for themselves, like we expect adults to be? Should we turn back the clock 200 years (much, much less in most regions, if you go beyond suffrage) on womens rights and womens independence? Is that what you're implying? Are you a chauvinist, Whitehound? Are you sexist?
Quote:
And get over your problem of the word "need". I need women. It would be a dead world without them.
See, now you've added a qualifier, a "for x", as it were. However, this particular "for x" has absolutely nothing to do with prostitution, or does it?
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 19:38:00 -
[157]
Originally by: Whitehound If it is of no importance to you then why do you not want it to be illegal and to protect women?
Its not about women, its about legally consenting adults. Sex is legal, selling is legal. There should be no law against selling something that can be given away for free.
Quote: You do not want children to prostitute themselves either, do you?
Because a child is a legally consenting adult, eh? Didn't the anti-gay marriage people already use this reasoning? Stop stealing.
Your arguments imply that legalizing prostitution is going to force women into it. Guess what, it already happens where its illegal. Legality would bring regulations, restrictions, and inspections.
You could post some concrete evidence, say number of illegal/enslaved prostitutes in countries where its legal vs where its not. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 20:55:00 -
[158]
Edited by: Whitehound on 31/07/2009 20:56:05
Originally by: Awesome Possum Its not about women, ..
It is about women. You do not see many men on the street, do you?
Quote: Your arguments imply that legalizing prostitution is going to force women into it.
No. And, yes, it does force women into it regardless of the legality.
Make it legal and you have women selling themselves for the minimum wage and while paying taxes for what you like to call "service". Their "customers" would not be allowed to choose a prostitute based on the age of the woman, because it would violate the right for equal employment. The "costumers" would not be allowed to bring a chicken or eat excrements out of a shoe, because it would violate health regulations, etc.
You really do think prostitution is a proper business, don't you?
I tell you what it is: prostitution is creeps and weirdos f'cking around with women. It has got little to do with what you call legally consenting adults. Prostitution is illegal by law. --
|
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 21:18:00 -
[159]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 31/07/2009 20:56:05
Originally by: Awesome Possum Its not about women, ..
It is about women. You do not see many men on the street, do you?
Quote: Your arguments imply that legalizing prostitution is going to force women into it.
No. And, yes, it does force women into it regardless of the legality.
Make it legal and you have women selling themselves for the minimum wage and while paying taxes for what you like to call "service". Their "customers" would not be allowed to choose a prostitute based on the age of the woman, because it would violate the right for equal employment. The "costumers" would not be allowed to bring a chicken or eat excrements out of a shoe, because it would violate health regulations, etc.
You really do think prostitution is a proper business, don't you?
I tell you what it is: prostitution is creeps and weirdos f'cking around with women. It has got little to do with what you call legally consenting adults. Prostitution is illegal by law.
Not in the state of Nevada. And according to Munchees article Germany allows it too.
Also saying that they are forced into it is a generalization. Many are but there are also plenty who know that men like to **** and are willing to pay for it.
Take the chick who sold her virginity for 1.6 million dollars, she had a commodity and someone bought it. Why I don't know but they did.
Then you've got Eliot Spitzers little prize package, she's private industry and Makes like $1000 an hour.
As for Nevada though since they are legal they are required by law to get regular check ups so you don't have to explain to your wife where that rash came from.
|
Riki Halcyon
Caldari Sativa Imports Ltd.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 21:50:00 -
[160]
Edited by: Riki Halcyon on 31/07/2009 21:51:51 These regular check-ups will also help to stop the flow of HIV and other nasty VDs.
I have to say again, I am impressed with the EVE community...this thread has turned out to be a very interesting discussion and luckily most of us are pretty open minded.
A special thanks to Malcanis for his many responses - especially:
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: baltec1
Originally by: Munchees
More people die from alcohol than weed. It has never been proven that weed was related in any death (unless it was a drug war, but weed related drug wars wouldn't happen if weed was legal).
Weed causes all sorts of mental disorders, primarily paranoia. It also has the same effect upon driving as alcohol and can be just as addictive to people.
Proof!
lol Thank you this is a hilarious and appropriate response as most reseacrh trying to demonize weed is simply faulty if not outright ridiculous.
For those who continue to think that somehow weed can do permanent damage, and continue to compare it to alcohol, let me help.
The active ingredient that interacts with the brain in weed is THC. Scientists have actually found receptors in the brain for THC. They are still looking for the ligand or agonist, the naturally produced compound that would interact with the receptors in our bodies. So interestingly enough, as is the case with opiates, weed works naturally with our brain. This is not to say that people cannot abuse the plant, or that it can't trigger the onset of mental disorders as has been pointed out. Another linky.
Now alcohol essentially opens a channel between neurons and allows potassium to leak out of the cell dissipating it's activity. This means that alcohol lowers our brain function essentially dampening active pathways.
Now even more interesting is that alcohol has numerous ill effects on other parts of our bodies, especially the liver. Alcohol is also one of the worst detoxes out of any drug someone becomes chemically dependent upon. My mother has worked as a psychiatric nurse for over 20 years and has made it very clear to me that alcohol is the most dangerous detox, in fact the only detox in which a person can actually die without medical attention.
While, our counterpart, weed, has been proven to be effective at helping ease the symptoms of various diseases, side-effects of treatment, and disorders. Interesting, eh?
|
|
Riki Halcyon
Caldari Sativa Imports Ltd.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 21:55:00 -
[161]
Here's one more link - myths myths myths....
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 22:01:00 -
[162]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich ...
Politicians get caught with prostitutes on a regular basis, which puts an end to their careers. Governments like to get taxes out of any money transfer regardless of what the money is being used for. And people use sex for marketing. But what is your point? --
|
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 22:28:00 -
[163]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich ...
Politicians get caught with prostitutes on a regular basis, which puts an end to their careers. Governments like to get taxes out of any money transfer regardless of what the money is being used for. And people use sex for marketing. But what is your point?
If you didn't see it the first time then I can't help ya bud, sorry.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 22:35:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich If you didn't see it the first time then I can't help ya bud, sorry.
You want to have sex with other women and do not want your wife to know about it. Hence your appreciation for regular check-ups of prostitutes.
Is that it? --
|
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 22:36:00 -
[165]
I'm not married.
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 22:53:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Whitehound
Make it legal and you have women selling themselves for the minimum wage and while paying taxes for what you like to call "service". Their "customers" would not be allowed to choose a prostitute based on the age of the woman, because it would violate the right for equal employment.
You really do think prostitution is a proper business, don't you?
I tell you what it is: prostitution is creeps and weirdos f'cking around with women. It has got little to do with what you call legally consenting adults. Prostitution is illegal by law.
You're wrong on all accounts, pretty much, except the bit on taxation. Why don't you broaden your horizons from hickville USA, and take a look at conditions prostitutes actually live in, in the majority of EU countries, where prostitution IS LEGAL BY LAW.
Or several Australian states, or New Zeeland, or Canada.(Pimping, or Procurement, i.e. deriving financial gain from the prostitution of others, is forbidden in many of those countries.) Note I'm only listing developed western countries, most of which take care of their weak and vulnerable far better then the US does.
I was going to say bum**** USA, but I'm guessing the wordfilter will eat the potency of that expression.
Anyway, since you've already decided not to respond to me, I'll doubt you'll respond to this either. I do hope you read it though, especially the bolded part.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 22:58:00 -
[167]
Originally by: Qui Shon prostitution IS LEGAL BY LAW.
Since you use caps and bold will I respond.
How often do you use prostitutes? --
|
nahtoh
Caldari Vanguard Frontiers Sc0rched Earth
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 22:58:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Qui Shon
Originally by: Whitehound
Make it legal and you have women selling themselves for the minimum wage and while paying taxes for what you like to call "service". Their "customers" would not be allowed to choose a prostitute based on the age of the woman, because it would violate the right for equal employment.
You really do think prostitution is a proper business, don't you?
I tell you what it is: prostitution is creeps and weirdos f'cking around with women. It has got little to do with what you call legally consenting adults. Prostitution is illegal by law.
You're wrong on all accounts, pretty much, except the bit on taxation. Why don't you broaden your horizons from hickville USA, and take a look at conditions prostitutes actually live in, in the majority of EU countries, where prostitution IS LEGAL BY LAW.
Or several Australian states, or New Zeeland, or Canada.(Pimping, or Procurement, i.e. deriving financial gain from the prostitution of others, is forbidden in many of those countries.) Note I'm only listing developed western countries, most of which take care of their weak and vulnerable far better then the US does.
I was going to say bum**** USA, but I'm guessing the wordfilter will eat the potency of that expression.
Anyway, since you've already decided not to respond to me, I'll doubt you'll respond to this either. I do hope you read it though, especially the bolded part.
Fac it Qui he does not even entertain a viewpoint that does not confim toi his pretty narrow viewpoint.
I don't think he is the USA though, Middle England would be my guess... ========= "I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 23:01:00 -
[169]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Qui Shon prostitution IS LEGAL BY LAW.
Since you use caps and bold will I respond.
How often do you use prostitutes?
Well that's not deeply personal or anything.
|
THE L0CK
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 23:02:00 -
[170]
You guys are wasting your time. He's just trying to troll you and get you in trouble. Its what he does.
Originally by: Whitehound
If I think, but I do not.
|
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 23:21:00 -
[171]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Qui Shon prostitution IS LEGAL BY LAW.
Since you use caps and bold will I respond.
How often do you use prostitutes?
That means caps + bold works. I've already answered that question, before it was even asked.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 23:22:00 -
[172]
Originally by: THE L0CK You guys are wasting your time. He's just trying to troll you and get you in trouble. Its what he does.
He's trolling?
I refuse to believe it. Trolls are supposed to use intelligent posts to get their marks.
♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 23:36:00 -
[173]
You do not have a view point.
If you stand up for the legalization of the prostitution of women then you first need to explain why you want women to become prostitutes in the first place.
Prostitutes can see a doctor at any time. The legalization however forces them to see a doctor. Once a prostitute becomes infected does she start working illegally. She will not give up her job. The legalization is nothing but a method to register and to tax prostitution. It does not change prostitution. It creates more prostitution.
Declaring it as illegal allows the law to prosecute men who pay women for this "service" as well as the women who prostitute themselves. If you do not use prostitutes then this should be not a problem for you. So why do you want it to be legal? --
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 23:53:00 -
[174]
Originally by: baltec1
Actualy the way it works is that weed shuts down parts of the brain, over time this causes nural damage.
Interesting. Link?
It was on BBC news 24 the other week.
Loathe as I am to questions News 24's status in the peer reviewed publications league table, I dont have a TV, and was hoping for something a tad more tangible.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.07.31 23:58:00 -
[175]
Originally by: Whitehound If you stand up for the legalization of the prostitution of women .....
Of consenting adults. Not women.
Big difference. Unless, of course, you're secretly a homophobe and the idea of men sleeping with other men disgusts you so much you can't even contemplate the ideal that men would pay men to have sex with them.
Would I pay a woman to sleep with me?
I do, every time I take one out on a date. This just takes the middleman out of the equation. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 00:01:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Originally by: Whitehound If you stand up for the legalization of the prostitution of women .....
Of consenting adults. Not women.
Big difference. Unless, of course, you're secretly a homophobe and the idea of men sleeping with other men disgusts you so much you can't even contemplate the ideal that men would pay men to have sex with them.
Would I pay a woman to sleep with me?
I do, every time I take one out on a date. This just takes the middleman out of the equation.
Hell there's only a few actual differences between a date and prostitution when you get down to it, namely it can be cheaper, your guaranteed to get some, and you don't have to worry about calling her later.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 00:03:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Hell there's only a few actual differences between a date and prostitution when you get down to it, namely it can be cheaper, your guaranteed to get some, and you don't have to worry about calling her later.
Agree, however women hate it when this is brought up. So I'm going to shut up on this point before every female in Eve wardecs me. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 00:05:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Awesome Possum Of consenting adults. Not women.
The same law that declares who an adult is and and who is not declares what prostitution is. So you cannot use it as an argument. --
|
Northern Fall
Minmatar Guild Exploration Guild Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 00:14:00 -
[179]
What the hell ever happened to our "Stiff Upper Lip" ?
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 00:38:00 -
[180]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 01/08/2009 00:12:41
Originally by: Awesome Possum Of consenting adults. Not women.
The same law that declares who an adult is and who is not declares what prostitution is. So you cannot use it as an argument.
Wrong.
Try again.
p.s. 1. there's no federal law that defines the age of adulthood. it's up to every state to decide for itself.
2. there is no federal law against prostitution, it's up to every state to decide for itself. Hence it being legal in Nevada and Rhode Island.
3. not one single state law i searched had the 'age of majority' law tied in any way, shape, or form to prostitution.
You lose again Lews Therin. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 00:49:00 -
[181]
Edited by: Whitehound on 01/08/2009 00:50:50
Originally by: Awesome Possum Wrong.
No, it does not matter what the name of the law is. Either shut up or say that you want prostitution and why. It is this simple. --
|
Maik Sarsei
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 00:53:00 -
[182]
Originally by: Whitehound Open-mindedness is nice, but it gets abused, too. Think about this: we could reintroduce slavery and provide quality food, health care and shelter for our slaves. There would be no chains but electronic tags and nobody would need to worry about wounded ankles. No more worries about unemployment or what to do with your live. If done right then all a slave would need to worry about is about not being a free person. Can anyone spot where my open-mindedness went wrong?
you're making a category mistake here
soz, but if your mind has such gaping holes in logic don't be surprised that other posters simply refuse to argue with you
|
Qui Shon
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 00:56:00 -
[183]
Originally by: Whitehound If you do not use prostitutes then this should be not a problem for you.
Brilliant logic....not. If I do not intend to, say, blackmail someone, and am unlikely to end up a victim of blackmail, why would I care if it's illegal or not? Durrr.
Maybe some of us care about more then immediate self interest, ever think about that Bubba?
I already said why I think it should be legal, dedicated a whole post to that question, so don't ask it again. Also, don't forget it IS legal where I live, as in the majority of the western countries.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 00:59:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Qui Shon Brilliant logic....not. If I do not intend to, say, blackmail someone, and am unlikely to end up a victim of blackmail, why would I care if it's illegal or not? Durrr.
What is your logic? You want to legalize blackmail? --
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 01:02:00 -
[185]
Edited by: Whitehound on 01/08/2009 01:03:50
Originally by: Maik Sarsei soz, but if your mind has such gaping holes in logic don't be surprised that other posters simply refuse to argue with you
No, it is not a category mistake. It is an example of how open-mindedness can be abused (aka "bull-sh*tting"). Do not try to argue with me when you do not like losing. --
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 01:06:00 -
[186]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 01/08/2009 00:50:50
Originally by: Awesome Possum Wrong.
No, it does not matter what the name of the law is. Either shut up or say that you want prostitution and why. It is this simple.
Wrong
I've already stated I want prostitution legal.
You're still wrong.
That simple. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Maik Sarsei
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 01:06:00 -
[187]
Originally by: Whitehound Do not try to argue with me when you do not like losing.
yes, tell us how you really feel :)
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 01:10:00 -
[188]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Qui Shon Brilliant logic....not. If I do not intend to, say, blackmail someone, and am unlikely to end up a victim of blackmail, why would I care if it's illegal or not? Durrr.
What is your logic? You want to legalize blackmail?
This just shows me you're either dumb and slow, or english is not your first language and you don't understand how to properly communicate and debate in it.
Go to a forum that speaks your natural language if you wish to discuss issues. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 01:10:00 -
[189]
Originally by: Awesome Possum ...
You would actually want your mother, your sisters and your wife on the street offering themselves to other men? --
|
Maik Sarsei
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 01:53:00 -
[190]
Originally by: Whitehound
You would actually want your mother, your sisters and your wife on the street offering themselves to other men?
you really have little experience with women/girls, do you? you speak of us like we are some sort of strange creatures, who, once prostitution is made legal, are gonna run off and impale ourselves on the **** of any stranger who waves a $100 bill at us
|
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 02:09:00 -
[191]
People act prostitution is no big deal and that anybody opposed to it is some puritanical prude. When in truth prostitution is an exploitation of the worst kind. But we guys like to get laid and damn the effects on anybody else right?
The average age of entry into prostitution is 14-16, 42% are under 18 when they start.
49% were physically abuse by their primary caregiver during childhood. 65-90% were sexually abused by their primary caregiver during childhood.
75% of prostitutes are on drugs.
When asked what they need... Would you leave prostitution: 87% Need home or safe place: 78% Need job training: 73% Need health care: 58% Need peer support: 50% Need legal assistance: 42% Need alcohol and drug treatment: 67% Self defense training: 49%
Due to on the job assaults(of various types) prostitutes often develop post traumatic stress disorder. Canada: 74% Colombia: 86% Germany: 60% Mexico: 54% South Africa:75% Thailand: 58% Turkey: 66% USA: 69% Zambia: 71%
Those returning from combat develop post traumatic stress disorder at 69%
So ya, go to Vegas and have a good time. Just remember that the girl your with probably has a gun to her head or is getting flashbacks of a sneaky uncle while you're enjoying yourself.
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 02:14:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Maik Sarsei
Originally by: Whitehound
You would actually want your mother, your sisters and your wife on the street offering themselves to other men?
you really have little experience with women/girls, do you? you speak of us like we are some sort of strange creatures, who, once prostitution is made legal, are gonna run off and impale ourselves on the **** of any stranger who waves a $100 bill at us
Exactly, the women that become prostitutes are the abused and neglected. They need help not exploitation.
|
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 02:28:00 -
[193]
Originally by: Mr Reeth People act prostitution is no big deal and that anybody opposed to it is some puritanical prude. When in truth prostitution is an exploitation of the worst kind. But we guys like to get laid and damn the effects on anybody else right?
The average age of entry into prostitution is 14-16, 42% are under 18 when they start.
49% were physically abuse by their primary caregiver during childhood. 65-90% were sexually abused by their primary caregiver during childhood.
75% of prostitutes are on drugs.
When asked what they need... Would you leave prostitution: 87% Need home or safe place: 78% Need job training: 73% Need health care: 58% Need peer support: 50% Need legal assistance: 42% Need alcohol and drug treatment: 67% Self defense training: 49%
Due to on the job assaults(of various types) prostitutes often develop post traumatic stress disorder. Canada: 74% Colombia: 86% Germany: 60% Mexico: 54% South Africa:75% Thailand: 58% Turkey: 66% USA: 69% Zambia: 71%
Those returning from combat develop post traumatic stress disorder at 69%
So ya, go to Vegas and have a good time. Just remember that the girl your with probably has a gun to her head or is getting flashbacks of a sneaky uncle while you're enjoying yourself.
The thing is if you legalize it actual businessmen can set up brothels, and not pimps who are criminals. Nevada is an example of this.
Anyway, I like how this thread went from being about the prison system to being about prostitution and weed.
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
Maik Sarsei
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 02:34:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Mr Reeth Exactly, the women that become prostitutes are the abused and neglected. They need help not exploitation.
Exactly. And for as long as prostitution is illegal good luck making these women admit that they are prostitutes and getting them to ask for help. Now on the other hand if it was legal and society would have some sort of outreach & educational programs to help these women and girls many would take it to get out of the situation that they are in.
I remember reading an article in BBC News about offering sex education to prostitutes in one of those middle eastern countries. Many did not come to the workshop to listen about how to protect themselves against AIDS. Why? Because prostitution was illegal in that country and they were afraid that when they show up they will be tricked and caught.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 03:03:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Mr Reeth People act drug use is no big deal and that anybody opposed to it is some puritanical prude. rabble rabble rabble
People have been selling sex for millennia. Nothing will stop it.
Oh and not every prostitute was someone who was abused. Nice try though. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 03:10:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Mr Reeth People act prostitution is no big deal and that anybody opposed to it is some puritanical prude. When in truth prostitution is an exploitation of the worst kind. But we guys like to get laid and damn the effects on anybody else right?
The average age of entry into prostitution is 14-16, 42% are under 18 when they start.
49% were physically abuse by their primary caregiver during childhood. 65-90% were sexually abused by their primary caregiver during childhood.
75% of prostitutes are on drugs.
When asked what they need... Would you leave prostitution: 87% Need home or safe place: 78% Need job training: 73% Need health care: 58% Need peer support: 50% Need legal assistance: 42% Need alcohol and drug treatment: 67% Self defense training: 49%
Due to on the job assaults(of various types) prostitutes often develop post traumatic stress disorder. Canada: 74% Colombia: 86% Germany: 60% Mexico: 54% South Africa:75% Thailand: 58% Turkey: 66% USA: 69% Zambia: 71%
Those returning from combat develop post traumatic stress disorder at 69%
So ya, go to Vegas and have a good time. Just remember that the girl your with probably has a gun to her head or is getting flashbacks of a sneaky uncle while you're enjoying yourself.
Take note Whitehound, this is how you win arguments. Random incoherent babble as you can see hasn't gotten you far other than massive amounts of heckling. State facts and back them up. Would have been better if he posted a link but I still give him points for that post.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 03:13:00 -
[197]
Originally by: Munchees The thing is if you legalize it actual businessmen can set up brothels, and not pimps who are criminals. Nevada is an example of this.
What makes you think these are real businessmen? The pimps only start wearing suits and hire a tax consultant. Consequently do they stop being criminals once you have changed the law. --
|
Krystal Vernet
Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 03:18:00 -
[198]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Take note Whitehound, this is how you win arguments. Random incoherent babble as you can see hasn't gotten you far other than massive amounts of heckling. State facts and back them up. Would have been better if he posted a link but I still give him points for that post.
You seem to think he's doing anything other than trolling.
|
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 03:21:00 -
[199]
Originally by: Krystal Vernet
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Take note Whitehound, this is how you win arguments. Random incoherent babble as you can see hasn't gotten you far other than massive amounts of heckling. State facts and back them up. Would have been better if he posted a link but I still give him points for that post.
You seem to think he's doing anything other than trolling.
Oh I know he doing nothing more than trolling, although you gotta give him credit for hooking like a dozen people now.
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 03:47:00 -
[200]
Originally by: Munchees
The thing is if you legalize it actual businessmen can set up brothels, and not pimps who are criminals. Nevada is an example of this.
I donÆt mean to be dismissive of your beliefs or opinions but that is utter crap. I used to see the illegal kind of prostitution all the time in America. And now I see the legal kind all the time in Japan. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. The customers are the same types of guys. The pimps are still pimps. And the woman are still the abused and neglected that feel they are totally worthless and deserve nothing better or are being forced. Yes, forced. Even if something is legal, women can be forced into it against their will. And the ôbusinessmenö have an arsenal of tactics to force and coerce women into it.
|
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 04:11:00 -
[201]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Krystal Vernet
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich Take note Whitehound, this is how you win arguments. Random incoherent babble as you can see hasn't gotten you far other than massive amounts of heckling. State facts and back them up. Would have been better if he posted a link but I still give him points for that post.
You seem to think he's doing anything other than trolling.
Oh I know he doing nothing more than trolling, although you gotta give him credit for hooking like a dozen people now.
I'm not trolling. I've done a lot of community outreach work with the homeless, prostitutes and at risk children in Boston. You really wouldn't believe the horror stories they have to tell. It's crushing just to hear and I can't imagine how they even get up every morning. I used to think legalizing prostitution was the way to go. On the surface it made sense. But then I met a woman who had moved from Nevada to Boston. She told me all about what it is really like in many of the brothels over there.
You can believe me or not. But the statistics on prostitution are easily obtainable online. And the real story is on your local street corner. Why don't you offer to buy a prostitute a hot meal and listen to what she has to say. Just be prepared to pay for her time in case her business manger is around.
|
Krystal Vernet
Minmatar Gradient Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 04:41:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Mr Reeth I'm not trolling.
We weren't referring to you. O_o
|
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 04:46:00 -
[203]
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Originally by: Munchees
The thing is if you legalize it actual businessmen can set up brothels, and not pimps who are criminals. Nevada is an example of this.
I donÆt mean to be dismissive of your beliefs or opinions but that is utter crap. I used to see the illegal kind of prostitution all the time in America. And now I see the legal kind all the time in Japan. THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. The customers are the same types of guys. The pimps are still pimps. And the woman are still the abused and neglected that feel they are totally worthless and deserve nothing better or are being forced. Yes, forced. Even if something is legal, women can be forced into it against their will. And the ôbusinessmenö have an arsenal of tactics to force and coerce women into it.
Your right. Most of these guys are scum.
But let's compare it to the ****ography industry. Most women in that business choose to go into the business (who knows whether or not they can't get another job etc), but they enjoy having sex on camera, or are consenting to having sex on camera for money. Sure the orgasms are all fake but that's beyond the point.
I think if it were to be legalized in the US it should be strictly regulated to make sure the women aren't abused and are doing the act consensually.
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
Micheal Dietrich
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 05:03:00 -
[204]
Originally by: Krystal Vernet
Originally by: Mr Reeth I'm not trolling.
We weren't referring to you. O_o
This. Sorry if you felt it was reference to you.
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 05:20:00 -
[205]
Originally by: Micheal Dietrich
Originally by: Krystal Vernet
Originally by: Mr Reeth I'm not trolling.
We weren't referring to you. O_o
This. Sorry if you felt it was reference to you.
Heh, sorry. I'll go practice my reading comprehension skills.
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 05:40:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Munchees
Your right. Most of these guys are scum.
But let's compare it to the ****ography industry. Most women in that business choose to go into the business (who knows whether or not they can't get another job etc), but they enjoy having sex on camera, or are consenting to having sex on camera for money. Sure the orgasms are all fake but that's beyond the point.
I think if it were to be legalized in the US it should be strictly regulated to make sure the women aren't abused and are doing the act consensually.
Thanks for opening the adult video door for me. In fact many women in **** are forced into it. I have heard it's as high as 50% in America and 80-90% in Japan. (If you've ever seen Japanese **** were the woman appears unwilling, it's probably because she was.)
One of the most famous **** stars is Linda Susan Boreman. She did the first **** with plot called Deep Throat. About that movie she said... "Virtually every time someone watches that movie, they're watching me being ****d." "It is a crime that movie is still showing; there was a gun to my head the entire time."
Traci Lords is also pretty famous but her early films are hard to come by because she was underage when she started in the business.
I'm sure there are completely sane and stable women who have no problem selling themselves. I'm sure there are women who can do a lifetime of adult service work and never regret it. But the fact remains that there are nowhere near enough of those women to fill the demand. And that leads to some dangerous areas as the pimps and ****ographers need to find more and more talent. Abused runaways, naive teens, poor illegal immigrants and the all the most vulnerable of our societies are the bread and butter of the sex trade.
|
Mr Reeth
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 05:41:00 -
[207]
Edited by: Mr Reeth on 01/08/2009 05:41:54 double post... sorry
|
Munchees
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 08:58:00 -
[208]
Originally by: Mr Reeth Edited by: Mr Reeth on 01/08/2009 06:02:17
Originally by: Munchees
Your right. Most of these guys are scum.
But let's compare it to the ****ography industry. Most women in that business choose to go into the business (who knows whether or not they can't get another job etc), but they enjoy having sex on camera, or are consenting to having sex on camera for money. Sure the orgasms are all fake but that's beyond the point.
I think if it were to be legalized in the US it should be strictly regulated to make sure the women aren't abused and are doing the act consensually.
Thanks for opening the adult video door for me. In fact many women in **** are forced into it. I have heard it's as high as 50% in America and 80-90% in Japan. (If you've ever seen Japanese **** where the woman appears unwilling, it's probably because she was.)
One of the most famous **** stars is Linda Susan Boreman. She did the first **** with plot called Deep Throat. About that movie she said... "Virtually every time someone watches that movie, they're watching me being ****d." "It is a crime that movie is still showing; there was a gun to my head the entire time."
Traci Lords is also pretty famous but her early films are hard to come by because she was underage when she started in the business.
I'm sure there are completely sane and stable women who have no problem selling themselves. I'm sure there are women who can do a lifetime of adult service work and never regret it. But the fact remains that there are nowhere near enough of those women to fill the demand. And that leads to some dangerous areas as the pimps and ****ographers need to find more and more talent. Abused runaways, naive teens, poor illegal immigrants and the all the most vulnerable of our societies are the bread and butter of the sex trade.
Don't deny that you don't watch or have watched **** religiously at some point in your life.
Originally by: Mr Reeth
Why is it every time I read somebody call all Americans stupid I hear it in a British accent and think of this |
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 12:18:00 -
[209]
Originally by: Awesome Possum People have been selling sex for millennia. Nothing will stop it.
The law does not stop crime. It reduces crime.
Even when you put the death penalty on murder do people continue to commit murder.
It is no reason to legalize prostitution or any other crime. --
|
Iasius
Mercurialis Inc. Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 15:43:00 -
[210]
Prison is never a cakewalk. You have to tough not to be institutionalized from the regime.
Simple things like being able to open doors by yourself and not having much freedom of movement fries the head. Suicide rates in prison are high.
Maybe the old colonial prisons should be reintroduced. On islands so there is no escape. Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. ~Saint |
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 15:57:00 -
[211]
Originally by: Whitehound Consequently do they stop being criminals once you have changed the law.
Yes and no. If they committed the act before the law was changed, they are still considered criminals until the statute of limitation runs out.
If they have only committed the act after the law was changed, then they are not criminals.
Welcome to Law 101.
I'm enjoying this discussion so much, I especially love all you white knights.
If a female didn't want to be a ****star/hooker, maybe she should've paid attention in school more. Instead they daydream of going to Hollywood and being the next big singer/actor, and ending up sucking off mandingo for $20 a shot.
There are perfectly healthy, unabused females who go into ****/escort for one simple reason. They know sex sells and that guys are morons that'll pour cash into it. Trophy wives/girlfriends are the same thing. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 15:58:00 -
[212]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Awesome Possum People have been selling sex for millennia. Nothing will stop it.
The law does not stop crime. It reduces crime.
Even when you put the death penalty on murder do people continue to commit murder.
It is no reason to legalize prostitution or any other crime.
Its only a crime if it is illegal.
And prohibition makes a mockery of your thought that laws reduce crime. ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Xen Gin
Solar Excavations Ultd. Black Sun Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 16:12:00 -
[213]
Edited by: Xen Gin on 01/08/2009 16:12:34
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Awesome Possum People have been selling sex for millennia. Nothing will stop it.
The law does not stop crime. It reduces crime.
If you think it does, then you are sadly out of touch with reality.
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.01 18:26:00 -
[214]
Originally by: Awesome Possum Its only a crime if it is illegal.
And prohibition makes a mockery of your thought that laws reduce crime.
No, it does not.
How can you now compare the prohibition with prostitution? The prohibition in the United States, which is what I guess you are referring to, was introduced while everyone was drinking alcohol. Of course it had to fail.
Try today to declare smoking as illegal and it will fail just the same, which is why it is being banned only slowly.
Prostitution however is not a wide spread problem and therefore does it not require legalization or a step-by-step program to solve it. --
|
Tajwel Kura
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 15:25:00 -
[215]
Edited by: Tajwel Kura on 02/08/2009 15:29:44
Originally by: Whitehound
How can you now compare the prohibition with prostitution? The prohibition in the United States, which is what I guess you are referring to, was introduced while everyone was drinking alcohol. Of course it had to fail.
Prostitution however is not a wide spread problem and therefore does it not require legalization or a step-by-step program to solve it.
There are 6.7 billion people on the planet and half of them are male. On average 25% of males worldwide visit prostitutes. In some countries, like US that percentage is low and the whole activity is very hush-hush and not advertised. So if you lived in US and never stuck your nose out, of course it would seem like nobody around does it. In other countries that percentage is very high. Average comes down to around a quarter.
Now 25% of world's male population, that's 0.8 billion of johns involved. Adding in all the prostitutes themselves and everyone else who is involved in the business that figure is even higher. And this is not a wide-spread problem to you? What planet are you living on again?
Going back to prohibition though, when drinking was made illegal criminal organizations made a lot of money off of it. Today's criminal groups get immensely rich from prostitution and human trafficking like they did off alcohol back in the days when it was illegal. Only it is no longer a drink that is involved, but women, children, and even sometimes men and boys who have nobody to turn to because they would be treated as criminals even if they did.
So best way to go about it is allow prostitution like alcohol was allowed, eliminate the criminal element that gets rich off it by allowing lawful sale of sex services, and help those who have fallen into it to enable them to get out of the situation that they are in. Not close our eyes and treat them as criminals like you want to do it.
|
Tajwel Kura
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 15:47:00 -
[216]
Edited by: Tajwel Kura on 02/08/2009 15:53:16
Originally by: Whitehound Try today to declare smoking as illegal and it will fail just the same, which is why it is being banned only slowly.
And by the way, the main reason there is a reduction in harmful behavior of smoking right now is that people get educated about the dangers of it. Not because it was ever made illegal.
People now know it causes lung cancer, they know it is highly addictive, they have seen advertisements on TV about people who had their voice boxes removed because of cance. I remember seeing those ads when I was 12 or 13. So now they can make a choice.
Sex on the other hand is advertised as something glamorous. Pron is in style. If you talk about watching **** to your friends in game at most they will just laugh about it. And what goes in Vegas has always stayed in Vegas. There is very little outreach about prostitution and human trafficking. There is very little education about it and what harmful effects it has on society so that people can later on in life make the right choice. And there is little to no help that the girls who get pulled into it can get, because hey, they are criminals after all.
Education is the main tool in the hands of a civilized and organized society. Criminalization and prohibition is the way of backwards, barbaric societies that will chop of your hands if you steal bread. Which world do you stand for?
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 16:00:00 -
[217]
Originally by: Tajwel Kura On average 25% of males worldwide visit prostitutes.
What is your point? All you have done is to bring another incoherent argument. I do not even know if you are for prostitution or against it. And are these 25% of all men seeing prostitutes on a daily basis or just once in their whole lifetime?
I repeat the one number, which you should be thinking about, for you:
Originally by: Mr Reeth Would you leave prostitution: 87%
You can use the number and type it into a calculator. I think women do not like prostitution, but for some this is news. --
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 16:03:00 -
[218]
Edited by: Whitehound on 02/08/2009 16:06:00
Originally by: Tajwel Kura Criminalization and prohibition is the way of backwards, barbaric societies that will chop of your hands if you steal bread. Which world do you stand for?
Are we chopping off the hands of prostitutes and their "customers"?
People then stop smoking, because of the increasing costs and the fewer places where they are allowed to smoke. And, yes, a better information helps, too. --
|
Evthron Macyntire
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 16:17:00 -
[219]
They should legalize prostitution, and make it a government run monopoly, anything outside of that is illegal, anything circumventing the law (escort services) would be illegal. Photo ID mandatory.
Since only illegal prostitutes are neglected and exploited, everyone wins.
------------------------------ Sigs like this. |
Tajwel Kura
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 19:20:00 -
[220]
Originally by: Whitehound
Originally by: Tajwel Kura On average 25% of males worldwide visit prostitutes.
What is your point? All you have done is to bring another incoherent argument. I do not even know if you are for prostitution or against it. And are these 25% of all men seeing prostitutes on a daily basis or just once in their whole lifetime?
I repeat the one number, which you should be thinking about, for you:
Originally by: Mr Reeth Would you leave prostitution: 87%
You can use the number and type it into a calculator. I think women do not like prostitution, but for some this is news.
You started contradicting yourself here. Before you start arguing may be you should trying making some sense at least inside your own head and think before you type. Like with smoking and drinking, I highly doubt that anyone who has such a need only does it once in their lifetime and then totally stops it. You're not making any sense here again.
These 87% of these women who want to leave will never admit that they are prostitutes and never seek help to leave prostitution because you just labeled them criminals.
|
|
Tajwel Kura
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 19:28:00 -
[221]
Originally by: Whitehound Edited by: Whitehound on 02/08/2009 16:11:12
Originally by: Tajwel Kura Criminalization and prohibition is the way of backwards, barbaric societies that will chop of your hands if you steal bread. Which world do you stand for?
Are we chopping off the hands of prostitutes and their "customers"?
People then stop smoking, because of the increasing costs and the fewer places where they are allowed to smoke. And, yes, a better information politic helps, too.
Your approach to punish in this case is simply inhumane.
Ok so you dont pay $3 a pack, you pay $6. ZOMG! entire 3 bucks, you're gonna go broke. The places where you cannot smoke you spend very little time in & you can always wait and smoke afterwards. Which brings up back to the point that people don't smoke or pick up smoking because they know the consequences & because they will be reprimanded for it by their friends and loved ones saying "you know you can get lung cancer from it" etc. Not because they have to pay $3 more and can't afford that or cannot go out of a restaurant and smoke outside.
|
Enakaru
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 19:31:00 -
[222]
Chateu D'if
|
Whitehound
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 20:10:00 -
[223]
Originally by: Tajwel Kura ...
I do not contradict myself. You are taking it further off the topic.
And no one is labelling prostitutes as criminals here.
Do you think of people who get caught speeding as criminals and do you label them? No, you do not. If anyone needs to be labelled as criminal then it is the men who use prostitutes.
This thread was originally about teenagers in prison, and because Awesome Possum wanted wanted to legalize prostitution are we now talking about it. Prostitution has very little to do with prohibition. This is now about the abuse of women living in poverty also known as prostitution. Prohibition is about the abuse of alcohol. Women are then not the same as alcohol ... --
|
baltec1
Antares Shipyards Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.08.02 20:54:00 -
[224]
Edited by: baltec1 on 02/08/2009 20:58:41
Originally by: Malcanis
Loathe as I am to questions News 24's status in the peer reviewed publications league table, I dont have a TV, and was hoping for something a tad more tangible.
I spend 8 to 12 hours a night with only news 24 to keep me company, had that 30 min show come up twice a night for a week so I get to know these things by heart
Although thankfully for half of the eve population moderate use is fine (unless you go for a drive). Insidently they hightlighted the big problem of drugs in jails today, aparently there are on average 10 prison guards in every UK jail who have been flagged for supplying things to prisoners.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: [one page] |