Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (797762)	7/28/2014 3:02:47 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580052

"If that's not your position, wtf are you playing this game...." I will do my best to clarify my purpose here. The issue of heinous criminality has always been high on my list of discussion topics because I don't believe we have an adequate resolution for heinous crimes via the justice system. At this point in civilization we have only two dispositions that have been forwarded. Each comes with apparent flaws, at least from a secular view, which is all we have. Each is an ultimate penalty resulting in death in some assigned way (in prison at the end of natural life, or at a scheduled time). Capital punishment comes with two serious over riding concerns. 1) The justice system has not be proven infallible at determining guilt. 2) Allowing the state to take the life of a citizen, violates the natural right to life premise of our constitution. We have already discussed the Capital punishment issue in detail. So I want to move on to the Right to Life option. The pros and cons and justification of the Right to Life penalty never gets discussed beyond declaring that it is not the death penalty, which it's advocates consider intolerable. So the question remains: Can you explain how the Right to Life penalty at 113k per year with all the benefits known to man except freedom is a just resolution for heinous criminals. So far you have been afraid to even try, or you've not been able or willing to even try. I doubt it can be done but I haven't seen anyone even try to engage in such a discussion. If anyone does, I will take the antagonist position until I see a persuasive argument. My only goal is seek a just, fair, and resolute outcome for heinous crimes which satisfies the "Justice for All" condition.