For me it is hard to decide on the death penalty/abortion. To me some crimes deserve death (bin laden, mcvaigh, yates, milosevich, hitler) and others don't. But where do you draw the line though? Why doesn't a drunk driver that kills a family get the death sentence instead of vehicular manslaughter? I think the death penalty is too humane now. It is just a shot and you die. If public hangings were reinstated I would have to think it would deter crime. Then does that infringe on our constitutional rights though? Should you have rights if you are a convicted killer? But then the system is not perfect so you could have an innocent man/woman? The prison/court systems must be overhauled. Prison is just a breeding ground for more criminals. The small timers come out of prison worse off and commit more crimes. I totally support hard labor. They should be forced to work for their food/tv unless they are unable to. I also think they should seperate the criminals by their crimes. Murders/Rapist in one section and other lesser criminals in another. Abortion is another tricky issue. I am for it to save a mother's life, but I am against it if the person can not take care of the kid. They should give it up for adoption and stop having sex. But, I don't want the government telling me what I can and can't do. There are just too many if, and's, or but's to make any of this easy. It all makes my head hurt.
giddyup, I know plenty of older Americans with views very different from yours. In fact, approximately 50% of Congress is that way. Don't think that as people age, they will or should start looking at things they way you do.
Oh, I know that. You think I haven't been watching Ted Kennedy with bewilderment for years? In most cases, there is such a thing, though, as the arrogance of youth. I had it. RM95 is bleeding out with it. He made statesments over a year ago that he would never change, that he would never be anything but Liberal. That's what got him and me going on this little side-trip. He is so entrenched; I'm just helping to wedge him in a little bit. Ironically, I'm probably more open-minded than he is. Don't take any of this too seriously.
do any of you know people personally that are in prison? i do. #1 prisoners get treated far to well. #2 i dont believe in this redemption crap. #3 it sucks when innocent people get convicted, but life's not fair. anyway, i support the death penalty.
You're more open minded than I am? That's by far the funniest **** I've ever read on this board. The debate you're referring to: you wouldn't even allow yourself to believe for a second that two people swear they heard what Dr. Laura said. Wow, can I hope to be as open-minded as that one day? You go on ad nuaseum about how people will grow more like you as they age. For one thing...bull****. My own parents have turned more liberal in the past 5 years...they're 62 and 57. So I guess you have that to look forward to. How about me? I used to be pro-capital punishment, now I'm not. I had numerous spirited debates with many friends on the subject. Is the fact that I turned more liberal mean that I have more of a closed mind than you? I used to be anti-abortion, and personally, I still am. However, I listened to people from both sides, and I've become pro-choice in the fact that I would never do it, but I wouldn't dare of telling someone they couldn't. Is the fact that I turned more liberal mean that I have more of a closed mind than you? I used to be staunchly anti-gun. Through debates with many, a lot on this board, I've turned more conservative on that issue. So what does that make me RichRocket, still closed minded? Am I only open minded when I change my opinion more conservatively? I'm so much more open minded than you it's sick. The fact that your arrogant, condescending, closed minded ass isn't on my ignore list is testament to that. But you're really testing me.
It honestly does not surprise me that D Monkey knows people in prison. I don't think prisoners have it all so well, after all the rate of AIDS in prison is 5 times that of the regular population. Use your imagination.
Boy, I think I hit a nerve. Ignore lists are for weaklings. A truly open-minded person would look into it and realize that he was mis-representing Dr. Laura's well-known positions on child welfare in bad marriages. It does not match up with what you accuse her of saying. The liberal clap-trap would be just to let you go on thinking you had heard what you thought you heard because that is your right... regardless of whether or not it respects her position. She has rights too. I don't know whether you misunderstood her or not but I do know that you misrepresented her well-known positions in this forum. That deserves correcting. Who is being close-minded about this?
5 times, I doubt this is because they're in prison, but that their lack of foreseeing the consequences for their actions may be the biggest cause. I think that prison in some ways is much harsher than people realize for the most part, but on the other side I see many privelages that I don't think they should have. Just my two cents.
It makes complete sense to compare American criminals to innocent women living under the Taliban. Diseased- Actually, I have known people in prison. And for the most part, I agreed with everything you said. I just don't think there are any absolutes (so I can't say rehabilitation doesn't work because it could perhaps). subtomic- First-They are prisoners. They shouldn't be given rights and luxuries. They didn't play by the rules and they need to be punished. They are treated poorly and it is harsh, but that's more a result of the other prisoners than the institution itself. Perhaps prisoners should be guarded more carefully and not allowed so much interaction. Second-I don't mind TV's or leisure time to those who earn or deserve it. If time needs to be occupied, put them to work repaving roads or growing crops or anything. Not only would they be busy and helping society, but they could learn skills. I agree that they need to be busy, but they could be doing something productive and something that makes them work. Joe Joe- The innocent people that need to research for their appeals will probably behave in prison and earn luxuries to libraries, although, I would hope they had a lawyer on the outside to do that. Third-Rehabilitation is not the main focus of a prison, and if it is, they need to work on that a lot. I don't think rehabilitation works for the majority of cases. Fourth-Science can't determine everything yet. Hair, blood, clothing, anything can still be planted on someone. Science technology is in the process of earning a reputation. It is not perfect and neither are scientists. The more they are used and work, the more they will be accepted. I don't want to see innocent people in prison or killed for something they didn't do, but that's the risk we all take in this system. Just my two cents
A person who gets 3 years for robbery and then gets HIV from a prison rape probably doesn't think he has it too good. That was basically what I was trying to say.
That's a terrible thing to happen to anyone ever. At the same time, don't you think he shouldn't have committed the crime in the first place? I'm not saying he would deserve this to happen to him. Nobody does. But he made a choice to commit a crime for which he could go to prison. It's awful, but I think that's the price you pay. It goes again to my point though that prisons need to be reformed.
Seriously, how do you in one sentence say that's a terrible thing then say at the same time he is a criminal and then you say he doesn't deserve it and then you say that's the price you pay? Are you on drugs or something?
Princess, Right now, the prisoner-guard ratio isn't in favor of the guards, so it's either let them watch TV or deal with daily riots. If you think the prisoners need to be guarded more closely, then I guess you should become a prison guard. Because nobody else wants that job. Prisoners do work on farms and roads. Haven't you driven through Huntsville and seen the prison farms? It isn't tended by SHSU students. But you can't work anyone all the time. There's just not enough hours in the day and night work creates a whole new logistical nightmare for the prison guards. Is prison inherently brutal or just because its filled with criminals? I'm not qualified to answer this, but you might want to go to UH's library and check out Phillip Zimbardo's paper on his Stanford Prison Experiment. It was published in the early 1970s, but I used it in a couple of papers while I was an undergrad so I know its there. I think you'll find it interesting and quite opposed to your claim that it's the prisoners and not the institution. Of course science can't determine everything. But justice is not served when science is denied someone because they are poor or because the judge think everyone in his courtroom is guilty. You're correct - rehabilitation is not the goal of most prisons. That needs to change.
That's why I haven't put you on there. I don't like the ignore list, but if I ever do decide to use it, I gurantee you, you're number one on the list. It's hard to misrepresent what I heard. Now, I will concede that maybe those comments (both mine and her's) misrepresented her views, but that's not my fault. I'm only accusing her of saying what I heard. I've offered before, and I'll offer again, but myself and the passenger in my car that day will both sign legal affidavits saying that we heard that. Of course, then you'll just accuse me of perjury. This has nothing to do with any liberal clap-trap. I don't have a personal vendetta against Dr. Laura, I just don't like her. I especially don't like what I heard those times. If those aren't her real views, it's her fault that she misrepresented herself. Really, I didn't know that! Of course, defenders of Dr. Laura always like to forget that those protesting her have the same rights to free speech as Dr. Laura does. Never would I support Dr. Laura being censored by the government, or anyone for that matter. On the same token, I wouldn't support protesters being censored by the government anyway. Now, I don't agree with people spreading false information about anyone. And if people are/were purposefully misrepresenting her position, then that's bad. Maybe I was as well, but I can only analyze what I heard, and since hearing that didn't really endear me to hear, I really haven't given her the time of day since. From what I can tell however, I disagree with her on many fundamental levels, and that's fine-I disagree with many people on many fundamental levels and I get along with them just fine. I'm willing to concede that, and pretty much have. But again, my misrepresentation of her position is her fault by what she told the callers I listened to. I again volunteer affidavits. Since you haven't once been willing to concede that I did hear what I say I did (and did), you are. Hope you're looking forward to becoming more liberal because my parents were much more conservative at the age of 48 than they are now. You don't have much longer to be close minded...follow the light.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I got this part, but was merely trying to convey that I'm of the opinion prison raping isn't the biggest reason behind the percentage being 5 times that of the normal poppulation. I did not want to demean how much being raped in prison and getting HIV would suck.
