Are We Punishing People the wrong way.

Whatever we are doing isn't working.

I read about a local woman that spit on a teen during a protest.
She has been arrested and charged with a hate crime.

Maybe we need to go back to an eye for an eye.

If you spit on someone (yes even a cop)
I think you should be put in a cage and set on a public street, and spit on by whomever wants to spit on you.
It should be broadcast on the internet. The funds raised (you know it would be a lot)
could be used to help victims of abuse.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
Are We Punishing People the wrong way.

If the answer is, 'tossing them into a well', my reply is 'no'.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Technically it's not a hate crime until teenaphobia is recognised officially by the medical profession.

Cages in the street? Didn't ISIS start that?

a reply to: Tulpa

Cages in the street? Didn't ISIS start that?

No... there is/was a setup/scene on Hollywood blvd with some Asians in a cage... sorry to be crass but don't really remember what it was harkening to.... Batman was like right next door and Obama was trying to shake my hand.

a reply to: MarkOfTheV

Crass is cool.

I would've shaken Batmans hand. Got a feeling it wasn't the real Obama.

Bring back the stocks.

Most people think it was just an uncomfortable position to be held in.

But when night fell ... in the dark ...

Getting rid of these hate crime laws that are poorly defined and can be interpreted in all sorts of weird ways

might be a good place to start .

And having a good national conversation over this amendment and how to properly interpret it might help as well.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. -8th amendment

We seem to focus so much on the 1st and the 2nd that we forget that there are other rights in the bill of rights.

originally posted by: SolAquarius
Getting rid of these hate crime laws that are poorly defined and can be interpreted in all sorts of weird ways

might be a good place to start .

And having a good national conversation over this amendment and how to properly interpret it might help as well.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. -8th amendment

We seem to focus so much on the 1st and the 2nd that we forget that there are other rights in the bill of rights.

Hate crime legislation and sentencing laws are Unconstitutional in the first place. 14th Amendment mandates equal protection under the law and when you have a law that claims the same crime is punished differently based on the races involved, then that's clearly in violation of the 14th.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
Whatever we are doing isn't working.

I read about a local woman that spit on a teen during a protest.
She has been arrested and charged with a hate crime.

Maybe we need to go back to an eye for an eye.

If you spit on someone (yes even a cop)
I think you should be put in a cage and set on a public street, and spit on by whomever wants to spit on you.
It should be broadcast on the internet. The funds raised (you know it would be a lot)
could be used to help victims of abuse.

An eye for an eye is fine I guess. How would an eye for an eye work regarding rape though? What about financial destitution because of fraud.

How could we "eye for an eye" for Kosovo? How can you "eye for an eye" regarding the grooming gangs and the official policy of denial in the UK.

The list is endless and an eye for an eye?

It's laughable.

a reply to: Jonjonj

I don't think she means every frigging crime has to be exactly an eye for an eye [efae].
Crimes where this can be used are when it's a one on one crime. You shoot someone, you should get shot if it turns out that you did it for gain.
Other crimes cannot be punished like that. Like wars or grooming.

Anyway that's how I interpret it. It's just one way of punishment, when it's applicable and so desired by the victim.
Especially rape should be punished like that. I am sure you can find people that will be executioners of that for money.

One thing is for sure. Our penal system is an ass. Justice isn't existent. Normal people are arrested for standing quietly in a park or road, whilst 1500 seriously dangerous criminals are set free.

Why is everything in this world black and white? There are more grey areas than stars in the sky. You have to be a bit flexible in your thoughts.

a reply to: Hecate666

Crimes where this can be used are when it's a one on one crime. You shoot someone, you should get shot if it turns out that you did it for gain.
Other crimes cannot be punished like that. Like wars or grooming

But surely then you create a two. three, however many tiered system. Because lawyaers, whatever they may be, will surely be on top of ALL THAT!

a reply to: Hecate666

I don't think she means every frigging crime has to be exactly an eye for an eye

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
...when you have a law that claims the same crime is punished differently based on the races involved...

It would be a different argument if it were based on races merely involved in a crime. Our legal system has deemed that ostensibly identical crimes are more severe if motivated solely by bias based on race, religion, gender, etc. It is similar to how intent plays into the degrees of murder.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6


Hate crime legislation and sentencing laws are Unconstitutional in the first place. 14th Amendment mandates equal protection under the law and when you have a law that claims the same crime is punished differently based on the races involved, then that's clearly in violation of the 14th.

I really dislike the way so many laws and policies have a type double speak to them.

Patriot Act....Is anything but patriotic
Affordable Health Care..anything but
...Its all about marketing these laws to sound appealing ..when they usually serve an alternate agenda..

Hate Crimes..why would you be against laws that protect against hate crimes are you a bigot?

I got admire the sinister Machiavellian genius of those in power and they way they sell their laws to the public and title them good rule of thumb seems to be that it will be the total opposite of its name.

As to hate crimes being unconstitutional..whats unconstitutional could likely be the source of several ATS threads.

a reply to: JAGStorm
Protestors are a protected class now. I ask this question on another thread, why don't people go ballistic when a black cop kills a unarmed white man? Flame on....

a reply to: JAGStorm
We have that pesky thing called no cruel and unusual punishment.

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck
a reply to: JAGStorm
Protestors are a protected class now. I ask this question on another thread, why don't people go ballistic when a black cop kills a unarmed white man? Flame on....

Protesting IS protected. So, yeah.

Why don’t people go ballistic when the races are switched?
They should, why don’t they? I suppose they have a different sense of community. Less empathy towards “criminals” in general.

I also think the white vs police experience is very different than black vs police.

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: JAGStorm
We have that pesky thing called no cruel and unusual punishment.

I don't want to see things like hands or tongues cut off, eyes poked out, gays thrown off buildings, stuff like that but I'm not opposed to public shaming for minor crimes. We don't do that anymore and that's one reason I never pushed the limits far enough to break a law that would put me in jail. I'm not going to pretend I was innocent as a teenager. I was as afraid of shaming our family as I was being caught doing something wrong. To a point that works to deter some, it did me.

a reply to: spacedoubt

The problem now is that everything is being excused by jamming it under the umbrella of "protest". By the way these modern democrat officials are handling things, the South was merely "protesting" when they seceded from the Union. It's no different from what these kids have done in declaring themselves no longer part of the US.

So what is and what is not protest?

I see people here calling riots protests. Calling rebellion protests, but calling people assembled and open carrying in accordance with laws in protest acts of open terrorism. What determines a protest?

originally posted by: spacedoubt

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck
a reply to: JAGStorm
Protestors are a protected class now. I ask this question on another thread, why don't people go ballistic when a black cop kills a unarmed white man? Flame on....

Protesting IS protected. So, yeah.

Why don’t people go ballistic when the races are switched?
They should, why don’t they? I suppose they have a different sense of community. Less empathy towards “criminals” in general.

I also think the white vs police experience is very different than black vs police.

Have you every been low income areas of white people? The oppression by the police is just as real. Once they get known by they system the system will keep them under their thumb.