Reasonable penalties?

reply to post by JaxonRoberts

---

Actually, no. Violent people are an annoyance and can be dangerous, but are very limited in their impact (tens and hundreds versus thousands and millions). I don't fear violence because I've experienced it and trained myself to deal with it: I'm the guy others look to for protection most times. And my childhood wasn't particularly pleasant, but I prefer rational thought over violence, and use it in preference.

The Bernie Madoffs do violence in more subtle and far-reaching ways: they violate trust in ways that kill the spirit as thoroughly as any molster can.

reply to post by apacheman

---

We will just have to agree to disagree. I put little value on the material, so being swindled might make me feel stupid for trusting the swindler, but I would not feel 'violated' or 'unsafe'. Material possesions (including money) can be replaced, but the scars of violence will last a lifetime.

Mass murder: Death Penalty

Arson: Life with hard labor

Murder: Death Penalty

Rape: Death Penalty

Child Molestation: Death Penalty

Theft: Pay back what you stole plus pay fine to victim...not able to pay? Forced labor until paid back.

Corporate fraud: Same as above. If it takes a lifetime to pay back...too bad.

I think that's a little excessive...
Some things are a little less cut-and-dried than that. I remember maybe a year or two back reading in a magazine about a trial where a boy got into a girl's house either by being let in by the girl or letting himself in somehow (they couldn't agree on it) and basically the jury decided it technically was rape because the girl wasn't entirely awake. Imagine getting the death penalty for that.

Mass murder: Executed in front of any who wish to witness it - violent death, guillotine or firing squad.

Arson: Depends on the circumstances - loss of life or intention to cause loss of life - violent death. Damage to buildings - fine and lashes.

Murder: Depends on the circumstances, if it was aggressive and unprovoked then violent death. If provoked - then much less, perhaps acquittal.

Rape: Depends on the circumstances. Stalking someone unknown, with injury - public lashes and brand in the forehead. If with a current sexual partner, and no bodily harm was occasioned - then it is a civil not criminal case.

Child Molestation: If under 12 yrs old, then public lashes and brand in the forehead. Depends though on the definition - say a 15 yr old girl prostituting herself and wearing makeup - then it might be hard to tell she was underage, and if she was soliciting - then you would hardly apply the same penalty.

Theft: Lashes - possible branding or execution depending on the severity. Ripping off a retiree of their entire life savings and leaving them destitute to freeze to death - well, that's serious.

Corporate fraud: Lashes, branding - possible execution depending on the severity.


I don't locking people up is useful - it does nothing, its barbaric and costs a lot more than the persons life is worth. Punish them, or execute them - then let it go.

Circumstances are extremely important. People who have been provoked, or are threatened - I think the benefit of the doubt has to go to the person who was not the aggressor, or who was being provoked.

If someone provokes you with no cause, physically or verbally can expect to get whats coming to them, basically they are an aggressor - if they die in the process - then they should have considered the possible consequences before hand. I think this is an area of law that needs serious review.

[edit on 13-6-2009 by Amagnon]

That's quite a statement!
Women who have been abused or beaten for many years by their partner may get off a bit easier but not on every occassion.