Women gets to drip acid into a mans eyes by court rule

[vlad321]

sapphi_snake said:

@vlad321:

Public hangings defeats my point? I even mentioned that only people in public executions would see the results, and therefore most would only hear of it by word of mouth. I defeated your counter argument before you even wrote it out. So there goes your counter-point.

You really didn't defeat my counter-argument at all. When you mention public executions, you're looking at them as the executions carried out today (private events, were only a few people are present). Back when such barbaric forms of punishment (which are essentially fetishized) were practiced they were a public even where everyone gathered around to watch (sort of like sports games). Also, they took place on a local level, so the whole community would view such a thing. Everyone had a clear image of the punishment omne would recieve. My point still stands.

You get to the crux of the problem. You can't just commit a person to jail without him committing a crime. If a person is mentally unstable, it is very much his fault nonetheless.If someone is harmful to society, for whatever reason, he is harmful to society. Mentla handicap does not absolve one from his crimes. Though it may mean that the purpose/intent of the crime may not have been as cruel.

O_O This is probably one of the most disturbing paragraphs I've read in a while. If a person suffers for mental illness it is not their fault (I've enver heard of a person intentionally making themselves go insane) and they are not responsable for their actions. Any psychiatrist would agree to this. It's just pure ignorance to ignore this (LOL).

I find it laughable that you equate murderers, rapists, and other such people with "people we don't like." Nice strawman fallacy you got going on there.

Really not a straw man argument. It's quite easy to label people as "evil" and wash your hands of them, rather than trying to understand them.

I was also not insulting you, I was just calling you idealistic and ignorant of human nature, because that is what you are.I was like that as well up until a little bit ago too, so there is nothng wrong with that, I don't feel like I was dumb or stupid back then. So I don't see why you feel insulted by that.

What understanding of human nature do you have?

Furthermore I would like to point out that this isn't just emotions speaking. What seperates our species from others is that we can function as a social group to achieve great things. Cheetahs run fast, lions can kill easily, bears are large and strong, humans work in a society. If someone can't function in society and is outright damaging to it, murderers and rapists obviously fall in this category, then those individuals can't be counted as human. Therefore killing them is no more inhumane than killing the bear/lion/dog/whatever that killed another human. Also, torture is only for those especially heinous crimes like child rape and murder. Those people deserve to experience the most excrutiating pain imaginable for what they did, and then die. Those types of people are lower than absolutely any living being, an ddeserve to be treated as such.

O_O Disturbing... Your reasoning is largely fueled by emotion and irrational beliefs. It's also like something out of the Old Testament. Your post clearly indicates that you enjoy torturing, and are probably a sociopath yourself. I hope one day you'll look back and be as terrified of what you said as I am now.

Edit: Torture is actually much milder than what most people believe will happen. Most people believe in eternal agony, being reincarnated as a worm, or other forms of eternal agony. I don't believe in fairy tales, so I want that eternal punishment to be exacted while the person is still alive. On the bright side, it isn't all eterntiy, just a few days, then it's over. So in fact I am much nicer than the majority of people on Earth.

No one deserves torture. Sorry.

So elt us see, you are claiming that everyone in the olden days had been exposed to public executions? I somehow HIGHLY doubt that. The best case you can make is the French Revolution, however by the end everyone knew people were being killed left and right for no good reason, just look at Lavoisier. Therefore they lost all form of meaning. Furthermore did they have child rapists/urderers in every town for them to see such punishment. Your entire point is just laughably bad, trying to make it out as if there was information proliferation on the scale of the internet/TV/radio way back in the day. Your point is faulty and full of holes, I am sorry.

Ok, maybe I gave you too much credit then. There is a nice objective way of determening the differences between a murerer/rapist/etc. and just a person you don't like. If you can't realize that, then I can see how the pisspoor strawman argument makes sense to you.

I also don;t see how you think I nejoy torture, I jsut think it's necessary. Pretty big difference between the two, but I am not sure if you are able to tell the difference. I also expected you to come up with some counter argument, seeing as how you didn't I have to assume you couldn't.