With regards to sentencing of offenders

[Simon Curran]

Hi all.
The second post in this thread :- http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26472
set me thinking about something.
Last week, here in Denmark, a man was sentenced to six (of a possible twelve) years imprisonement, for the brutal multiple rape of a young lady, three times at three separate locations, having dragged her semi-naked from one location to the next.
My aim of this discussion is twofold, firstly, and most obviously, what kind of world is it that we are living in where a monster such as this can be allowed to drag a semi-naked, and obviously distraught woman, from one place to another without a single passer by (of which there were apparently plenty) doing something to help?

The second theme I would like to discuss is somewhat more controversial, so please let's not let this degenerate into a mud throwing contest.
I am of the opinion that people who commit offences such as this (i.e. rape, child mollestation, etc.) should be sentenced more heavily than those who commit murder.
Please don't misunderstand me, I am not understating the severity of the offence of murder, however, with the crime of murder the victims themselves are, mercifully enough not forced to endure many subsequent years of constant psychological torture.
A victim of a more intimate offence, however, is forced to live with the event throughout their days, and, according to the experts, more likely to commit such attrocities themselves (in the case of a mollested child for example)

I understand that the family of a murdered person is forced to live with the loss, but they themselves are not the ultimate victims, I believe that the ultimate victim theirself should be afforded justice, and the security of the knowledge that the particular offender will no longer be able to ruin another life, nor continue to haunt them upon release.
My personal advocation would lean towards either capital punishment, or life imprisonment, only then, I feel, would justice be served.

How do others feel on this matter?

 

[Wild Bill]

Most people in this world are either sheep or wolves. On a rare occasion you might find a sheep dog. Unfortunatly this poor woman was unable to find a protector. We live in a very sick world.



Murderers, rapists, and child molesters deserve to die. Nothing else makes sense to me.

 

[Loki]

Firstly, it's horrible to hear that. Nobody did ANYTHING? Attract attention, call the cops, nothings? That's horrible...

As for the main issue, I don't know. I don't have a clear opinion on capital punishment as of now, but I certainly wouldn't want it to be a common thing. The Sanhedrin, the ancient high council of the Hebrews, had capital punishment, but it was rarely evoked. If it is used, there should be a mechanism to make sure high standards are enforced before sentencing a person to death.

There are cases where a sex offender is clearly in need of help, not execution. How does this fit in?

Is rape a crime worse than murder? I don't know either. A rape victim, though living with the trauma of it, has a chance of getting over it and emerging stronger than before, even if scarred for life. A murder victim can't.

 

[heretic888]

My aim of this discussion is twofold, firstly, and most obviously, what kind of world is it that we are living in where a monster such as this can be allowed to drag a semi-naked, and obviously distraught woman, from one place to another without a single passer by (of which there were apparently plenty) doing something to help?

Its not at all surprising from the point-of-view of social psychology. Nor is it necessarily the grounds for condemnation of "people" or "the world".

There are a lot of variables that go into the situational factors that influence whether or not any given individual will "help" or not. What you are referring to seems to be the bystander effect: the phenomena in which people are less likely to help when others are present.

How do others feel on this matter?

For one thing, I oppose murder of any kind when it can be practically avoided.

Secondly, I feel this assumes a rather irrational and lop-sided view of society's punitive system. We should focus more on preventing future criminal behaviors from occuring than on "punishing" or "making them pay". Its rather archaic thinking to claim otherwise.

A lot of the crime in this country would more easily be addressed with good solid investments in financial aid to low-income communities, an abandonment of silly "zero tolerance" policies, use of educational programs in our penal institutions, research into possible genetic factors in aberrant social behavior, increased use of psychotherapy, and so on.

Making them "pay" just isn't practical anymore. Since, admittedly, its the taxpayers that are doing the real paying here...

 

[Dan G]

The second theme I would like to discuss is somewhat more controversial, so please let's not let this degenerate into a mud throwing contest.
I am of the opinion that people who commit offences such as this (i.e. rape, child mollestation, etc.) should be sentenced more heavily than those who commit murder.
Please don't misunderstand me, I am not understating the severity of the offence of murder, however, with the crime of murder the victims themselves are, mercifully enough not forced to endure many subsequent years of constant psychological torture.
A victim of a more intimate offence, however, is forced to live with the event throughout their days, and, according to the experts, more likely to commit such attrocities themselves (in the case of a mollested child for example)

I understand that the family of a murdered person is forced to live with the loss, but they themselves are not the ultimate victims, I believe that the ultimate victim theirself should be afforded justice, and the security of the knowledge that the particular offender will no longer be able to ruin another life, nor continue to haunt them upon release.
My personal advocation would lean towards either capital punishment, or life imprisonment, only then, I feel, would justice be served.

How do others feel on this matter?

Not that controversial. Civil law already gives higher compensations in certain circumstances for the living than for fatalities for exactly the reasons you outline - they need to carry on surviving. I think you have a point when you see that criminal law doesn't look at things this way as well. Criminal law is often far too protective of property, and not protective enough of the person

I'm not a big fan of capital punishment, mainly because I don't trust the government/executive to give out speeding tickets fairly, so am hardly going to extend the power of life or death over me and other citizens to the same people. There are plenty of oxygen pirates out in the world, but even more incompetency and prejudice.
I've met judges and lawyers, some of them are great, some of them I wouldn't trust with a box of matches. Ignoring the moral aspects, it just doesn't make sense to give the power of life and death out to people with a track record of failure...

Pretty nasty incident you posted, and the sentence is far too light. I hope the victim can cope with it all.

The bystander effect is a depressing thing.

Dan

 

[heretic888]

Ignoring the moral aspects, it just doesn't make sense to give the power of life and death out to people with a track record of failure...

Agreed.

The bystander effect is a depressing thing.

Not necessarily... although, apparently even bringing it up is grounds in the mind of some individual to ding me with negative rep points. Its always inspiring to see people conduct themselves in such a mature and logical manner.

Its important to understand phenomena like the bystander effect, because it helps you predict the type of social circumstances in which you can expect help to be more or less likely forthcoming. In the same way, it can also help you understand your own moral identity as a human being (what would you do in such a situation?), as well.

That being said, the bystander effect is a pretty straightforward and logical observation. The more people there are around, the more likely responsibility can be "transferred" to someone else. When its just you, however, the buck stops being passed around and its more likely you'll step in and provide help.

There are a lot of other things that go into the likelihood of moral behavior, even if we exclude other social factors. Moral reasoning, moral emotions, personality traits, and moral beliefs all play a role. The bystander effect, however, is still a biggie.

Laterz. :asian:

 

[kenpochad]

I can't believe the guy only got 6 years ......
He should of got 60 years with the general population.
Well mybe in the general population he wont last 6 weeks.

 

[Dan G]

Agreed.



Not necessarily... although, apparently even bringing it up is grounds in the mind of some individual to ding me with negative rep points. Its always inspiring to see people conduct themselves in such a mature and logical manner.

Its important to understand phenomena like the bystander effect, because it helps you predict the type of social circumstances in which you can expect help to be more or less likely forthcoming. In the same way, it can also help you understand your own moral identity as a human being (what would you do in such a situation?), as well.

That being said, the bystander effect is a pretty straightforward and logical observation. The more people there are around, the more likely responsibility can be "transferred" to someone else. When its just you, however, the buck stops being passed around and its more likely you'll step in and provide help.

There are a lot of other things that go into the likelihood of moral behavior, even if we exclude other social factors. Moral reasoning, moral emotions, personality traits, and moral beliefs all play a role. The bystander effect, however, is still a biggie.

Laterz. :asian:

Bit harsh getting a neg rep for your previous post.

From what I vaguely remember of the stuff I read on the bystander effect it is pretty depressing how often people will walk on by. On the other hand the studies also showed that one person taking action encourages others to participate too - in certain circumstances - so not all bad.

Dan

 

[heretic888]

Bit harsh getting a neg rep for your previous post.

Hah! I got a second negative ding from my previous post, too!

From what I vaguely remember of the stuff I read on the bystander effect it is pretty depressing how often people will walk on by. On the other hand the studies also showed that one person taking action encourages others to participate too - in certain circumstances - so not all bad.

Yup, pretty much.

There are also other factors that go into it, too. A trained physician, for example, is more likely to help an injured person than a non-physician. This is because the knowledge and skills one can lend to those in need, and a personal responsibility to those in need, are also a big part in ascertaining the probability of someone helping or not.

Many people don't help because they believe: a) someone else will do it and they shouldn't get in the way, b) they don't have the expertise to be of any real assistance, and c) they don't feel they have a personal responsibility to lend assistance (which can depend on their own perceptions concerning the severity of the situation, what the individual did to cause the situation, and so on).

Also, one of the most obvious factors is that the larger the crowd is, the less likely any given individual will actually see you in the first place.

Its a complex phenomena, involving a number of variables that go beyond simplistic solutions like, "durr, people are bad".

Laterz. :asian:

 

[Simon Curran]

.

Secondly, I feel this assumes a rather irrational and lop-sided view of society's punitive system. We should focus more on preventing future criminal behaviors from occuring than on "punishing" or "making them pay". Its rather archaic thinking to claim otherwise.

I would say that I agree with you in theory, however, unfortunately there are people in society who are undeterred by the penal system as it stands.
Once again, I maintain my position that the victim of such an offence should be alowed some form of retribution.

Thanks for your posts though, informative and interesting.

By the way, the whole anonymous rep point dinging thing, in my opinion, is just sad, troll-like behaviour, if someone has something to say to a person they should at least have the decency to stand by their statement and put their name to it.

 

[heretic888]

I would say that I agree with you in theory, however, unfortunately there are people in society who are undeterred by the penal system as it stands.

I'm not talking about "deterrence". What I'm talking about is more akin to what some might call "re-education".

Most crimes don't warrant state execution or lifelong imprisonments. Our punitive system has shown time and time again that jailtime is not a powerful deterrent to criminality, as our recidivism rates have clearly demonstrated. Certain alternative policies, most notably teaching inmates meditation as well as training them in job skills they may be able to use once they're out of prison, have been shown to be much more effective in this regard.

At the same time, some people are clearly beyond hope. Either due to genetic or hormonal factors, the social environment they will be returned to (this is often why rehab clinics have only a temporary success for junkies), or the fact that they're psychoses are so profound it would require decades of psychotherapy to fully address. Some of this we can "fix" ourselves (the social environment would be the most obvious place to start), for the rest I would suggest isolation from the general public in the form of life imprisonment (it actually costs less to the taxpayers than executions, too).

Once again, I maintain my position that the victim of such an offence should be alowed some form of retribution.

I cannot support such policies. It reaks of Eye For An Eye menatlity, which I personally find morally repugnant.

Thanks for your posts though, informative and interesting.

No prob.

By the way, the whole anonymous rep point dinging thing, in my opinion, is just sad, troll-like behaviour, if someone has something to say to a person they should at least have the decency to stand by their statement and put their name to it.

No kidding.

Laterz. :asian: