The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
"If this does not qualify for the death sentence, then there is no case that would''
Only the "monster" that is us will continue killing and feeling justified in doing so. The finality you speak of is understandable. It's harder to be compassionate and risk being hurt than to kill and feel safe until the next one rears it's head sporting their own justification for killing. Easier doesn't mean better though. In this case I think it's futility as the underlying problem isn't addressed, allowing it to cycle in perpetuity.
My argument still is that we are all potential "monsters" as you put it, and that differentiating based on circumstance is sticking our head in the sand. The right drug combo administered with brutality and/or brainwashing and we all become very messed up. Some people just get this naturally through what they are born with and/or how they are treated in life.
I would give the guy a choice. "We can't allow you back in society. Do you want to spend the rest of your life confined and restrained, probably medicated (by order of psychiatrist) or would you prefer to die a quick and painless death?"
Originally posted by Aeson
I don't want torture yavoon. :P
I would give the guy a choice. "We can't allow you back in society. Do you want to spend the rest of your life confined and restrained, probably medicated (by order of psychiatrist) or would you prefer to die a quick and painless death?"
yes ur very humane, u give option. torture or death.
Better than forcing one or the other though, and not really torture. No real nice options in the case... unless you know how to magically restrain someone without restraining them?
I'm not saying that no murderer will ever kill again. That's clearly an absurd claim. What I did say is that most murderers will never kill again, and that that many who are executed wouldn't have killed again.
Let's look at your examples.
There's no evidence that Gaskin would have killed again had he been kept in solitary (I skimmed all that, so I may have missed something).
As for Shawcross, there's no evidence that he would've killed again had he been in prison for life instead of 17 years.
If the methodologies we advocate were used, they wouldn't have killed again.
Now, it's fair to say that with these methodologies as basic guidelines, these people may given more lax a treatment than was warranted. That is, there were no problems in the application, these people just ended being extremely blood-thirsty. So your solution is, if we find a murderer, fry 'em, right? Because, you can never tell what a murder might do given the chance.
But doesn't that apply to everyone? You or I or Aeson very well might murder in the future. Isn't it better if we were all locked up since it'd be very hard for us to murder in prison? Let's lock up everyone, then we'll all be safe. If someone acts criminially, there's always the needle. Virtually no chance that a person is murdered, isn't that great?
My point is that sometimes people fall through the cracks of the system. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't take any chances and kill them before they get another opportunity to kill. The first priority really ought to be fixing the system and ending violence in prisons which fosters this sort of behavior. As as I see it, the fundamental question is, how many Gaskins are in death row right now?
You mentioned Gitmo. People are criticizing it for damn good reason. Detaining people indefinitely without due process has no place in a free society. And characterizing them all as war criminals and terrorists is absurd. If these characterizations were true, none of them would have been released (some have been realeased, and there are plans to release many more). And if these characterizations were true, they ought to be proven in a trial. You know, Lord Protector Ashcroft has kept young adolescents in Gitmo (and regardless of guilt - which is pretty blatantly inevident as a few have been released so far - this is hardly the best place to put a 13 year old). Incidentally, some Brits detained in Gitmo have just been released, and there's an interesting interview just carried in the Guardian: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/print...102285,00.html
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon
Originally posted by Aeson
Better than forcing one or the other though, and not really torture. No real nice options in the case... unless you know how to magically restrain someone without restraining them?
no, but my lacking could be solved easily by a gov't program looking into such things.
So are you then a pacifist who desires torture yavoon? You seem to think killing or torturing people is wrong, so you must be a pacifist... and all pacifists desire to torture as you said.
The methodologies you advocate WERE used in the cases I brought up here. They were used, and used, and used some more.
They failed.
Not in their initial application (as has been pointed out and conceded to, none of the killers killed again while in solitary), but they failed in their overall application because those prisoners were not KEPT in solitary.
Stuff happens.
It's called life.
Prisions get shut down, prisoners get transferred, people get lax.
And when that happens....when the boogeymen get set free....here's a big surprise....they kill again.
Not so with the application of the death penalty.
It is successful through and through....both in its initial application, and long term.
You cannot say that a killer who has been sentenced to solitary confinement has never killed again. I have shown you an example of that very thing.
I however, can tell you absolutely that no killer who has ever been hit with an application of the death penalty has ever killed again.
And I am curious. How is lifelong (20+ years....a thing that has been advocated here) solitary confinement (which is torture, no matter how you slice it) "morally better" than death? Not only is it less certain to work (for the reasons mentioned above), but it carries with it the risk that the killer will get loose and do it again.
-=Vel=-
The list of published books grows. If you're curious to see what sort of stories I weave out, head to Amazon.com and do an author search for "Christopher Hartpence." Help support Candle'Bre, a game created by gamers FOR gamers. All proceeds from my published works go directly to the project.
Originally posted by Velociryx
I however, can tell you absolutely that no killer who has ever been hit with an application of the death penalty has ever killed again.
Well in Exorcist XXXIX? there was that guy who in his last life was a serial killer who ended up possessing that little old lady that crawled on the ceiling and going on a killing spree.
Man that was a bad movie. How could George C. Scott fall so low?
By the by, point well made. Sometimes there are monsters that are/will be/can be such a danger to society that the best choice is to have them put down.
"Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson
“In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter
Too right about the Exorcist movie...."Shocker" too, for another example (serial killer gets zapped, and instead of dying, he goes into the city's electrical lines and still lives, able to zap himself all around town and continue his killing spree)
-=Vel=-
The list of published books grows. If you're curious to see what sort of stories I weave out, head to Amazon.com and do an author search for "Christopher Hartpence." Help support Candle'Bre, a game created by gamers FOR gamers. All proceeds from my published works go directly to the project.
Originally posted by Velociryx
I however, can tell you absolutely that no killer who has ever been hit with an application of the death penalty has ever killed again.
On the other hand, there have been cases where - after a decade or two - somebody discovers new evidence bringing a person's guilt into question, or even outright proving that the suspect could not possibly have commited the crime he was once sentenced for...
"Politics is to say you are going to do one thing while you're actually planning to do someting else - and then you do neither."
-- Saddam Hussein
Yep, just like there are airline fatalities, fatal car crashes, and people killed by administering the wrong meds, mistakes ARE made. No denying that.
And until we reduce highway fatalities to zero (see my nerf-tank post a couple pages ago), I don't see that a compelling point can be made that this should get the lion's share of societal attention. The process is long and arduous (for a good reason), and as percentages go, not terribly many mistakes are made.
Is even one, one too many?
Of course.
Same with highway fatalities, especially in light of the technical possiblilty of building an absolutely safe vehicle.
Still happens tho.
-=Vel=-
The list of published books grows. If you're curious to see what sort of stories I weave out, head to Amazon.com and do an author search for "Christopher Hartpence." Help support Candle'Bre, a game created by gamers FOR gamers. All proceeds from my published works go directly to the project.
Tweet
Comment