Is America going insane??!

[Cota]

Ok, lately I'm sure many have noticed some of the craziness in the United States. I'm talking about the political stuff, just society as a whole. I've been New York City most of my life and things have never been this insane. Let me explain:

Since 9-11 this country has turned into a pit of chaos. But I want to focus on more recent events, like in the past few months. I'm sure we're all aware of the huge basketball brawl where players and fans brawled eachother. Going back alittle further, we've had firefighters and police offers fighting eachother. I dont even want to start on the political side of the chaos. The most recent being the on stage murder of "DimeBag" Darrell. Plus the other countless acts of complete insanity that have occured in the past 3 years.

What the hell is this country turning into. I've done alittle homework, and most countries in this world dont seem to have this problem on this large of a scale. So I'm asking, what the f**k is wrong?

[mmm..pi..3.14..]

America is so screwed up right now...

Consider this:

Now I personally don't believe in god, and I don't hold a grudge against people who do (it just doesn't make sense to me), but everyone knows how there's this huge controversy about gay marriage in America. I'm no genius when it comes to the bible, but I do know that religious people are supposed to abide by the ten commandments. Now what's really f_cked up is that gay marriage has become a much larger issue than the ten commandments!! When America becomes more concerned about the fact that same-sex couples want to get married than the sixth commandment (thou shall not kill), something is totally screwed up!! Shouldn't the government be spending all of our tax dollars to keep people from killing and commiting other crimes rather than keep 2 guys from kissing?? What's the big f_cking deal!!! None of these "problems" the government has brought up is even important....

I would so love to punch George Bush in the face right now, in fact...before I die, I would like to punch him in the face, not kill him, just let him know how I feel, anybody else feel the same??

Eric :)

[Dark_Element]

errh aint the sixth one thou shall not commit murder? or was it something to do with the neighbour's wife?

besides u havent really looked into bush's conciderations have you? (not that im on his side) cos john howard (australian prime minsiter, u no the boldass sissy who licks bush's ass all day?) did the exact same... besides politicians dont give a **** about people (well almost all of em don't) they just care about money, power, and more power and money and proberbly sex with chicks who are not their wife (great example clinton... dweeb). And by the looks of it bush is thinking the same way as howard, im guessing that he thinks that there are more ppl who would support straight marrages and what everyone call "Moral" acts...

erh im not so good with this kind of stuff (i always get yelled by my sose teacher for not understanding this crap) so there is a very good chance that i am wrong

[Dark_Element]

and as for america going insane? well i have to say its not exactally that... its just stearing further off the edge of regularity (doubt that word excists)...

[petefs]

going implies we weren't already so : )

[Colin Campbell]

America has too many egos and too many points of view at the moment. Instead of maintaining the united feeling everyone in America and the world had after 911, President Bush made some sketchy foreign policy moves that not only cast away any chance of staying united, but divided the country and the world. I think thats the root of the problem. Somewhere along the line, one half of America lost the way. Which half, thats yet to be decided.

[BadBadNeil]

the world is just as ****ed up as we are, you just don't hear about it.

[pixelwit]

Capitalism. That's the problem. America is Capitalist HQ. We're raised learning that Capitalism is what drives us, that if it weren't for competition we'd all be lowly Socialists groveling for gruel. Competition through Capitalism insures succes for the best ideas and practices... at least that's how it's ~supposed~ to work.

Think about what Capitalism means. To Capitalize is to take advantage of your sittuation and use that advantage to your own bennefit. Have you ever heard the saying that it's better to teach a man to catch his own fish than it is to forever give him a fish? Whoever made that saying up definitely wasn't a Capitalist because a Capitalist would rather sell you a $5 dollar fish every day than a 20 cent hook every year. In America, the guy selling all the fish profits, succeeds and breeds while the man selling hooks perishes and dies. So what we American Capitalists have so efficiently developed and bred is a society where the majority of people are only looking out for themselves and they're rewarded for doing so. This train of thought "me before we" has changed from an Economic ideology to a Social one. Who cares what other people think and feel, as long as I profit? I believe it's this self-centered way of thinking that causes most of the problems in the world today.

I don't think Americans or Capitalists are the only people taking advantage of others and causing trouble but we ARE getting really good at it.

-PiXELWiT
http://www.pixelwit.com

[Cota]

A few of you make points about the government, but is that really the issue...? I cant blame the government for my neighbor deciding to go outside and shoot a few people. Why the hell is this country turning on itself to the point where killing eachother is becoming acceptable. The plaster it all over the news and the reaction is like "Ok, what else is on".

That aside, yes the country has become divided since Bush made a few sketchy policies. And yes, I agree that two men wanting to get married to eachother is the least of our problems. But I think we need to look alittle deeper and get to the source of this problem. Cause this sh*t is getting bad, very very bad.

[Colin Campbell]

A few of you make points about the government, but is that really the issue...? I cant blame the government for my neighbor deciding to go outside and shoot a few people.

Gun control policy? Rarely, if ever, happens here in Canada, yet shootings are so common in America. Canada is one of the most heavily armed countries in the world, over 10 million firearms to the roughly 30 million people here. Makes you think, if gun control was stricter in the States, what would life be like for someone who lives in a poor neighborhood with a lot of street violence? My guess is a little, if not a lot, safer.

[BadBadNeil]

I don't think gun control really makes a difference. Many of the people who use guns for crimes aren't ones who purchase them legally, they buy them on the streets without permits and for little money. If a person wants to shoot someone with a gun they will get one, no matter what you do.

Also the United States has the highest gun to population ratio in the world with over 39% of the public owning a weapon, compared to over 29% for canada and very few places on earth with such a high number coupled with a population and inner cities population density that is higher than most countries on earth and of course you will have higher numbers.

[Ruben]

Man, this is getting WAY too political for me...read through only half of it and then stopped, when it comes down to politics people often tend to say stereotype-things....

Anyways, about what Cota said about other countries; Holland's becoming quite f_cked up as well, though it couldn't ever match up against the US.
About one month ago a famous (well, in Holland that is) director was murdered. He had made a movie about the bad situation of wifes in muslim mariages (beatings, etc). Some muslim extremist shot him while the director-guy was cycling across the street, it was on broad daylight. The guy didn't die immediately so he crawled to the sidewalk, the muslim-guy stabbed him with one knive in his chest, and then he pinned a note to his chest with another knive...

Half a year ago there was this foreign guy who heard that his ex-girlfriend had made out with some guy while she was on holiday. He freaked out so when she got back he asked her to come to his place. He carved something in her back, put her on fire, then halfway he decided to put her under the shower...So the girls mutilated for life...they should hang the motherf_cker.

I could go on and on (for instance about the politician who got murdered a while ago)...But you guys get the idea....Things are getting as sick as in the US here in the Netherlands...sad...

- Ruben

[Xeef]

i think the basic problem in the US. is the big diference in the cuality of life pore-->rich
and i don't think the world have change so much since the past you just know evereithing (many things) you have TV and can wach the hole day news about killers, terorists and what not
if a 100 years ago you was faling out of the windows it was destiny
if the same happens to day a staf of 50 sientists come and search solong the find somthing (even if they find that the carpet wasn't secure enught)
by the way as long i know do anybody in the schwitz who was by the millitari has a Rifle at home
ah jeh and you also have much more time to day (not working from 5 in the motning till 10 in the night out of some pottato field)

[Ruben]

That's a good point Xeef's making there, maybe some (or alot of) people just have too much time on their hands and start having weird thoughts which finally leads to (for instance) shooting up schools...

Just a theory

:rolleyes: - Ruben

[mmm..pi..3.14..]

MICHAEL MOORE FOR PRESIDENT!!!......at least he knows more about how America should be run the current politicians :D

Eric :)

[Ruben]

MICHAEL MOORE FOR PRESIDENT!!!......at least he knows more about how America should be run the current politicians :D

Eric :)

Whahaha, I hope this one guy (from the count up the votes-thread (http://www.actionscript.org/forums/showthread.php3?t=57758)) visits this thread, I'm sure he'll be all offended and stuff...That'd make this thread really fun to watch

:D - Ruben

[Xeef]

a nother point which i think is even more dramatic is a 100 or even just 50 years ago you was know each person living around you inseide 10Km today you barely know you neughbur
and it was also normal that you was living whit your parents and you grand parent's and you grand grand mom was siting in the corner
to day you are totaly uncool if you are older then 18 and still living at home
people have no more contact to each other and that's the main problem i think !

[Ruben]

to day you are totaly uncool if you are older then 18 and still living at home
people have no more contact to each other and that's the main problem i think!

Well people surely have contact, just another way of contact, right now I'm posting on a thread, 50 years ago I might have written you a letter...
The difference is that when you post on a forum (for instance) you just type what you think at the moment...If I would've written you a letter then I probably read it once or twice before I'd send it...

- Ruben

PS. And where I live there are alot of people who are 18 and still live with their parents, nothing weird about that, unless you've got some kinda problem with laziness :p

[Cota]

So you guys think we're losing touch with our humanity and becoming one with TV? By that I mean taking the values TV puts out to heart and ignoring good ol' family values.

[Ruben]

So you guys think we're losing touch with our humanity and becoming one with TV? By that I mean taking the values TV puts out to heart and ignoring good ol' family values.

Well, not necessarily, in a nutshell, what I was saying is that people have drastically changed the ways they comunicate and that I question if it has been an improvement...

- Ruben

[mmm..pi..3.14..]

Eh,

I watch TV but I have NEVER seen more than 5 minutes of a "reality" show nor have I ever watched MTV for more than 20 minutes (I think MTV is the dumbest station ever, that's why they invented MTV2, because MTV stands for "Music Television", and the CEO's seemed to have forgotten that, so they had to make another station devoted entirely to music. In another 20 years there will be no music on that either so they'll need MTV3). The only shows I watch on a rgular basis are: The Simpsons, Discovery Wings channel (quite possibly the greatest channel ever, half the time it's an awesome show about WWII famous/experimental aircraft) and the Discovery Times Channel (mostly historic/political shows, like a biography of a political leader or the secrets of hitlers bunkers used in WWII). I like educational shows in case you didn't figure it out already :rolleyes:

I'd rather watch no TV at all than watch this "reality" TV crap!!! :mad:

Eric :D

[Dark_Element]

you know what they say.. the second a camera moves onto it the reality is goooooone!

[Ruben]

MTV sucks, Eric's right...and MTV2's alright, sometimes, though I recogn there's way too much fake alternative crap in there...we shouldn't have to wait untill the evening to get our share of metal :mad: I hate the programs like dismissed and stuff, I just can't seem to understand what the fun is of watching other people do the stuff you do all day? And then stuff like mtvcribbs, it just freakin sucks, all these rich people showing there houses filled with stuff they bought when they were wondering how to spend 34million in 24 hours....assholes...

- Ruben

[BadBadNeil]

You think cribs is bad try watching Life of Luxury, not sure what time it is on. I watched it once and all they talk about is this guy has 10 homes worth 20million each, private islands, jets, million dollar wardrobes, bentleys etc etc. I hate watching stuff that I can't have, although if I had the cash I'd be the same way :)

[Ruben]

You think cribs is bad try watching Life of Luxury, not sure what time it is on. I watched it once and all they talk about is this guy has 10 homes worth 20million each, private islands, jets, million dollar wardrobes, bentleys etc etc. I hate watching stuff that I can't have, although if I had the cash I'd be the same way :)

Yeah, me too...and if I had a gazillion on my bankaccount, well yeah, I'd probably spend my money that way as well, though the difference'd be that I wouldn't show it off and make myself look like I'm a superhero just because I've got too much money...

- Ruben

[mmm..pi..3.14..]

If I had that much money I sure would spend it like they do but I wouldn't set foot in California or any place with cameras, I'd just hide out and "chill" :cool:

That's why Bill Gates is an ok guy in my book, he has 64 billion dollars but I can't remember anytime I've seen him on TV talking about it. You only see him on 30 second clips on CNN talking about the future of Microsoft Windows. His name isn't even on the Microsoft Website!! You'd have a better chance of seeing the name "Liza Minelli" on the Microsoft Website than seeing "Bill Gates" in my opinion. That's the way all celebrities should be, rich and quiet!!

Eric :D

[Xeef]

:D

as long i can remember "Bill Gates" was building the modernest house at the time for around 1 Billion Dollar (1000 million) !!! not remember how many tousend square meter it was !?
whit flatscreens on the wall as pictures (for around 10 years)
people wearing some sort of sender like a watch on the arm and the pictures show the faworite pictures on the wall playing the faworite music stoff like this ect.
(as long i know it's free (you have to pay entrace) to go in and check it out )

if you hear somthing from Billy then not that he buy a car for 5 million but a company for 5 billion :D

[BadBadNeil]

The tough part is that the whole point of being a celebrity is being in the limelight, that is how they got their money in the first place. The only way to get away is to be like Johnny Depp and buy a private island to live on.

CEO's like a bill gates are MUCH more frequent millionaires in this country than actors and celebrities and they are usually very low key, mostly because to the public they aren't very interesting. They hide out in places in the country and around the world that us poor folk don't even know exist.

[Cota]

WoW, from insane America to celeberties, that was an interesting twist. So then I pose this question. Is the death of celebrty any more tragic then then death of a common person?

[BadBadNeil]

Well a celebrity is:

celebrity

n 1: a widely known person; "he was a baseball celebrity" [syn: famous person] 2: the state or quality of being widely honored and acclaimed [syn: fame, renown] [ant: infamy]

So why their death may appear more tragic is because they are more well known. The same thing is the case with this laci peterson trial, it has been overhyped to death when similar cases probably happen many times a year, yet you hear nothing about them, or the OJ simpson trial which was really just another murder when you put it into perspective. I think people take celebrities too seriously and put them on too high a pedastal. In summary I don't think the death is more tragic from a biologically worse standpoint but when a person of celebrity status means more to people than an average person like you or I you will see things like you did when Princess Di was killed or when Reagan passed away.

[mmm..pi..3.14..]

^^ Exactly badbadneil ;) ^^

I don't understand why this Laci Peterson thing is such a big deal, like neil said, the same thing happens thousands of time a year, you just don't hear about it because it happens in a place that doesn't exactly deserve national attention. I think the only reason the Laci Peterson case is so big is because it happened in a famous state, California. You can't take 10 steps anywhere in California without running into a reporter, and that's partially the reason why the case is so big...because reporters smelled a story, and it smelled good :) Had the murder happened in...say....the middle of Texas, nobody would have cared. Texans would have just sentenced him to death in nothing flat and gotten on with their lives, they do it every day anyway :rolleyes:

The whole death sentence is stupid too, not many people realize that it costs ON AVERAGE, 48% MORE than keeping a prisoner in jail FOR LIFE!!!! How screwed up is that?? What chemical is the government using to kill people anyway??. I figure, if you committed a crime serious enough to get you sentenced to death, why should your death be painless. The prisoners die in their sleep, so they feel nothing...totally not right if you ask me. I think prisoners who get the death penalty should be put in prison until they turn 75 years old (if they live that long) so they completely lose their freedom and just sit and "rot" in jail, then they should be executed, but it should not be a painless death, it should be a really bad death....like suffocation (all of this depending on the crime, murder more people get more time in jail and a worse death). Sort of related to the death penalty: When most people think of the beheadings in Iraq, they might think of the guillotine, which would sever the head almost instantly. That is not the case in Iraq, a long time friend of mine (who flew Huey helicopter's in Vietnam, and whose son is currently in Iraq) and my mom's, told me that they actually use a hack saw to cut the head off. It takes them several minutes to cut the head off because it's done by hand and they have to saw through bone...the victim is ALIVE the whole time they do this!! :mad: Quite sad if you ask me :( America also has one of the highest crime rates in the world. I think it's because the penalties for committing a crime are not all that bad. I mean, you get a bed and a warm place to stay and food every day, so if I was homeless and hungry, I would just break a window at a bank, and wait for the police to take me to jail....life would be BETTER in jail than on the streets!!! I think the punishment should make criminals fear committing a crime. I've seen videos of police in Russia, and I'm petrified of them, but consider them good cops. I saw them tackle a man who had killed several women who wore fur over several weeks, and they beat the crap out of him!! They didn't kill him or cause any permenant damage, but I bet you that makes other criminals think about committing a crime. That's the way severe punishment should be. I think instead of just sentencing Saddam Hussein to death, they should cause him more pain than he's caused his victims. I'd like to shoot him in the foot, let him heal halfway, then come back and shoot him in the other foot :mad: Might sound harsh, but this is a guy that forced 500+ people into a giant hole in the ground, and buried them....while every single one of them was ALIVE!!!! And he did it more than once too... :mad:

Eric

[Xeef]

Hmmmmm

1. as long i know most of the people in the us. whit "death sentence" are siting in jail for a couple of years and waiting (will it by tomorow or after tomorow) which shoud by enoght torture (mayby not phisicly but shilologicly)
2. i don't think it's so nice in jail that i woud like to go in instead of sleaping on the streat (not tested either one so not sure)
3. jail shoud by a shance to think on what you have done and resocialize
ofcourse this is not to usefull if in the end you siting on a chear whit 25000V in it
4. i belive in that some person just has this in his DNA so he not can handle diferent
especialy if you look at a massmurder or his parens was torturing him truh his hole live and now he become a murder (mayby we also shoud torture the parens of the murder ? )
by the way what's worser if i kill somebody (or more people) slowli whit a kniwe let's say 3 houers or if i psihicli torture my wife truh her hole life ?
so shoud we also torture bad husbends ???
or what if you boss is pushing you down all the time and you jump out of the window ?

either the system makes all the killer in the US. so they are not TOTALY guilty
or
all the people in the US. have some DNA defect so they are not TOTALY guilty
or what else woud by the reason why the crime in the US is so high and else where not ?
and woud it by all aroud the world so high then this woud mean the human is like this and we can't chane this (at leas not whithin a humans life mayby in 100 generations)
the same aply to the teroroists in the arabic countrys

just somthing to think on it (i think it's sad but history show it's truh) not know from who it's

if you kill one you are a killer if you kill a couple then you are a massmurder if you kill tousends then you are a conqueror

[Cota]

Ok, now we know how Eric really feels. But, I have to agree with him also. I think people should be executed in the same manner that they killed. Or at least let me think of the punishments, I would make it entertaining for all.

[Xeef]

yeh we coud broadcast it to primetime ! and when the doctor's put him tugether again (so he not die to quickly) we coud make some nice addvertising
mayby
this torture was brought to you by "mechanich tools" the sharpest knife around
or
the hammer we use to smash his leg was made by :

[Cota]

I like the hammer idea......Man, what a twisted bunch of designers/programmers. Who knew computer geeks could be so evil....

[BadBadNeil]

Man I watched that beheading of Mr. Johnson and if you haven't seen it, it was the most horrific thing in my life and I have seen a lot of people die before. I think worse than the picture is the sound. It was so bad I was actually nausiated and felt so lightheaded I had to go outside and lay down in the cold. Then I couldn't get the picture and sound out of my head for about a week. I garnered a new sense of the animals in Iraq after watching it that I will never forget, nor could I ever bring myself to forgive if it was my place to do so.

For that type of brutality lethal injection, inprisonment, etc is just too humane. If it was up to me I'd probably do a slow death like starvation where the body will eat itself from the inside out until you die slowly over a couple weeks. No cost of upkeep, just throw them in a cell and let them rot.

[Xeef]

Hmmm

in germany is just end a big proces before court on this !

there was a guy who was kidnaped a smal child (10 years or so) and hide him somewhere then he was chached
a high police officer give the order to say to him he either say where he is or he will sufer pain then newer before in his live !
non of the police man was doing this ! but hi (the officer) (stupid or corect ? he make a protokol on this) the guy was saying where the child is but it was to late he killed him alreade a weak ago !

now a couple of people start to discuse about make it legal to torture peole in such (and other) case !

one is sure if the ever bring a law like this out you will see me running whit a bomb on my back to the goverment palece !!!!!!

this woud mean to my the ABSOLUTE end of humanity !!!

[Ruben]

Damn, I've been away from the forums for like 24hrs and I've missed all this tasty stuff...:(

Well regarding the celebrities; I recogn that it's just because there are more people who know celebrity X then there are people who know John Doe from Iowa.
Let me explain; if celebrity X dies, a thousand people knew celebrity X and, say, 50% of the people who knew celebrity X were sad, then there'd be 500 people saying "I'm sad, celebrityX died yesterday".
Now this might sound stupid, but if John Doe from Iowa dies, who knew 4 people and 50% of them liked him, then there'd be only 2 people saying "I'm sad, John Doe died yesterday"...
It's all about the amount of attention that gets attracted to a certain event...

Now regarding the weshouldtortureprisoners-question; On one hand I'll have to agree on feeding 34 dogs Sadam's testicles while they're still on. And I also recogn that prisoners should have the same cruelties (which they practised themselves) as their punishments.
Though what if person Q (yup, I'm really into hypothetical personalities today) got sentenced for rape and murder, but he didn't do it? He'd be raped by the queerfamily prison-gangbangers, after that the justice-system comes to the conclusion that person Q didn't commit rape nor murder...Alright, maybe he'd be released from jail, but he'd still be traumatised for life because of something he didn't have a role in in the first place, if he hasn't been put to death that is....

That's the whole thing, you can't reverse the punishments you apply to prisoners after you find out they're not the ones that deserve them. And that seems to be the problem in the US often, people getting locked up for crimes they didn't commit...

- Ruben

PS. Eric, if I were you I'd rather sleep on the street instead of going to jail and have my body-exit torn up by lonely men :eek:

[jubei]

On the politics of division (someone mentioned it waaay back) nobody is better at that than John Howard, the little rat. He managed to win the election by lying to cover his older lies. I was so disappointed with it all.. and surprise surprise, the country is having financial problems.. all those people with massive personal debt who elected Howard on the belief that he could have any effect on interest rates (another lie!) have noone to blame but themselves, because my call is interest rates are gonna go up regardless. At least this way they can't blame the labor party.. too bad they're too disorganised to get their **** together and let the country know all of this. Bah.

On torture.. that's some of the scariest opinions I've ever heard. So you think people who hurt/maim/kill others should be hurt/maimed/killed? And who would be responsible for doing that? Would those people then have to go through the same process? Or is it ok, because it's state-sanctioned torture? Where would the cycle end? Ok, there's some cases where I wish the perpetrator would go through pain.. but that would make us as bad as them. Worse, even. And it would set up precedents for countries around the world to torture their prisoners.. just like what David Hicks has alleged is happening right now. It makes me sick to think a human could do that to another human, whether their superiors tell them to or not.

[BadBadNeil]

So people that kill others, specifically those who do it brutally in cold blood, those who kill children, those who kill tens or hundreds deserve to have state money pumped into taking care and reforming them for something they calculated and did with the sole intent of destroying another life?

People often use the line, in fact too often, "it would make us as bad as them". Really it wouldn't. The difference is that person would have taken an innocent life and his would be a guilty life which in my opinion makes all the difference. I think it should be reserved for the VERY few who reach this status however and not just start killing off all murderers.

Perhaps as with cases such as Jeffrey Dahmer we can let the fellow inmates take care of the problem for us as they hate child killing and other such crimes as much as we do.

As for who would do it, hmmm. Well typically the prison system elects such a person such as a doctor to inflict current punishment like the injection. Maybe a pay per view tv system where you can pay $30 and with your tv remote can send a pain signal to the prisoner. The tv audience at home in an interactive display of reality tv can kill the person with their tv remotes. I'm sure cbs will pick that one up in no time :D

[Cota]

Oh my god that would be great....Torture with my TV remote, I'd never leave my house.

Ok, since this can go back and forth all day long, I've come up with a simple solution that will make all happy. Since torturing the criminals would make "us" as bad as them, we wont torture them. This is what we'll do. We'll buy a country in Africa. Take all the people there and give them a place to live and a job in the U.S. We'll build a huge wall all around the country, only allowing the wild life to pass through it. We'll dump all of our horible criminals there and let them fight for their own survival with nothing, just the clothes on their backs.

How does that sound?

[jubei]

People often use the line, in fact too often, "it would make us as bad as them". Really it wouldn't. The difference is that person would have taken an innocent life and his would be a guilty life which in my opinion makes all the difference. I think it should be reserved for the VERY few who reach this status however and not just start killing off all murderers.

No, really, it would. For starters, who are you to say who is innocent and who is guilty? What if, say, a soldier killed a child by accident (it happens far too much).. is that soldier guilty? Can the child's parents torture and kill the soldier? What if the soldier did it on purpose? What about the torture of the Iraqis by the Americans? Should those American's be tortured in turn? In Australia, some soldiers tortured and killed kittens.. that's pretty ****ed up. Should they be tortured? Reformed? Killed? In some countries, having a baby out of wedlock is punishable by death. They would consider those women "guilty" as well. It's supreme arrogance to suggest that your value system is the right value system in this world, and therefore you can use your value system to make rules that affect the world.

IMO.

[jubei]

Oh my god that would be great....Torture with my TV remote, I'd never leave my house.

Ok, since this can go back and forth all day long, I've come up with a simple solution that will make all happy. Since torturing the criminals would make "us" as bad as them, we wont torture them. This is what we'll do. We'll buy a country in Africa. Take all the people there and give them a place to live and a job in the U.S. We'll build a huge wall all around the country, only allowing the wild life to pass through it. We'll dump all of our horible criminals there and let them fight for their own survival with nothing, just the clothes on their backs.

How does that sound?

Very much like "Escape from New York" actually..

[Cota]

There were a few movies like that, Its more like the one with Ray Liota, I forget the name of the movie.

[BadBadNeil]

No, really, it would. For starters, who are you to say who is innocent and who is guilty?

Well you are guilty as soon as you commit inentional murder. Whether you are bad enough to deserve execution should depend on the severity of the crime. Personally speaking I'd rather have every murderer executed but I agree that is a bit hawkish, so I would settle for having the really bad ones executed instead.


What if, say, a soldier killed a child by accident (it happens far too much).. is that soldier guilty? Can the child's parents torture and kill the soldier? What if the soldier did it on purpose? What about the torture of the Iraqis by the Americans? Should those American's be tortured in turn?

There are rules of war during a war and one of them is that there is a possibility of civilians being killed. It isn't nice but is a fact of war. No the child's parents can't torture and kill the soldier legally, but they can try illegally if they wish, that is up to them. But for their actions they may commit intentional and no unintentional murder and would have to be killed themselves. If a soldier killed on purpose then he should be found guilty, if the crime was severe enough then face the same penalty as a civilian who commited murder. I think that is the current rule anyways.

The torture of the iraqis by the Americans (if you call posing in pictures naked torture) is silly. In any instances where iraqis where really harmed physically or killed then they should be tried. It's not like they are having their limbs removed, tongues cut out, etc. This discussion wasn't really an eye for an eye in everything in life, more pertaining to the ultimate crime which is murder.


In Australia, some soldiers tortured and killed kittens.. that's pretty ****ed up. Should they be tortured? Reformed? Killed?

Kittens are creatures and should be respected as any creature but there are a lot of animals tortured and killed in this world every day, I'd say in the millions of chickens and foul and other creatures and do you honestly feel a human is on an equal plane with a cat?


In some countries, having a baby out of wedlock is punishable by death. They would consider those women "guilty" as well.

If those are their rules then who am I to change them, I can think they are wrong but my thoughts only apply to what happens in this country.


It's supreme arrogance to suggest that your value system is the right value system in this world, and therefore you can use your value system to make rules that affect the world.
IMO.

It is not a discussion on whether my value system is the right or wrong. The act of murder, especially the beheadings was done to a citizen of this country so therefore I apply my values to it as would someone else from iraq if they saw US citizens here in the states intentionally start beheading iraqis. Frankly I don't care about the rest of the world at all, what they want to do is their own business.



Ok, since this can go back and forth all day long, I've come up with a simple solution that will make all happy. Since torturing the criminals would make "us" as bad as them, we wont torture them. This is what we'll do. We'll buy a country in Africa. Take all the people there and give them a place to live and a job in the U.S. We'll build a huge wall all around the country, only allowing the wild life to pass through it. We'll dump all of our horible criminals there and let them fight for their own survival with nothing, just the clothes on their backs.

How does that sound?

Wait isn't that how australia was started, send the criminals away :) ?


Phew lot of typing.

[Ruben]

Wow, this is getting really complex. Since I haven't got the time or motivation to write something about each post I'll just state what I think:

@jubei:
If some 17yr old kid would beat up your 9yr old brother, sister, daughter, son, whatever, then I'd probably pay the guy a visit and beat the crap out of the little f_ck, as would most of you I guess...Does that make me bad? Does that make any of you bad? No, just someone who cares about what happens to their loved ones...

@BadBadNeil:
If someone were to punish let's say a rapist with rape (stick, you get the idea :eek:), then I think at a certain moment the punisher would become as f_cked up in the head as the people he punishes and eventually he'd probably end up committing the same crimes himself (for kicks) which would put him in the same position as the people he punished, and that can't be the idea...
The idea of letting inmates take care of punishments might sound like a good thing at first, but you should realise that this would mean that the authorities would work together with the people they put into jail in the first place, the people that did wrong things in their opinion, that'd be hypocrite, and if there's one thing governements have plenty of then it'd be hypocricy...right?
Childmolestors and alike are already punished by their fellow-inmates, that's a good thing (in my opinion) but I don't think stuff like that should be legalized or included in any laws or in any other kind of rule...

@Cota:
Well it sounds like a great idea, but they will have too be fed (=taken care of) like in prison, because there'd be enough voices saying that letting them starve is torture.
Besides that; they'd eventually escape....so it's a nice idea (having all of the bad guys put away in some foreign country far far away) but not very realistic...



...So here's some extra food for thought: Why was Alcatraz (http://www.nps.gov/alcatraz/) closed down and (maybe even more important) should something like that be done again?

:rolleyes: - Ruben

[jubei]

Geez, that was a lot of typing. I'll just discuss a few points you've raised there..

There are rules of war during a war and one of them is that there is a possibility of civilians being killed. It isn't nice but is a fact of war.

Now see didn't the Coalition decide that they didn't have to treat their prisoners as prisoners of war, because they're not soldiers, they're terrorists. I think "war" is a term the governments use when they want to, like when they kill civilians, and drop it when they don't, like the treatment of prisoners. Similarly, when the terrorists kill civilians, that's not ok.

Personally, i think it sucks on both sides. But the double standard sucks as well.

The torture of the iraqis by the Americans (if you call posing in pictures naked torture) is silly. In any instances where iraqis where really harmed physically or killed then they should be tried. It's not like they are having their limbs removed, tongues cut out, etc. This discussion wasn't really an eye for an eye in everything in life, more pertaining to the ultimate crime which is murder.

Well, David Hicks has said that he was beaten regularly, and psychologically tortured as well. And this was before he was charged with any crime. I think torture, any torture, whether state sanctioned or not, is wrong. So why I bring that up is not that the torturers should be punished, just that it's not ok to use torture as a punishment for any crime. Which was what was originally suggested.

It is not a discussion on whether my value system is the right or wrong. The act of murder, especially the beheadings was done to a citizen of this country so therefore I apply my values to it as would someone else from iraq if they saw US citizens here in the states intentionally start beheading iraqis. Frankly I don't care about the rest of the world at all, what they want to do is their own business.

What if, say, Iraqis saw American soldiers shooting directly into crowds, and trying to invade their country, and their values said a fair response was to react with terrorism? Then you saw terrorism, and thought a fair response was to send more soldiers. And they saw this, and thought a fair response was to strap a bomb to themselves? It's a nasty cycle, and I stand by my opinion that if you decide to respond to murder with torture, you're only gonna make it nastier.. as well as setting up a really bad precedent. After all, then when a soldier killed the kid, there would be justification for his torture. Whether the soldier considered it an act of war or not - they're killing iraqis, so iraqis can apply their values to it.

What's good for the goose, after all..

It's just.. it's so easy to say "well, all murderers should be tortured" without actually considering the effect. Only seeing things through your own eyes - people you think are really bad, well, they should be tortured.. and people you think are ok, well, they're an exception. But the lines are very blurred when you actually, honestly, think about applying this to the world. Your hero is someone else's villain, and vice versa.

Wait isn't that how australia was started, send the criminals away :) ?

Sure was.. And now watch the English flock to Australia for their holidays..

Ruben: If some 17yr old kid would beat up your 9yr old brother, sister, daughter, son, whatever, then I'd probably pay the guy a visit and beat the crap out of the little f_ck, as would most of you I guess...Does that make me bad? Does that make any of you bad? No, just someone who cares about what happens to their loved ones...

Sure, I'd want to do that. But considering i'm 24, does that 17 year old's brother/father then have to right to beat the crap out of me? And then should my bro get him? You tell me where it ends? Is it survival of the strongest and most violent? Do you want to live in that world?

You need to take your thinking one step further, and see through the eyes of the other person. Actions have consequences.

[jubei]

All that said, if someone attacked my wife, I'd ****ing kill them. I'm not perfect :D

I just wouldn't want the government supporting me in doing it.

[Dark_Element]

if the person killed one of your loved ones then it would be a different story now won't it?

The reason i think why people turn to terrorism is because that they are civilians who's family was destroyed, their loved ones killed, their hart broken and their values violated. Anyways how many options does that give the person? if it happened to you wouldn't rage over power you and make you want to get back at them no matter what its to costed you?

[jubei]

if the person killed one of your loved ones then it would be a different story now won't it?

Sorry, is this directed at me? Because no, it's not a different story.. as I've been saying, I don't think it should be state sanctioned. And I'd be prepared for the punishment for my actions too.

Also, it's kinda funny that the thread started about America being insane, and turned into people talking about enjoying watching torture. That's pretty damned insane right there.

[mmm..pi..3.14..]

...So here's some extra food for thought: Why was Alcatraz closed down and (maybe even more important) should something like that be done again?

Good point Ruben ;)

I've always kinda wondered why Alcatraz was closed, it's not like there's some dangerous chemicals that would make it dangerous for people to be there, I mean, they give tours there....

It was probably closed because of financial reasons, it's the only logical choice I think. It probably just cost too much to keep running :( All it needs is a few coats of paint, and maybe a few new jail cells, but other than that it's pretty much perfect :D

Eric

[jubei]

Hey Eric, your little icon was dancing in perfect time to a song on the radio just now. I spent about a minute staring at it.

[mmm..pi..3.14..]

hehe, mesmerizing isn't it?? :D

[Ruben]

Sure, I'd want to do that. But considering i'm 24, does that 17 year old's brother/father then have to right to beat the crap out of me? And then should my bro get him? You tell me where it ends? Is it survival of the strongest and most violent? Do you want to live in that world?

You need to take your thinking one step further, and see through the eyes of the other person. Actions have consequences.Well first of all you've got an excellent way of thinking (in my opinion, that is). Though I don't think the father/brother of the 17yr old kid would attack you knowing that his son/daughter had his or her go at a 9yr old. Though they might not know this, so maybe they would. But then again, this was only hypothetical, in another situation it'd be america vs somecountry instead of 9yrold kid vs 17yr old kid....so I guess we're all way better off applying what you're saying, just think one step further and think of what other people's respond will be to your actions...

All that said, if someone attacked my wife, I'd ****ing kill them. I'm not perfect :D

I just wouldn't want the government supporting me in doing it.That's a nice statement, beat whoever you want in real life, as long as the authorities stay out of it and don't support stuff like that :cool:

Good point Ruben ;)

I've always kinda wondered why Alcatraz was closed, it's not like there's some dangerous chemicals that would make it dangerous for people to be there, I mean, they give tours there....

It was probably closed because of financial reasons, it's the only logical choice I think. It probably just cost too much to keep running :( All it needs is a few coats of paint, and maybe a few new jail cells, but other than that it's pretty much perfect :D Whahaha, I don't think alcatraz itself meets the criteria for a prison (too cold, no central heating, etc).
As you said it's probably been closed down due to financial reasons...

But I was actually aiming at the concept of alcatraz, not alcatraz itself

- Ruben

[Cota]

Alcatraz was shut down for 2 major reasons. 1-The cost of running it, and 2- the hundreds of lawsuites that were filed against alcatraz for prisoner torture and murder.

Dark Element:

The reason i think why people turn to terrorism is because that they are civilians who's family was destroyed, their loved ones killed, their hart broken and their values violated. Anyways how many options does that give the person? if it happened to you wouldn't rage over power you and make you want to get back at them no matter what its to costed you?


To be a typical American, but thats a load. Most terrorists exist simply because they are angry the arent getting their way. Basically, like a 2 year old. Notice I say most, not all. The perfect example would be the Palistinians......need I say more?

[mmm..pi..3.14..]

What doesn't make sense to me is why exactly did they attack us?? Did no one even think to ask what it was we might have done to piss them off?? I mean, they are a 3rd world country but they're not complete morons, they wouldn't attack someone without good reason....probably comes down to all the religions over there. You stick 5 different religious groups in the place where Jesus lived, and you're just asking for trouble :rolleyes:

[BadBadNeil]

I beleive bin laden's excuse is he doesn't want any western nation or people in a muslim land, hence why he attacked USSR in Afghanistan, the US while we are in Saudi Arabia, Australians in Bali, and supports attacking the Israelis. He is also opposed to any arab government who helps the western governments. He believes the US and western countries are exploiting the middle east and muslims, and he wants to foreign forces in the middle east. However these foreign forces are the ones that liberated Kuwait and protected his own kingdom from Iraq, who most likely would have invaded the vast oil fields in Saudi Arbia had the US not been stationed there.

The israeli palestinian situation is so bad because the Israelis controlled that land first but lost it during the Roman Empire and they were expelled. The palestinians never had a land of their own but have been native to the area for some time, also known as Philistia. After the Ottoman empire collapsed in the early 1900s Brtiain gained control of the land that is now Israel. They signed over the land to the israelis after the holocaust since they didn't have a land of their own any more (plus hundreds of thousands of Israelis already lived in that land). There was a 6 day war of 1967 and land has traded back and forth ever since.

[Cota]

The Afgany situation goes alittle deeper then Western governments in the middle east. They're still slightly pissed off about the whole Afgan-Russian war. The U.S. had sent arms and supplies and had promised troops and re-inforcements, but they never sent them. The U.S left the Afganies high and dry against a superior Russian military. Ironically enough, the Russians gave up after years of trying to beat the Afganies. I'm a true blooded patriotic American, but we really screwed the Afganies over in that one.

[BadBadNeil]

I'm not an expert on the Soviet-Afghan war being so close to Vietnam in time I highly doubt the US would have ever sent troops, and the US arms and aid ultimately did play some affect in the Afghans not being overrun entirely, even if the pullout was more due to a disconcerted public opinion in the USSR.

After the war with no government in place and only tribes the talibran and eventually al qaeda took control, but it is hard to believe that OBL's hatred can be that deep from that single event.


The Soviet invasion in Afghanistan elicited a strong reaction from all over the world. The United States condemned the occupation immediately. We sent hundreds of millions of dollars worth of guns and food to Afghanistan to aid the mujahidin and the refugees. The United Nations voted to condemn the action, and repeatedly exhorted the USSR to pull out. From throughout the Arab world, people gave money and aided the mujahidin. One of these benefactors of the war was Osama bin Laden. Although the primary reason for the Soviet withdrawal was their military failure, diplomatic pressure from around the world may have hastened it...

In part, the tide of the war had been turned by the introduction of US-made shoulder-launched antiaircraft missiles in 1987. With these missiles, the mujahidin shot down Soviet planes and helicopters every day, increasing the monetary and human cost of the war, and making Soviet strike tactics ineffective...

[Dark_Element]

hum.... all this comotion going around is really shifiting the world's views about stuff right now ay? BTW how many days osama binladin has so far been successfully playing this huge game of hide and seek anyways? (wasnt he named the world's best player of hide and seek? ROFL)

[BadBadNeil]

I wouldn't be surprised if Osama was hiding in the US (the last place we'd look for him) :D

[Ruben]

I wouldn't be surprised if Osama was hiding in the US (the last place we'd look for him) :D

Whahaha, he now goes by the name of George W. Bush

:eek: - Ruben