Whatever. We're all arguing different things as usual.
|
Denmark was voted the number place to live as far as people being happy.
The difference between the rich and poor is minor, so most are folks on the same tier. They pay a ton of taxes but the government takes good care of them. They pay for their college, their medical, and their elderly are taken care of. If a woman has a baby, the husband can take 6 months off maternity leave, and the government pays his salary.
This has been brought to you by the Would Someone Please Send Me to Denmark Fund.
We could do this too! We just need to break our nation into smaller entities where we can govern more effectively. Come on, you know you want to!
Viva la Conch Republic! One minor revolution and we're bringing Denmark to you.
|
...I saw an interview with some "multiple wives," who more or less said point-blank that it was demeaning, they hated it, and the ONLY reason that ANY woman would ever consent to it, ever, is religious upbringing. Now, a number of disgruntled polygamous wives is not the full population, but they were clear enough to give me pause. If a practice causes suffering without alleviating any, I consider it immoral, and if it causes more strife within a community than it prevents, I consider it impractical.
(bolded portion mine)
I think 'suffering' is maybe a strong way to put it.
Surely if someone doesn't agree with the practice, they don't have to participate?
Now, if people are being held against their will, then that is a different matter, and one for the law enforcement agencies, no matter what the community.
But if you're a woman who dreams of a 'one-woman-guy', and all the guys in your area are 'one-two-three-four-women guys', then your options are; stay single, shrug and get with the program, or jump on the next bus out of town.
But you don't have to be living in Utah for that to be the case. You'd be in exactly the same situation if you were a woman in a town where all the guys want to screw around and never settle down. Same solution; stay single, shrug and get with the program, or jump on the next bus out of town.
Denmark was voted the number place to live as far as people being happy.
The difference between the rich and poor is minor, so most are folks on the same tier. They pay a ton of taxes but the government takes good care of them. They pay for their college, their medical, and their elderly are taken care of. If a woman has a baby, the husband can take 6 months off maternity leave, and the government pays his salary.
This has been brought to you by the Would Someone Please Send Me to Denmark Fund.
We could do this too! We just need to break our nation into smaller entities where we can govern more effectively. Come on, you know you want to!
Viva la Conch Republic! One minor revolution and we're bringing Denmark to you.
Sign me up.
|
Wow, Sam, that's condescending. I think you must have mistook me for someone who didn’t do his criminology readings.
No, it means it would take something the thread had not considered yet, something that would take a considerably more detailed discussion of a sub-topic. There was nothing to indicate anyone had done that, and was just tossing around surface considerations.
Dude, you said punishment and rehabilitation were the only logical reasons for incarceration. I said protecting society was also a reason. I didn't say it was the only reason. You disagreed, I believe, or was that just Jeremy? Whatever... that was a nice but not entirely accurate summary of the history of reasoning behind crime and punishment. You left something out. Kirth and I are not the only ones who think prison can serve us by protecting us from criminals, and a little googling would most certainly provide you with some logical incapacitation arguments from others without forcing us to type all that crap out.
And I say again they are the only logical reasons, as using it as internal exile will not be satisfying to the public at large.
If you would like to provide another summary of the history of punishment feel free to. If you think I missed something I would be happy to hear it.As for other people thinking prison can protect us from criminals, I could also note I left other things out as well, things even more illogical. Two of my favorites that regularly come from the anti-death penalty and anti-death for rape crowds are the dual classics of prison being worse than the death penalty and thus a "better" punishment, and prisons being a source of extra-judicial sexual assault of rapists. Both very callously and very cavalierly overlook that if death is so cruel as to be unconstitutional, sentencing someone to something worse would be just as unconstitutional, as well as sentencing someone to violent physical assaults being cruel and unusual.
There are many alternative theories out there. I have yet to see any reasonably supported.
If you want to take this further and tell me that incapacitation is not an economically feasible reason let me jump ahead and tell you what I think of that argument. Sure, actuarially speaking incapacitation alone is expensive; it probably costs us more than the cost of the crimes we are preventing, but are you really willing to put a dollar value on rape and murder just to tell me that incapacitation is a rip off? I'm not.
The economic feasibility is a red herring. Whether or not the cost is excessive is irrelevant to the social stability of the punishment.
Likewise it is virtually impossible to properly assess the value of crimes prevented. How can anyone actually know how many other people a rapist or murderer would rape or murder if they are imprisoned longer or executed?Similarly a comparison of the extra cost of a death penalty case routinely ignores the egregious padding of expenses in death penalty cases by people who simply oppose the punishment rather than believing in the innocence of the accused. If they were held responsible for derailing the legal system the costs would be significantly more reasonable. It likewise constantly ignores the more general social costs of a society knowing that someone they would have executed is simply sitting in a prison somewhere, however unpleasant, and they might conceivably be released or escape. How do you ever properly weigh the psychological costs of that?
So do please go ahead and provide anything beyond a simple "Well it can be used for that." You can use a wrench to hammer in a nail, but it is not a particularly appropriate use.
This has been brought to you by the Would Someone Please Send Me to Denmark Fund.
Here is some people discussing how to become a Danish citizen, you might look at it and see if there is any information that might be useful to you, assuming you are serious.
|
|
In that last one Sam changes from “the only logical purpose” to “So there is no single reason.”
The two are not incompatible.
You can have many logical and many illogical reasons for doing the same thing.Internal exile is a reason for incarceration as a punishment.
Storage for rehabilitation is a reason for incarceration as a punishment.
Forced labor facilities is a for incarceration as a punishment.
Unpleasant conditions constituting punishment in and of itself is a reason for incarceration as a punishment.
I find the first unsatisfying, the second a hopeless cause, the third no longer socially acceptable, and the last the only remaining option.
Again, feel free to provide additional alternatives.
Whatever. We're all arguing different things as usual.
Yeah? Well, Van Hagar was bogus.
This has been brought to you by the Would Someone Please Send Me to Denmark Fund.Here is some people discussing how to become a Danish citizen, you might look at it and see if there is any information that might be useful to you, assuming you are serious.
Thanks, pres man. Reading it now.
Others will attest... I've been thinking of the UK, Canada, and Scandinavia. My Norweigan is weak and illiterate, probably because I picked it up as a lark and am not actually Norweigan. It's more likely that I would, should I expatriate, wind up in a country that speaks my language.
There should be a contest held among those countries on my list to see who loses and is forced to take me.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
This has been brought to you by the Would Someone Please Send Me to Denmark Fund.Here is some people discussing how to become a Danish citizen, you might look at it and see if there is any information that might be useful to you, assuming you are serious.
I seriously would like to see Jade deported out of the U.S., does that count?
|
Can we send Jade here?.I hear Gitmo is nice this time of year.
We'll need some incriminating evidence...
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
We'll need some incriminating evidence...Can we send Jade here?.I hear Gitmo is nice this time of year.
He hates America, as shown by his willingness to leave the country. Case closed.
And if that fails...well...we'll figure something out...
|
|
We'll need some incriminating evidence...Can we send Jade here?.I hear Gitmo is nice this time of year.He hates America, as shown by his willingness to leave the country. Case closed.
And if that fails...well...we'll figure something out...
I bet he's French too.
Can we send Jade here?.
I've been trying to find that place for YEARS, Jack. You ROCKETH! I just couldn't remember the name. Thank you so much.
Just to spite Sebastian I'm going to move to San Diego and be his bestest buddy. We'll go everywhere together. :) Da zoo. Da movies. Out to buy more pretty Bella Sara stuff. Oh, won't it be grand?!
|
|
I've been trying to find that place for YEARS, Jack. You ROCKETH! I just couldn't remember the name. Thank you so much.
Just to spite Sebastian I'm going to move to San Diego and be his bestest buddy. We'll go everywhere together. :) Da zoo. Da movies. Out to buy more pretty Bella Sara stuff. Oh, won't it be grand?!
I try.
Oh and make sure to go to a Chargers game too.|
|
Whatever. We're all arguing different things as usual.Yeah? Well, Van Hagar was bogus.
They were seriously considering Patty Smythe (of Scandal) as lead singer at one point. Can you imagine? Van Halen, with a smoking strong-voiced female lead singer? Yow.
Sammy's solo stuff was better.
And don't even get me started on that dude from Extreme. Ugh.
Although jesting, of course your words do indeed represent the opinions of fools who actually think that @#$%. Which makes me ponder...
It's funny how when you're born in a US state, they'll let you move to another state without guff (so long as the place you're moving to votes the same way... blue states to blue states, red to red), but if you want to see what life is like in Ireland for a few years you're somehow a turncoat, denying the country wot taught ya stuff a chance to bleed you dry until the day you die. How American do I have to be? Do I have to eat apple pie off the back of a bald eagle? As if in this Starbucks-on-every-corner supermall of a world, nationality means so much any more. I am not a vital cog in a national machine. I am a soveriegn citizen who wants to, and will, see the world.
I'm like ninety-six years old. Lemme go die where I wanna die.
Whatever. We're all arguing different things as usual.Yeah? Well, Van Hagar was bogus.They were seriously considering Patty Smythe (of Scandal) as lead singer at one point. Can you imagine? Van Halen, with a smoking strong-voiced female lead singer? Yow.
Sammy's solo stuff was better.
And don't even get me started on that dude from Extreme. Ugh.
Gary Cherone. Not a fan. There was this tribute to Queen, and Freddy Mercury, and Gary, flavor of the month with More Than Words, did a song with Queen's surviving members. He reaches around Brian May's neck and headlocks him during the song.
The man's confidence was so underfunded by his career staying power. That was a move maybe Rod Stewart could have gotten away with... but Gary Cherone?
BTW... Patty Smyth? That's... brutally and unforgiveably insane an option.
Do I have to eat apple pie off the back of a bald eagle?Well...maybe set off some fireworks while you do it...
<G> Will do. I'll clinch some sparklers 'tween my cheeks. (I need both hands just in case the eagle gets frisky with those talons)
|
|
<G> Will do. I'll clinch some sparklers 'tween my cheeks. (I need both hands just in case the eagle gets frisky with those talons)Do I have to eat apple pie off the back of a bald eagle?Well...maybe set off some fireworks while you do it...
That has officially become a disturbing visual.
Congrats.
<G> Will do. I'll clinch some sparklers 'tween my cheeks. (I need both hands just in case the eagle gets frisky with those talons)Do I have to eat apple pie off the back of a bald eagle?Well...maybe set off some fireworks while you do it...That has officially become a disturbing visual.
Congrats.
We all celebrate our national independence in different ways.
Bright sparks shooting out of your ass is a new one though.
New for you, maybe.
You should see how I set-up a birthday cake!
Hopefully that involves wearing pants the whole time.Bright sparks shooting out of your ass is a new one though.New for you, maybe.
You should see how I set-up a birthday cake!
Non-flammable crotchless pants, sure.
And I say again they are the only logical reasons, as using it as internal exile will not be satisfying to the public at large.
That incapacitation can be statistically proven to reduce crime on the outside most certainly qualifies it as a logical reason. In fact it just so happens to be one of the easily quantifiable reasons for incarceration in the study of crime and punishment*. You contend that the public will not be satisfied but satisfying the public is not a logical reason as far as I can see, unless they somehow got some logic in them while I wasn't looking. Besides, the "public at large" never has been a homogeneous group so I don't get why you would ever bring them into the mix; looking on the net... yes, it seems that some of them are quite happy to hear that incapacitation works despite its costs. A political reason, sure, a popular reason, certainly!
*Punishment: not quantifiable. When is someone punished, what is fair, what makes a punishment equal to a crime? The rehabilitation argument can at least be measured by recidivism rates; it is quantifiable and has some logical basis as a reason for incarceration.
...
Gary Cherone. Not a fan. There was this tribute to Queen, and Freddy Mercury, and Gary, flavor of the month with More Than Words, did a song with Queen's surviving members. He reaches around Brian May's neck and headlocks him during the song.
The man's confidence was so underfunded by his career staying power. That was a move maybe Rod Stewart could have gotten away with... but Gary Cherone?
QFT. Extreme was a local Massachusetts band for many years before lightning struck them with that abortion of a song MTW. From anyone who I have met who ran across them in bars, at parties, or in general, both Cherone and his guitar-playing buddy Nuno Bettencourt had their heads wedged so far up their fourth point of contact they looked like Escher drawings. Even as struggling local artists they comported themselves as if they were super-megastars, sneering at anyone who ventured to say hello to them. They had no time for anyone who couldn't further their career, or fund their lifestyle (they had a reputation for mooching off a group of women fans, who were known as the 'Extreme Girls' ...ugh). It is gratifying that such smug 'artists' sank to the level of obscurity that they deserve.
PS: David Lee Roth FTW!
Unpleasant conditions constituting punishment in and of itself is a reason for incarceration as a punishment.
I didn't have time to post this before my class this morning.
Incarceration does not naturally or logically follow if punishment is demanded, as I have already posted. There are many other forms of punishment and different forms might be chosen for different (perhaps logical, perhaps not) reasons. I know that you know this is true so what's the point of your repeating your inaccuracy?
Now just as a interesting point of conversation, punishment as a disincentive to crime is fascinating to me because it would seem to be working on people who might commit crime if there was no penalty. It's with the people who ARE committing the crimes that it is not working because, by and large, they think they won't be caught. Heck, if our punishments were an effective disincentive then we wouldn't have any criminals, would we!
|
|
I was going to vote Libertarian this year... until I found out that they picked a former Republician as their frontrunner. I disagree with his view on international affairs, but I would have went with Ron Paul, since he seems to be the only one without ties to special interests groups/lobbyists/cronies.
Maybe another independent will step up to the plate. Until then, I think my ballot will remain undecided.
I don't quite understand your thinking here, so if someone was part of a political movement and later realized that he was taking the wrong position and is willing to admit it that is a bad thing, as opposed to candidates who slavishly follow party lines and never admit mistakes merely say that their statements were either misunderstood or misrepresented?
|
|
All though I would rather have voted for Ron Paul I am happy to vote for Bob Barr, I hope he stands true to his stance that the war on drugs and the war in Iraq are failures of policy and need to be ended,
On a side note, the Iraqis have asked us for a timetable for withdraw, I was oppossed to a withdraw timetable until that moment but if the Iraqis are asking for one it's time to go.
|
|
From anyone who I have met who ran across them in bars, at parties, or in general, both Cherone and his guitar-playing buddy Nuno Bettencourt had their heads wedged so far up their fourth point of contact they looked like Escher drawings.
One of my gaming group runs a store where Nuno shops regularly. It seems like every damn month, he's hinting that there's gonna be 'big news!' coming up regarding the band coming together. No really. Any day now!
It's been decades, shepard-boy. The wolves are gonna eat you, and nobody's gonna be there.
More Than Words bugged me even in my college frat-boy days, since it was some sort of paean to emotionally blackmailing your girlfriend to put out. Who needs that that sort of crap? Haven't they heard of roofies?
I've never met a professed Libertarian who didn't lean to the right. :)
On many issues, but not all. For example, a full-out libertarian would be pro-choice on the basis that the government has no right to make that decision for an individual.
Incarceration does not naturally or logically follow if punishment is demanded
What I don't get is this: person commits a serious crime, so we put them in a training center where other criminals teach them to be more ruthless. Unfortunately, given the sheer number of prisoners in the U.S., I don't see how it could be otherwise without totally re-vamping the prison system.
...
Gary Cherone. Not a fan. There was this tribute to Queen, and Freddy Mercury, and Gary, flavor of the month with More Than Words, did a song with Queen's surviving members. He reaches around Brian May's neck and headlocks him during the song.
The man's confidence was so underfunded by his career staying power. That was a move maybe Rod Stewart could have gotten away with... but Gary Cherone?
QFT. Extreme was a local Massachusetts band for many years before lightning struck them with that abortion of a song MTW. From anyone who I have met who ran across them in bars, at parties, or in general, both Cherone and his guitar-playing buddy Nuno Bettencourt had their heads wedged so far up their fourth point of contact they looked like Escher drawings. Even as struggling local artists they comported themselves as if they were super-megastars, sneering at anyone who ventured to say hello to them. They had no time for anyone who couldn't further their career, or fund their lifestyle (they had a reputation for mooching off a group of women fans, who were known as the 'Extreme Girls' ...ugh). It is gratifying that such smug 'artists' sank to the level of obscurity that they deserve.
PS: David Lee Roth FTW!
Worse, people used to think I looked like Nuno, because in an age of chemically kinked hair, mine was dark, long, and pin straight. That would be the single similarity, and even that wasn't quite right. I remember thinking, "This is who I'm getting compared to? Not Errol Flynn, James Dean, Elvis... but Nuno Bettancourt?"
One of my gaming group runs a store where Nuno shops regularly. It seems like every damn month, he's hinting that there's gonna be 'big news!' coming up regarding the band coming together. No really. Any day now!
It's been decades, shepard-boy. The wolves are gonna eat you, and nobody's gonna be there.
More Than Words bugged me even in my college frat-boy days, since it was some sort of paean to emotionally blackmailing your girlfriend to put out. Who needs that that sort of crap? Haven't they heard of roofies?
LOL. Thanks for the updates, guys. The pathos is overwhelming. That last story about Nuno almost makes you feel bad for him.
More Than Words bugged me even in my college frat-boy days
Yeah, me, too. I hated that song with a passion.
|
|
What I don't get is this: person commits a serious crime, so we put them in a training center where other criminals teach them to be more ruthless.
Well, obviously, they need training. If they were any good at being criminals, they wouldn't have gotten caught.
Or they'd be the *real* crooks, who, instead of holding up a convenience store, do something like rip off the pensions of 40,000 employees, fire a couple thousand people and then get a 3 million dollar reward for doing such a good job of saving the stockholders money. We've got tens of thousands of dudes in jail for using crack, and far too many educated good-old boys who are being *rewarded* for commiting crimes that hurt thousands of people, or in the case of the housing-lending thing, that end up punishing every single American who has to pay for what they like to call 'mistakes' even 'though nobody sane thinks that they didn't know exactly what they were doing.
It's impossible to take punishment-for-crime seriously in this country when Washington rewards and applauds law-breakers every single day on Capitol Hill. If the laws don't apply to every American, starting with the President, they why the hell should *I* be punished for getting a couple thousand people killed or stealing a couple million bucks?
|
|
That incapacitation can be statistically proven to reduce crime on the outside most certainly qualifies it as a logical reason. In fact it just so happens to be one of the easily quantifiable reasons for incarceration in the study of crime and punishment*.
It can?
I thought that was exploded by showing the US has a higher criminal population and higher crime rate?You might have a problem proving that.
You contend that the public will not be satisfied but satisfying the public is not a logical reason as far as I can see, unless they somehow got some logic in them while I wasn't looking. Besides, the "public at large" never has been a homogeneous group so I don't get why you would ever bring them into the mix; looking on the net... yes, it seems that some of them are quite happy to hear that incapacitation works despite its costs. A political reason, sure, a popular reason, certainly!
It is a critical reason.
The entire reason for a government justice system is to supersede the need for private justice systems, which are all too often just direct vengeance. If individuals are not satisfied with the perceived value of the justice they will turn to vigilanteism and worse. There is an overwhelming body of history to support this, not to mention the massive pop culture/entertainment industry based on it. Hell, on a certain level, fantasy games express the desire to take personal vengeance rather than leave it for someone else. Every time you play D&D and your character just goes out to save the day because it is the "right thing to do" rather than because he has a directly granted authority you are expressing just how much you do not trust the government to give you justice, and how much you want to take it into your own hands.*Punishment: not quantifiable. When is someone punished, what is fair, what makes a punishment equal to a crime? The rehabilitation argument can at least be measured by recidivism rates; it is quantifiable and has some logical basis as a reason for incarceration.
Of course it is massively subjective. And variable over time. That does not change the essential core of the concept. It is always about the vengeance.
Simple test:Somebody wanders by and beats the living daylights out of "you" (the person responding to the question). Is your primary concern:
1. Having the person suffer to an equal or greater degree
2. Having the person learn in a non-confrontational manner not to do that again
3. Having the person pay for all of your expenses from the incident
4. Having the person kept far away from you for some time
You will find a very powerful bias towards the first response, with the others being dismissed as "That might be fine for you, I want payback."
Incarceration does not naturally or logically follow if punishment is demanded, as I have already posted. There are many other forms of punishment and different forms might be chosen for different (perhaps logical, perhaps not) reasons. I know that you know this is true so what's the point of your repeating your inaccuracy?
I did not say it did.
I said that incarceration as punishment rather than exile or for rehabilitation follows logically.There is a difference.
What follows most naturally is the "Old Fashioned Asswhipping". However, that has long been superseded by the Rule of Law, and a social stigma against Lex Talionis as the basis for all punishment.
Now just as a interesting point of conversation, punishment as a disincentive to crime is fascinating to me because it would seem to be working on people who might commit crime if there was no penalty. It's with the people who ARE committing the crimes that it is not working because, by and large, they think they won't be caught. Heck, if our punishments were an effective disincentive then we wouldn't have any criminals, would we!
That is why it is functionally impossible to collect any data as to the deterrent effect of crime.
You can never get reliable information about who did not do something wrong.You can never get reliable information about who did not do something wrong again.
Not because people will not tell you, but because people who are "properly" socialized will have sublimated the aversion to breaking certain laws to such a degree that they no longer even recognize the deterrent effect.
"Why did you not steal the groceries you bought today?"
"Because it is wrong!"
"Was it because you were afraid of going to prison and the social stigma of being known as a thief?"
"Because it is wrong!"
"Did you feel you did not have a sufficient opportunity to get away with it?"
"BECAUSE IT IS WRONG!!!"
Contrasting with that, you would need to identify every single possible action by a criminal, and check why they did not commit a crime at each instance.
"Why did you not rob him?"
"Too big. Too many witnesses. I did not need money. He did not have enough for it to be worthwhile. It would not have been worth going to prison for."
Again, just because there are other reasons and other methods of punishment does not change the actual circumstances. They beat child molestors then hang them with cranes in Iran. Just because it is one of the broken clock things I agree with does not suddenly make that the only logical punishment, a generally logical punishment, or even a vaguely preferable punishment.
|
I am not actually Norwegian. It's more likely that I would, should I expatriate, wind up in a country that speaks my language.
There should be a contest held among those countries on my list to see who loses and is forced to take me.
Ha! I knew it!
But seriously, Norway's much nicer than Denmark. Much, muh nicer. Go there instead.
More Than Words bugged me even in my college frat-boy daysYeah, me, too. I hated that song with a passion.
"More than words" used to be a test of character back where I grew up. It worked like this - if you know the lyrics to "More than words", you are probably a [insert horrible insult of choice], and most certainly a [insert another horrible insult].
It was well-deserved, IMO. Awful, awful song.
|
|
Somebody wanders by and beats the living daylights out of "you" (the person responding to the question). Is your primary concern:
1. Having the person suffer to an equal or greater degree
2. Having the person learn in a non-confrontational manner not to do that again
3. Having the person pay for all of your expenses from the incident
4. Having the person kept far away from you for some timeYou will find a very powerful bias towards the first response, with the others being dismissed as, "That might be fine for you, I want payback."
I am just cynical about the nature of other people and the screwed up beliefs and lack of respect for themselves and others (since people who don't respect others either 1) are sad pandas that don't respect themselves or 2) are freaking psychopaths), to believe that you're right about that.
But am I unreasonable for choosing option 3 (keep the psycho the hell away from me) and finding people who chose number 1 to be EVERY BIT AS SCARY as the guy who beat me up in the first place?
I'd like to pretend that I'm a good enough person to choose option 2, but I'm not. I'm not even much of a Christian, so the whole 'turn the other cheek' thing never really worked for me (just as it doesn't terribly popular with 90% of the people who *do* think of themselves as good Christians...). I'm big on the forgiveness, but usually am not comfortable around people who have done me wrong. Gracious? Not so much my strong point.
Case in point. I was sexually abused at the age of five. I really could care less that she never got 'punished,' nor do I have the slightest desire to do anything gross to her to 'get her back.' I'm not remotely interested in seeing the woman again (she's probably nearly 60 by now anyway...).
Would punishing her, physically, socially or sexually, give me any sort of enjoyment? No. 'Cause I'm not a sicko. Would reading in a paper that she had a horrible life and died over six years of horrible pain as cancer ate her up make me feel better, like she 'got what she deserved' or it was 'karma' or something? No, again, because I am not damaged goods or some fragile fearful creature that needs to lash out at anything that has ever scared me. She made a choice that I can't fathom, but I'm better than that, and I don't get off on other people's suffering.
I am not actually Norwegian. It's more likely that I would, should I expatriate, wind up in a country that speaks my language.
There should be a contest held among those countries on my list to see who loses and is forced to take me.
Ha! I knew it!
But seriously, Norway's much nicer than Denmark. Much, muh nicer. Go there instead.
Norway was always my first choice, among Scandinavian countries. I can't wait to travel there.
Would punishing her... give me any sort of enjoyment? No. 'Cause I'm not a sicko. Would reading in a paper that she had a horrible life and died over six years of horrible pain as cancer ate her up make me feel better, like she 'got what she deserved' or it was 'karma' or something? No, again, because I am not damaged goods or some fragile fearful creature that needs to lash out at anything that has ever scared me. She made a choice that I can't fathom, but I'm better than that, and I don't get off on other people's suffering.
Word. The desire for simple vengeance is incredibly deep-seated in people, but ultimately it's usually more self-destructive than useful. A great take on this is the old Steve McQueen movie, Nevada Smith. There are one or two moments of interesting commentary in Jack Vances "Demon Princes" stories as well (to which I'm obviously partial). On the flip side, other sources (e.g., The Count of Monte Cristo, or The Niebelungenlied--two of my other favorites) paint it with a much more glamorous brush.
|
|
Or they'd be the *real* crooks, who, instead of holding up a convenience store, do something like rip off the pensions of 40,000 employees, fire a couple thousand people and then get a 3 million dollar reward for doing such a good job of saving the stockholders money. We've got tens of thousands of dudes in jail for using crack, and far too many educated good-old boys who are being *rewarded* for commiting crimes that hurt thousands of people, or in the case of the housing-lending thing, that end up punishing every single American who has to pay for what they like to call 'mistakes' even 'though nobody sane thinks that they didn't know exactly what they were doing.
well, ben glisan from Enron was my cellie for a year in federal prison...
|
|
Well the recent race post taught me that I am indeed a cracker. And if Polly wants me... she can have me.Well, Rone, sometimes when a man and a parrot love each other very, very much...
I don't get "poly" myself, but to each their own.
I kept reading that as "ploy". Which is what I have to resort to to get a date.
I'm only a four hour drive away.Sushi. Long Duck Sushi Bar, Montreal, Canada. 7:45 PM tomorrow. HURRY! YOU'LL BOTH MISS YOUR PLANES!Really? What reservation was that?Samuel Weiss has cause. I remember the thread were he and Dingo got into it and Dingo was way off the reservation IMO.
Greeeeaaat logic, bro.See, when ANYONE says something like that, I (not just me, either) would automatically assume that he was joking. Which he is.
Cool. You'll get there first. Dingo and Sam both have a ways to go.
OoOo... Unintentional metaphor...