I’m schizophrenia and autism. I am a convicted sex offender and am being strongly told I must take the testosterone block medication andracur. Do you think I should be able to refuse.
I’m schizophrenia and autism. I am a convicted sex offender and am being strongly told I must take the testosterone block medication andracur. Do you think I should be able to refuse.
I’m not arguing against anything you said.
I merely pointed out that the death penalty given for anything less than murder usually incentivises making lesser criminals murderers than deterring from the crime they commit.
There was a text on it since like the 1600’s-1700’s, though it talked about why it’s not wise to hang burglars.
Oh I’m sure you’re right, but are you saying that in a “people think ‘he should’ve died’ in a rhetorical way” or a “people actually think there should be the death penalty enacted for what he did”. I believe more the former and plenty the latter, but I wouldn’t say “most” for the latter.
Plenty of people who are against the death penalty, no matter the crime. Probably depends a lot on the context of the community. As in there’s more supporting it in the US for sure than in the Nordics, where it’s not been used for a while.
Etc etc.
Anyway thought it a good point to add.
Tldr if burgling/raping carries the sentence of death and you’ve already committed the crime, better make sure there are no witnesses because adding murder on top won’t matter since they can’t kill you twice.
Oh, okay. Brought up out of the blue like that it seemed like you were suggesting I was in the picture. I actually tried to reach out as non-judgmentally as possible there, given the context.
Ah yes, I actually have seen that passage, although I can’t find it now. Punishing theft with death was actually particular to Germanic cultures IIRC. Even most ancient people thought that was stupidly harsh.
Hmm. I wonder if this could be an argument against life sentences, too, since they’re similarly hard to add on to.
I deliberately didn’t specify, since it would have involved a digression, but I’d guess the same. People talk mad shit on the internet.
It’s relevant to the topic, not out of the blue.
Not exactly, because things change, and don’t the US serve convictions of like 3 consecutive life sentences so that it’d just a very surreal way of making sure they stay in jail?
Here in Finland “life” usually means was it 12 or 14 years, after which the president usually pardons you. But some of the more heinous murderers with several victims didn’t get the parole but that’s rare.
So if you had already murdered two people but it was like here and there how murdery you were instead of it being seconds degree murder or something, you definitely would have something to lose if you killed another dozen people.
But we don’t really get many mass murderers. Population is small and while there’s homicide it’s usually knives and like an angry spouse or smth.
Sure… I’m asking whether you think there’s a big difference in people who would say “kill the fucker” and people who would actually stand behind advocating for the death penalty for him, irl, if needed.
Well, we’re in a thread talking to a convicted pedophile, so I’ll refrain from judging morally. TBH I’ve found the more factual I am on the internet the better it goes.
There’s a difference between saying it and genuinely believing it, yes. Although, most people aren’t actually going to decide if they’re serious until they have to, because ethical analysis of the criminal justice system isn’t a typical interest. It’s more of a spectrum of seriousness, really.
Yes, that is a thing. Legal fictions are funny.
Yeah definitely I’m not gonna talk about the morality of that, I think we all entered with the assumption of understanding that.
Yep. And communication on pseudonymous Internet forums is a every different context from real life.
Agreed