- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:24 pm to Rebel
quote:
1 fact I think we can both agree on is that 100% of murders that have been put down by the state have gone on to murder / rape again.
And we can both agree that many people have been put down by the state for crimes that they in fact did not commit.
But it feels better to ignore that part and we sure do love our feels here.
This post was edited on 12/26/25 at 8:25 pm
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:29 pm to 4cubbies
Lol the majority of death row executions were innocent people!
This post was edited on 12/26/25 at 8:30 pm
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:30 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
We already know, conclusively, that harsher punishments do not deter crime.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:33 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
We already know, conclusively, that harsher punishments do not deter crime. Longer sentences don’t deter.
We also know going easy on these evil people will lead to innocents being murdered, which you are more than fine with.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:33 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Your hand-cutting example actually proves the point. Yes, a mutilated individual is unlikely to steal again. That tells us nothing about whether other people are deterred, which is the only metric that matters for public safety.
This shows how stupid you are lmao. So stopping repeat offenders doesn’t improve public safety? Well holy shite all those people that were victimized by people with previous arrests sure will feel better now.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:36 pm to djsdawg
It's why she never comments in threads like the lady blinded by a thug with a board.
Or a chick lit on fire.
Or a chick lit on fire.
This post was edited on 12/26/25 at 8:38 pm
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:36 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Are you at all interested in preventing crime and preventing victimization?
What a fricking moonbat.
There will ALWAYS be crime and victimization. To think those things could be prevented really highlights your disconnect from reality.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:36 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
that harsher punishments do not deter crime. Longer sentences don’t deter.
I am betting there would be a young Ukrainian woman who would disagree with you. It seems we can conclusively determine she was murdered because of loose and lenient actions of DA’s and judges. You aren’t a fricking lunatic.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:39 pm to 4cubbies
He pardoned Len Davis so shut the frick up.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:39 pm to Keltic Tiger
quote:
"Should google it"...........Here's the answer, she uses such a reliable, fair minded source for her statistics.
I have a bad habit of assuming people enter discussions in good faith, with at least a baseline familiarity with the topic they’re choosing to argue about.
If that were the case here, this wouldn’t even be controversial. We’ve known for centuries that harsher punishments do not meaningfully deter crime, largely because most people who commit crimes do not expect to get caught in the first place.
What’s odd to me is that instead of engaging the substance, several posters have opted to hurl insults and claim I’m “making this up,” without attempting to discredit it through even a cursory search.
Allow me:
quote:
Writing in the 18th century, the Italian criminologist Cesare Beccaria argued that deterrence in the criminal justice system was basically a function of the certainty of punishment, not its severity, a conclusion that still resonates today. Think about how we drive on a highway. Virtually all of us drive over the speed limit to some extent, but if there’s an increased presence of state troopers patrolling on a holiday weekend most of us will slow down. That’s because the certainty of punishment has increased and we’re trying to avoid getting a ticket. But if the legislature has recently increased the severity of punishment, by raising the fine for speeding, that will have little effect. Most of us will be unaware of that change, and we’re not expecting to be caught anyway.
The recent report by the National Research Council on The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Exploring Causes and Consequences, a comprehensive assessment by the nation’s leading criminologists, confirms these findings on deterrence. The report concludes that “all of the evidence on the deterrent effect of certainty of punishment pertains to the deterrent effect of the certainty of apprehension, not to the certainty of postarrest outcomes (including certainty of imprisonment given conviction).”
“Tough” Sentences Won’t Deter Crime
You don’t have to like that reality, but pretending it doesn’t exist doesn’t make us safer. Evidence doesn’t stop being evidence because it’s inconvenient to a “tough on crime” narrative.
Dismissing centuries of criminological theory and decades of empirical research with sarcasm and insults is pretty lazy and dumb.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:41 pm to ninthward
quote:
He pardoned Len Davis so shut the frick up.
Len Davis wasn't pardoned but had his federal death sentence commuted to LWOP.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:42 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
We already know, conclusively, that harsher punishments do not deter crime.
There are some very compromised studies by advocates of non incarceration that claimed this.
Just because you are taking a class where this is declared to be true does not make it so.
Just one of many.
https://www.nber.org/digest/oct98/sentence-enhancements-reduce-crime?page=1&perPage=50
quote:
Longer sentences don’t deter. Supermax conditions don’t deter. Making prison more miserable doesn’t deter. This has been studied to death spanning decades, jurisdictions, and crime categories.
By people who are determined to manipulate the data, you yourself have noted that departments only want papers they agree with.
You can look at the same data through a different statistical method and declare the opposite.
Once we stopped executing people in the 60s, murders went way up.
Oddly those people who were on death row didnt kill anyone after that... but murders went way up.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:42 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
largely because most people who commit crimes do not expect to get caught in the first place
It's largely because people who commit crimes generally have low IQs and weak impulse control. They are too stupid to realize they will get caught.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:44 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
What’s odd to me is that instead of engaging the substance, several posters have opted to hurl insults and claim I’m “making this up,” without attempting to discredit it through even a cursory search.
I pointed out an objective fallacy in your point and you didn’t address it. So shut your whore mouth about peoples responses to you.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:44 pm to RockyMtnTigerWDE
quote:
It seems we can conclusively determine she was murdered because of loose and lenient actions of DA’s and judges.
I'm not sure what this specific instance has to do with the greater discussion. Are you arguing that the only way to keep the public safe is to lock any and all criminals up for life? Are you open to the possibility of rehabilitation? Or do you argue that once someone has committed a crime, they should spend the rest of their life in prison? Or just certain crimes?
This could be another example of me assuming people are discussing in good faith when they are not, though.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:46 pm to 4cubbies
No you fricking dumbass the punishment is also to keep the public safe and has 0 to do with rehabilitation.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:46 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Then stop implying and say it explicitly. What exactly are you accusing me of?
...of trying to justify your insane conclusion based on a moral high ground that you don't even believe.
quote:
You keep asserting “lack of care for victims”
I asserted it once. I'll await your acknowledgement that you were wrong.
quote:
Because from where I’m standing, the evidence cuts the other way.
Our current system does a phenomenal job at producing people who come out more damaged, more antisocial, and more capable of harming others
You don't have evidence of this. This is a conclusion based on faulty logic.
quote:
You accuse me of not caring about victims because I don’t equate justice with maximal suffering.
No. I accuse you of not caring about victims by your relative lack of posts expressing concern for victims vs. your concern for the punishment of violent criminals. It's clear. You can't run from your post history.
quote:
I want fewer victims. That means fewer people cycling back into violence.
That is best accomplished via MUCH longer sentences for violent criminals and death for those that kill (and commit other severe violent crimes such as rape).
quote:
If your definition of “caring about victims” begins and ends with how much pain we can inflict after the harm is already done, then yes, we are operating from fundamentally different premises. But don’t confuse vengeance with concern.
Let's flip this around. You pretend your goal is to reduce the victims. If that's the case, then why do you care about a person doing hard time for the rest of their life vs. not so hard time for the rest of their life. Why do you care about a person getting the death penalty vs. doing a life sentence? All of those outcomes result in the same number of future victims (zero). So, with that in mind, why do you care?
Be careful how you answer that. It's going to reveal your true intentions and show that your motivation has nothing to do with the victims.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:47 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
These men were already removed permanently from society.
And now they are being punished. I fail to see the problem.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 8:48 pm to MemphisGuy
We destroy cancer cells and put aggressive animals to sleep. Why do we refuse to do the same to the human equivalent?
Page 7 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News