Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Smart

Once in a lifetime...

Recommended Posts

Should the crime of murder carry a staute of limitations of 25 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest im not witty

tough one.

depends on whether i killed someone or someone killed my friend. but doesnt it always. i say yea though. if you can get away with it for that long...the running scared lifestyle is enough punishment for me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dyptheria

no. depends on the individual case. if some fool raped my girlfriend, it might drive me nuts to kill him...i shouldn't receive the same sentence for some idiot who killed someone for a monetary benefit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ah, but doesn't a good murder also include a good 'dump'? So, the best murderers will be able to kill, dump the body, and continue living as if nothing has changed? Of course, if you keep killing people it might be argued as a 'continuous crime' under the serial killing defenitions, so nobody could expect to log a big tally, but... just a hypothetical...

 

say some 18 year old kid is in a bad place in his life, maybe dealing or something, and this leads to the direct murder of 3 or 4 people in one night, but that fucks him up and he changes his ways... spends 50 years as a ham 'n egger and just toes the line... then when he's 68, evidence comes out that directly implicates him, should he die in prison? Should he get some credit for living a clean life for 50 years after the fact?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Dyptheria

no. depends on the individual case. if some fool raped my girlfriend, it might drive me nuts to kill him...i shouldn't receive the same sentence for some idiot who killed someone for a monetary benefit

 

actually, a good 'revenge;' defense was fully acceptable under Italian law from the middle ages until Musolinni took over... that's another issue, but one that we could also explore...

 

so, now, it's 2 questions:

Should Murder carry for 25 years?

Is revenge a plausible defense for murder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

revenge doesn't work unless you go eye for an eye... and even then i don't think it would work...

i definately think the life sentence is more plausible than capital punishment though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by JohnnyHorton

i definately think the life sentence is more plausible than capital punishment though

 

this isn't about the punishment phase at all... the first question is about the liability phase and the secong question speaks to motive... let's leave punishment for another discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dyptheria

1. i don't believe in mandatory sentences for crimes. We have judges that do this. A judge makes decisions with consideration to the circumstances of the convict and the crime. A blanket law wouldn't leave any leeway.

 

2. i believe that there is a temporary insanity plea. essentially the plea is based on the fact that the person wouldn't commit the crime under normal circumstances, but some situation caused irrational thinking. revenge could fall under this category. recall the bobbit case in the early nineties.

 

Just my opinions. i'm open minded: if you make a good argument, i'll change my mind. i'm also open to expand on other scenarios

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Dyptheria

1. i don't believe in mandatory sentences for crimes

 

goddamnit! didn't I JUST say this isn't about the punishment phase? If you need to look up "Statute of Limitations" I'll understand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dyptheria

oh, hehe, i know what you mean...hence the scenario you proposed of the 68 year old guy.

 

gotta think about this one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dyptheria

i think everyone guilty of a violent crime needs to be brought to justice, regardless of how laong ago it was. it is at that point that a judge and jury can decide. the defendant may bring many character witnesses to show that they are now a good person. so maybe sentencing may be drastically reduced, but i think those close to the victim would like to see some from of restitution. if somone killed my dad 26 years ago, i don't care what kind of upstanding citizen he/she is, they're going to have some of their life taken from them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Dyptheria

if somone killed my dad 26 years ago, i don't care what kind of upstanding citizen he/she is, they're going to have some of their life taken from them

 

is this not justification for a 'revenge' defense though? and, then, you only killed them because they killed your dad, so, if you can get away with it for 25 years... I mean, if you got an airtight revenge, would you fuck that up by shoplifting or killing other people? Especially if you're a good person that got a screw job from fate, espescially if you live a good life until you find out who killed your pops, then you get them and then you cover it up for another 25 years...

 

???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dyptheria

err... what i meant by some life taken from them was time taken away, say five years in prison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so, basically, your position is that every murder deserves 'government justice', as opposed to revenge killing or something, so I'm gonna put you down under the '99 year staute' column, please correct me if I'm wrongly characterizing your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dyptheria

another question, this one about punishment...

 

scenario one: someone kills my dad, i have to take care of five younger siblings, essentially stripped of any opportunity for college or someother persuit of my own life. all kids are raised 25 years later, and i know i would have went to medical school and be making 6 figures, but i was stuck earning minimum wage and working overtime to support five kids when i was at the age of 18. someone is convicted of the murder. the person is a wealthy businessman who is good and earns a decent living.

 

scenario two: same as scenario one, except the person responsible for the crime became a monk, and dedicated their whole life to providing basic necessities and medicine to those starving and dying in third world countries.

 

would you feel that the person in scenario two has served humanity in a way that would probobly exceed the amount of sacrifice i had to make and whould therefore receive less punishment than the person in scenario one?

 

i dunno where i'm going with this... just thinking, thats all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ctrl+alt+del
Originally posted by JohnnyHorton

eye for an eye...

 

this is an extremely ancient idea, i beleive it was first put into writing by Hammurabi in his book of code. Im a bit rusty in my history, he was either an Egyptian ruler or a Babylonian ruler.... but then again this has nothing to do with this thread. just a bit of info, thought ya might be interested

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest imported_Tesseract

The whole thing is beyond justice in a way...seriously how many people kill...just for once and live as 'good' in their rest of their lives?...I mean this is totally theoritical...Laws are moslty meant to deal with Criminals, that do crime all the time, i remember a story that is irrelevant to this but has a point...a junkie was caught dealing, after that he changed and lived a clean hardworkin life...after 6 years or so, he's case got on trial...he faced prison. Everyone was somehow upset that this kid who did a huge effort to stay clean should go to prison where he would seriously get fucked uped and lose any motivation to stay clean....i dunno i believe in laws in a way...still everygeneral thing has exeptions and casualties...i guess its like when a really good kid and a generaly good driver does a stupid move behind the wheel and ends up dead while others dont get a scratch...bad fuckin luck..

 

 

so, now, it's 2 questions:

Should Murder carry for 25 years?

Yeah, because non punishment leads to the state where

revenge is plausible defense for murder...and on and on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Smart

ah, but doesn't a good murder also include a good 'dump'? So, the best murderers will be able to kill, dump the body, and continue living as if nothing has changed? Of course, if you keep killing people it might be argued as a 'continuous crime' under the serial killing defenitions, so nobody could expect to log a big tally, but... just a hypothetical...

 

 

*in san francisco somthing like 60% of murders go unsolved, its literally the easiest place in the country to kills someone and get away with it....so that shit does happen on the regular round these parts.

 

say some 18 year old kid is in a bad place in his life, maybe dealing or something, and this leads to the direct murder of 3 or 4 people in one night, but that fucks him up and he changes his ways... spends 50 years as a ham 'n egger and just toes the line... then when he's 68, evidence comes out that directly implicates him, should he die in prison? Should he get some credit for living a clean life for 50 years after the fact?

 

*just pop a cap in him and forget about the old fart, i dont give a fuck if you live clean, im on that whole eye for a eye shit, or a miserable life behind bars. Chaka got a stiffer sentence than the people who murdered my freind, call me a bit bitter.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest --zeSto--

here's the fault in this whole discussion...

 

The failure to adress the types of muder.

1st degree - premediated murder

2nd degree - crime of passion ( the whole revenge thing)

3rd degree - negligent manslaughter

 

Not all murders are equal.

And not all muders are violent.

 

whatever happened to a good old poisoning ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Canadiano

does anyone know where I could find a very good, concise book on the history of midieval europe? Nothing that will take over a year to read...you, know - concise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Canadiano

with maps of lands controlled by whoever (muslims, christians, etc)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

poison should be less than 10 based on effort.

 

as zesto broke down...there are many types of murder...

 

but how can it resolve itself, when countries that win wars (ie. have slaughtered thousands of people [intentionally]) very rarely come under fire for war crimes or crimes against humanity...and it is often those same countries that dictate/persuade criminal codes abroad.

 

i guess i don't know how long a life is worth...thus the euthanasia debate...

 

but it certainly strikes me as odd that govt can train people to kill, and that's okay, even reward the murderers w/ medal and raises etc...but some people are in for life for a knife fight gone wrong?

 

as the saying goes, "only poor people serve time"

 

there's some truth to it i think.

 

-dot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Smart

Should the crime of murder carry a staute of limitations of 25 years?

 

nope, i like it just the way it is here, no statute of limitations on murder. criminal mischief or conspiracy to commit criminal mischief can get shorter if you follow me but to hell with out waiting murder...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for a 12ozProphet forum account or sign in to comment

You need to be a forum member in order to comment. Forum accounts are separate from shop accounts.

Create an account

Register to become a 12ozProphet forum member.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×