You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
March 26, 2017, 02:06:27 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

The Elliquian Herald & Post
Issue 73 ~ February & March 2017

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: With the Stroke of a Pen...  (Read 4104 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline The American Patriot

Re: With the Stroke of a Pen...
« Reply #50 on: January 27, 2009, 01:22:05 AM »
Actually, the Geneva Convention tells us what to do to unlawful combatants... even partisans. Non-uniformed fighters are seen as unlawful combatants, and when i was in the service... we where told to kil them. not capture them. because they are not protected by the rules of warfare. technically, our guys where suppose to take them out back and put a bullet in the backs of their heads when we catch them.

thus the reason why 'Volkstrum' units during the end of the second world war would wear uniforms that had been outlawed by the Nazi party (and it became a death sentice to wear them), so they wouldn't be seen as unlawful non-uniformed combatants by the allied forces. And it's also the reason so many of the Volkstrum battalions surrendered enmass when encountered.

Offline RubySlippers

Re: With the Stroke of a Pen...
« Reply #51 on: January 27, 2009, 01:31:41 AM »
But I for one think we can take the high ground granting any partisans properly documented in the field as being acting for a government that is recognized as being so protected. Such as written documents or dog tags with recognizable meaning. That would still allow us to deal with terrorists and insurgents as not said protected and give the benefit of the status to suitable parties. Just amend the signature on the treaties to make this correction by Act of Congress.

Offline overfiend87

Re: With the Stroke of a Pen...
« Reply #52 on: January 27, 2009, 07:09:01 AM »
I guess I'm rarther immature with my belief, but I'd perfer there to be torture on those who commit crimes. For one thing if it's broadcasted, more people will not break the law, especially if they know the type of punishment they would be delt with, but that's my belief. A pacifist way of just locking someone up and away won't work in my opinion. Rehabilitation doesn't appear to work atall.

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: With the Stroke of a Pen...
« Reply #53 on: January 27, 2009, 07:27:03 AM »
For one thing if it's broadcasted, more people will not break the law, especially if they know the type of punishment they would be delt with, but that's my belief.

In many jurisdictions, committing murder makes you eligible for the death penalty, something that makes the US look bad in many European's view.  Despite this clearly broadcast punishment, people still commit murder.  There are mandatory minimums for certain drug-related crimes (possession, distribution, etc.), but people still buy and sell drugs.

I won't deny that there are times when harsh punishments are warranted, but knowing the punishments doesn't seem to stop people who are really determined to take a course of action.

Offline LaCroix

Re: With the Stroke of a Pen...
« Reply #54 on: January 31, 2009, 03:50:02 AM »
It does not, however, mean that the punishment is not justified. As far as I am concerned, if you see fit to end the life of another person (unless it should happen as a means of self preservation, a defense of your own life) then you deserve to put under the death penalty. If you claim another life out of malic or greed or what have you, then as far as I am concerned you have through that act relinquished all right to your own right to continue living.

In my mind, not putting a murderer (one has as I said before, killed out of malic, greed, or any other reason other than self defense of their own life or a loved ones through some direct threat) then you devalue the life of the victim. It is, as far as I am concered, the same as saying that the life of a murderer is more valued than the life of the victim.

Some people will openly disagree with that standpoint and I can respect that, but it is my own personal opinion on the matter. I'll also add here that I agree with Ket, however, I am of an even firmer opinion. Some people cannot be reasoned with. Some people refuse to negotiate and some people or factions are only going to back down if they recognize that statements made to the point of 'This and this will not be tolerated' are going to be back up by threat of force.

Having said that, I do not believe we need to be war mongering, or looking under rocks for the next threat, but when and if the next threat presents itself, I personally feel safer knowing said threat might be a little bit more cautious to poke its head up if it knows that when it takes some action against this country or its citizens that it might get that head blown off if the situation warrents such a reaction.

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: With the Stroke of a Pen...
« Reply #55 on: January 31, 2009, 08:37:20 AM »
It does not, however, mean that the punishment is not justified. As far as I am concerned, if you see fit to end the life of another person (unless it should happen as a means of self preservation, a defense of your own life) then you deserve to put under the death penalty. If you claim another life out of malic or greed or what have you, then as far as I am concerned you have through that act relinquished all right to your own right to continue living.

In my mind, not putting a murderer (one has as I said before, killed out of malic, greed, or any other reason other than self defense of their own life or a loved ones through some direct threat) then you devalue the life of the victim. It is, as far as I am concered, the same as saying that the life of a murderer is more valued than the life of the victim.

Some people will openly disagree with that standpoint and I can respect that, but it is my own personal opinion on the matter. I'll also add here that I agree with Ket, however, I am of an even firmer opinion. Some people cannot be reasoned with. Some people refuse to negotiate and some people or factions are only going to back down if they recognize that statements made to the point of 'This and this will not be tolerated' are going to be back up by threat of force.

Having said that, I do not believe we need to be war mongering, or looking under rocks for the next threat, but when and if the next threat presents itself, I personally feel safer knowing said threat might be a little bit more cautious to poke its head up if it knows that when it takes some action against this country or its citizens that it might get that head blown off if the situation warrents such a reaction.

Actually, we don't disagree that much.  I just think that when the punishment has been justified (by examining actual evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt), it should be dispensed with swiftly and cleanly.