|
On January 02 2010 02:09 EmeraldSparks wrote:
I vote that saying the phrases "dumb masses," "sheeple," or "why don't you think for yourself" be an immediately bannable offense as it indicates that in 100% of cases the posters is an arrogant prick.
You keep your blinders on, ignorance is bliss. lol
I'd highlight the obviousness of how the masses are complete sheep but there's no point in arguing with you. If you can't see how people are massively brainwashed by the media, you need to pick up a book and quick. Alternatively you can go back to iccup, shut down your brain and pretend this world is as pink and cute as the fantasy we're being fed with.
|
On January 02 2010 02:34 Elroi wrote:
Even if this is not at all as disturbing as the Liu Xiaobo sentece it makes me sick. I wonder if these threads should be closed though because they are all the same to me. I just feel like hiding in the world of SC instead of trying to understand this barbaric world. TT
The world of SC where marines are criminals that get brainwashed, pumped full of drugs, and sent into combat to their inevitable deaths. Where protoss take even their cripples into battle and rip people apart with their minds. Where ravening hordes of zerg that shit purple poo all over everything, devour everything, and then pervert humans into crab-looking suicide bombers? Yeah man! Sounds heaps better XD
|
On January 02 2010 02:38 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On January 02 2010 02:34 Elroi wrote:
Even if this is not at all as disturbing as the Liu Xiaobo sentece it makes me sick. I wonder if these threads should be closed though because they are all the same to me. I just feel like hiding in the world of SC instead of trying to understand this barbaric world. TT The world of SC where marines are criminals that get brainwashed, pumped full of drugs, and sent into combat to their inevitable deaths. Where protoss take even their cripples into battle and rip people apart with their minds. Where ravening hordes of zerg that shit purple poo all over everything, devour everything, and then pervert humans into crab-looking suicide bombers? Yeah man! Sounds heaps better XD
lol.. with the little exception that it's all a game..?
|
On January 02 2010 00:51 haduken wrote:
lol reit, so many trolls in this thread.
Look people, he's dead. Give it a rest.
Capital punishment is nothing new in Asia. Drug trafficking will sent you to your maker. Everyone knows that.
Morality my ass, the West needs to get use to the fact that you guys no longer runs the world.
I sorta agree with the capital punishment abolishment but why diss dog eating? that shit is goood.
Don't really care about dog eating, was just trying to show the guy how blatantly fucking retarded and racist his comment was.
Drug trafficking will only send you to your maker if you're at the bottom of the food chain. The people that do it to survive are those who are put to death. Their bosses, the people who will find a replacement for this poor soul your government massacred, will never face justice, as most of them occupy positions of power, whether in the public or private space.
Drug dealing, again, is a market. Who do you think profits from this? The dude who got executed? Think he wouldve made millions on the "suffering" of Chinese addicts? Fuck no. On the other hand, I wouldnt be surprised if some of the commies that run the Chinese state silver lined their pockets with heroin money.
The funny thing is, if he was your brother, you'd be tearing your shirts off, screaming at the injustice. But since it's some random bloke from the UK that you've never met or known, it's ok to kill him.
Kinda like that other retard poster who said it was ok to kill a few innocents. Wonder what he'd think if it was his mother eh?
|
On January 02 2010 02:42 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 02 2010 02:38 StorkHwaiting wrote:On January 02 2010 02:34 Elroi wrote:
Even if this is not at all as disturbing as the Liu Xiaobo sentece it makes me sick. I wonder if these threads should be closed though because they are all the same to me. I just feel like hiding in the world of SC instead of trying to understand this barbaric world. TT The world of SC where marines are criminals that get brainwashed, pumped full of drugs, and sent into combat to their inevitable deaths. Where protoss take even their cripples into battle and rip people apart with their minds. Where ravening hordes of zerg that shit purple poo all over everything, devour everything, and then pervert humans into crab-looking suicide bombers? Yeah man! Sounds heaps better XD lol.. with the little exception that it's all a game..?
You forget that what we think is the "real world" may be all a game too! A HAH! Got you there!
|
On January 02 2010 02:43 reit wrote:Show nested quote +On January 02 2010 00:51 haduken wrote:
lol reit, so many trolls in this thread.
Look people, he's dead. Give it a rest.
Capital punishment is nothing new in Asia. Drug trafficking will sent you to your maker. Everyone knows that.
Morality my ass, the West needs to get use to the fact that you guys no longer runs the world.
I sorta agree with the capital punishment abolishment but why diss dog eating? that shit is goood. The funny thing is, if he was your brother, you'd be tearing your shirts off, screaming at the injustice. But since it's some random bloke from the UK that you've never met or known, it's ok to kill him. Kinda like that other retard poster who said it was ok to kill a few innocents. Wonder what he'd think if it was his mother eh?
In general I agree with what you said in your post... But I just wanted to point out to you that we are only having this debate because it's a guy from Britain that was executed.
On January 02 2010 02:38 StorkHwaiting wrote:
You forget that what we think is the "real world" may be all a game too! A HAH! Got you there!
Yeah you owned me 
|
Dude tried to smuggle 5kg of drugs into China.
China law states that drug trafficing is punishable by death.
What's all the fuss about? That he was mentally ill? How ill? Ill enough to not get prosecuted or not ill enough so that someone would actually entrust this amount of drugs to him?
Edit: If it was my brother caught for trafficing drugs into China... Well, he'd probably deserve that.
|
So because China has the law that makes it okay?
What if China punished Jaywalking, or littering via death? Would every Jaywalker and Litterer honestly deserve that consequence just because China gave them "Fair warning," which honestly means crap in a country where most of the trafficking is done by those too young, sheltered, or uneducated to understand the letter of law.
|
It's ok because it is a reasonable law, not because China has it. If you don't think it's ok, then too bad. At least 99% of Chinese will agree with this law and support the death penalty of heroin trafficking.
|
So because something is popular opinion, that makes it right? Even when that popular opinion is demonstrably flawed?
You're not saying anything new. That was one of the very first arguments in the thread and it's cyclically unintuitive to restate. I guess I could just quote every response I have to that point all over again but I find it a bit tedious.
|
I've always thought that the insanity plea was ridiculous and has no place in our courts. Even if they are insane, why bother keeping them alive with taxpayer money? It would be nothing but a drag on society. A crime is a crime; the law may be wrong or unfair sometimes and could need a reevaluation or a reinterpretation by a court, but in most cases, it's very clear if a behavior must be punished or not. I've never understood why a life sentence is better than the death penalty. They get to subsist on taxpayer money but they rot in a jail cell, to do nothing productive until they expire. Some states don't allow the death penalty though. I've always been amused by the fact that the same people that oppose the death penalty and abortion support the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, despite the fact that these wars lead to many more deaths than the other two put together.
The diplomatic thing to do was to send him back to Britain to be tried, since he is a British national, but as the person was committing a crime in China, China did have the right to try and execute him. Even if he didn't know that drug trafficking was illegal in China, I'm sure he knew that what he was doing wasn't legal.
"Justice has to be just." What is just? It is merely the opinion of those in the judicial branch, within the scope provided by the legislative branch.
+ Show Spoiler +On January 01 2010 11:45 TwoToneTerran wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2010 11:41 yhnmk wrote:On January 01 2010 11:39 TwoToneTerran wrote:
This specific instance of law is a direct product of mob mentality, though. It's rash, angry, and brutal, and in no way syncs up with Law as a whole, which prides itself on being cold, calculated and fair.
If every consequence of law was a direct coorelation to mob opinion then, sure, the prisons would be a lot less crowded, but then we'd just be in the Witch Trial eras again. lol, you can want revenge and expect extremely harsh punishments but still do it in a calculated and fair manner. For example: The American death penalty. :O it completely syncs up with law. Law aint just about rehabilitation or prevention, it is also about punishment. Its been like that for centuries across the globe. And many philosophers justified the death penalty on the basis of revenge alone. It's not punishment. Punishment is meant to teach a lesson. Imprisoning a thief for ten years is punishment because he can learn from the consequence of his action. There's no learning from being killed. Also, don't get me started on the American Death Penalty. If you want a less 'impassioned' reason against the death penalty, there should be no death penalty because there's no infallible court system to prove 100% innocence and guilt. No matter how hard you try, you will end up killing innocent people just like how we have imprisoned innocent people. State sanctioned murder is no less abhorrent then personally committed murder. By its own logic, all supporters should be put to death for being absolutely involved in cold blooded murder once an innocent man has been falsely found guilty. But that's no the case. Why? Because it's the antithesis of law. there's no system for fallibility in the death penalty short of not killing the convict off the bat so he may later be absolved. It's dumb, senseless, and does nothing that imprisonment wouldn't besides sate subconscious bloodlust.
Not at all. There are times when it is completely obvious, with overwhelming evidence that someone is guilty and deserving of the death penalty. Of course, the system isn't perfect, but I would rather have a few innocents for the removal of many guilty than letting them all off and maybe even free to commit more crimes, just because you might be wrong.
"3) Its not dumb, its a calculated, complex process, with hundreds of years of philosophy and evolution behind it. And it removes the possibility of repeat offenders. Do you know how many murderer's, rapists, etc, get out of prison and commit the same act? A fuckin lot. Especially in states or countries [hi Canada] that ascribe to the idea that law exists to rehabilitate the criminal. In areas with a more lax justice system, a murderer can be let out in five years or less. "
Agree. Rather than second chances for people who commit crimes like murder or rape, they should just be killed before they can do it again. Leniency is overrated.
On January 01 2010 13:35 TwoToneTerran wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2010 13:33 Draconizard wrote:On January 01 2010 13:15 n.DieJokes wrote:
Wait, can we get back to the fact that they sentence a man to death for drug trafficking. That's insane, how is there even a discussion going on, they sentenced a man to [u]death[/u for drug trafficking! And this guy was an international citizen with questionable mental status but they just couldn't refrain from giving the motherfucking death penalty... for drug trafficking. I'm going to keep repeating that because if that doesn't alarm your sensibilities you don't understand the value of human. Heroin is bad, no disagreements here, but any argument where selling it should be punished by death is unbelievably flawed And what precisely is the "value of human [sic]"? Who or what defines such value? No one truly can (as any person views their own life as invaluable, and thus has a skewed premise), and since human lives obviously have some intrinsic value that we can't properly equate due to personal bias, the fairest assumption is that human life is all invaluable.
Fair is also overrated and is impossible to have anyway. All human life is NOT invaluable, this is a silly premise to accept. A doctor is worth more than a janitor. Steven Hawkings is more valuable than a homeless person on the street. No matter how you may feel about the morals of this kind of situation, the fact is that the value of a life can be quantified and frequently is, especially in situations where someone dies and their closest living relatives are compensated.
|
On January 02 2010 05:55 TwoToneTerran wrote:
So because something is popular opinion, that makes it right? Even when that popular opinion is demonstrably flawed?
Death penalty is the right option for China over not having death penalty, not because it's popular opinion, but because it is demonstrably the right option for China to have at this moment.
|
On January 02 2010 06:01 ghostWriter wrote:
I've always been amused by the fact that the same people that oppose the death penalty and abortion support the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, despite the fact that these wars lead to many more deaths than the other two put together.
are there even people who oppose both the death penalty and abortions? most people against abortions are pro death penalty right?
|
On January 02 2010 05:55 TwoToneTerran wrote:
So because something is popular opinion, that makes it right? Even when that popular opinion is demonstrably flawed?
You're not saying anything new. That was one of the very first arguments in the thread and it's cyclically unintuitive to restate. I guess I could just quote every response I have to that point all over again but I find it a bit tedious.
Unfortunately it's their country and they can pretty much do whatever the hell they want to the people within it.
Don't like it? Don't traffic drugs into a country that's notorious for killing people for it.
|
On January 02 2010 06:48 johnnyspazz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 02 2010 06:01 ghostWriter wrote:
I've always been amused by the fact that the same people that oppose the death penalty and abortion support the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, despite the fact that these wars lead to many more deaths than the other two put together. are there even people who oppose both the death penalty and abortions? most people against abortions are pro death penalty right?
This just makes their views even more ironic.
On January 02 2010 02:38 reit wrote:Show nested quote +On January 02 2010 02:09 EmeraldSparks wrote:
I vote that saying the phrases "dumb masses," "sheeple," or "why don't you think for yourself" be an immediately bannable offense as it indicates that in 100% of cases the posters is an arrogant prick. You keep your blinders on, ignorance is bliss. lol I'd highlight the obviousness of how the masses are complete sheep but there's no point in arguing with you. If you can't see how people are massively brainwashed by the media, you need to pick up a book and quick. Alternatively you can go back to iccup, shut down your brain and pretend this world is as pink and cute as the fantasy we're being fed with.
I'd just like to quote this post to highlight the sheer pretentiousness of the poster. Clearly he has all the answers (or at least most of them) and sees the world with heightened clarity compared to us lowly "sheep".
|
On January 02 2010 00:51 haduken wrote:
Morality my ass, the West needs to get use to the fact that you guys no longer runs the world.
Eh, why is this something relevant, lol (not just saying to you). This same debate could be had with quite a lot of other countries, is there really an east/west thing? I guess that is all that can keep the thread going since the topic itself is a pretty tired cliche debate topic. Kind of sad to see this always happen even on TL.
|
On January 02 2010 05:55 TwoToneTerran wrote:
So because something is popular opinion, that makes it right? Even when that popular opinion is demonstrably flawed?
You're not saying anything new. That was one of the very first arguments in the thread and it's cyclically unintuitive to restate. I guess I could just quote every response I have to that point all over again but I find it a bit tedious.
The very morality, and moral laws you're applying here are a matter of popular opinion, western popular opinion which the chinese do not agree with, nor do I as a matter of fact even though i was educated in the western way. And I completely fail to se how you can demonstrate that someone's ethical codex or worldview is flawed if it doesn't contain logical inconsistencies.
On a sidenote, there's nothing more that i would like than the oportunity to sit and talk to someone who is educated and is a critical thinker to explain these notions of "intristic human rights" and the objective and universal "right" and "wrong", because i seem to completely fail to understand them.
|
That was the very first argument I tackled in this thread and I'm very tired of repeating it. If you didn't read the entire thread -- I suggest you do. If you did read the entire thread and forgot, I suggest you take a look back. It's a pain to have to rehash the same thing over and over because people want to repeat that I'm just some Western Morality Normative supporter (whereas I'm completely not -- I am personally appalled and what passes for acceptable in western culture) when that's nothing but a strawman laced with pseudo-ad hominem (in so much as I take blanket accusation of western ideals as an insult to character).
|
United States47024 Posts
On January 02 2010 05:55 TwoToneTerran wrote:
So because something is popular opinion, that makes it right? Even when that popular opinion is demonstrably flawed?
You're not saying anything new. That was one of the very first arguments in the thread and it's cyclically unintuitive to restate. I guess I could just quote every response I have to that point all over again but I find it a bit tedious.
As an issue of international affairs, morality is irrelevant. It doesn't really matter whether you agree or disagree with the law--as a matter of policy, you don't flagrantly ignore local laws when you go to a foreign country, plain and simple; the converse results in too many hairy implications. Obviously families are going to be unsettled by the result, but British government officials really have no place speaking out against what the Chinese have done.
Whether the law is fair or just is an issue for the Chinese people to deal with. That you, who live thousands of miles away, think its unfair is an entirely different (and irrelevant) matter.
|
On December 31 2009 12:52 Spinfusor wrote:
Meh, the only thing in this case you might find interesting is that the trial length (30 mins). This is pretty big problem in China.
It took 30 minutes to sentence someone to die. Wow, just wow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
