• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

8th Amendment

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
First, I'm going to predict the future.

1) No one is going to agree with me here. This is only because they don't want to agree with me.
2) Nobody is going to make a comeback that I will not be able to comeback on myself.
3) When a person realizes they cannot win this debate, they will stop debating, either through leaving the thread or hanging around for the sole purpose of harrassing me, saying stuff like "You definately need help. Get some therapy." Anyone who says "I just see nothing to debate about." is a bald-faced liar. Ending the debate is the arrogant way of saying "Maybe you're right. Maybe this will work."

Now, on to the good stuff.

The United States has one of the worst crime rates in the world. A crime is committed every thirty seconds! This is clearly due to the fact of our lenient penal system. Criminals will commit hainous crimes and not care because the worst that can happen to them is a fifty dollar fine and a few days in jail. This is especially true in California, where you can't even spank your own children.

So I have an idea: Completely remove the 8th Amendment by constitutional amendment. You stole a pencil, you get whipped and lashed. You raped somebody, you get your skin shaven off with a potato pealer while your fully concious. You killed someone, some kind of petroleum product is poured on you and then you are lit on fire. And just to ensure that there won't be anyone trying to get out of the punishment, we'll completely remove the "excessive force" restriction on cops, so that they can shoot you in the head if you so much as jerk away from them, so long as they can prove you jerked away. This way, there will be no "resisting arrest."

Think of the good this could bring! Since the penalties are so harsh, people will be indimidated into obedience! Now, I know what you're first defense is going to be: "Without the 8th amendment, you'd be sentenced to death for speeding on the highway!" I actually got that once. Well, that's kind of the idea. Intimidating the people into obeying the law.

Now, on to the debate. Keep in mind my predictions of the future.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
dstebbins said:
First, I'm going to predict the future.

1) No one is going to agree with me here. This is only because they don't want to agree with me.
2) Nobody is going to make a comeback that I will not be able to comeback on myself.
3) When a person realizes they cannot win this debate, they will stop debating, either through leaving the thread
Must you preface every thread you make with this disclaimer? It's quite annoying.

dstebbins said:
or hanging around for the sole purpose of harrassing me, saying stuff like "You definately need help. Get some therapy."
You definitely need help. Get some therapy.

dstebbins said:
Now, on to the good stuff.

The United States has one of the worst crime rates in the world. A crime is committed every thirty seconds! This is clearly due to the fact of our lenient penal system. Criminals will commit hainous crimes and not care because the worst that can happen to them is a fifty dollar fine and a few days in jail. This is especially true in California, where you can't even spank your own children.

So I have an idea: Completely remove the 8th Amendment by constitutional amendment. You stole a pencil, you get whipped and lashed. You raped somebody, you get your skin shaven off with a potato pealer while your fully concious. You killed someone, some kind of petroleum product is poured on you and then you are lit on fire. And just to ensure that there won't be anyone trying to get out of the punishment, we'll completely remove the "excessive force" restriction on cops, so that they can shoot you in the head if you so much as jerk away from them, so long as they can prove you jerked away. This way, there will be no "resisting arrest."

Think of the good this could bring! Since the penalties are so harsh, people will be indimidated into obedience! Now, I know what you're first defense is going to be: "Without the 8th amendment, you'd be sentenced to death for speeding on the highway!" I actually got that once. Well, that's kind of the idea. Intimidating the people into obeying the law.

Now, on to the debate. Keep in mind my predictions of the future.
Is it really worth having a lot less speeders on the highway, if the tradeoff is living in a country that punishes speeding with the death penalty?
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Kandahar said:
Is it really worth having a lot less speeders on the highway, if the tradeoff is living in a country that punishes speeding with the death penalty?
uuh, YEAH. I'd gladly trade the 8th amendment for reduced crime.
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
First, you need therapy.

The reason we have such a high crime rate is because EVERYTHING is a crime. Reduce the laws, not the Constitution.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
dstebbins said:
uuh, YEAH. I'd gladly trade the 8th amendment for reduced crime.
I hear North Korea has very little crime.
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
alex said:
First, you need therapy.
See number 3

The reason we have such a high crime rate is because EVERYTHING is a crime. Reduce the laws, not the Constitution.
you forget about the many loopholes that the law provides. Depending on what lawyer you have, you can get aquitted of even rape or murder if you have the proper loophole. So no, not everything is a crime.
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Kandahar said:
I hear North Korea has very little crime.
can you give me a rundown on their penal system, and don't estimate. Don't give me an answer that you don't know for absolute sure.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
dstebbins said:
can you give me a rundown on their penal system, and don't estimate. Don't give me an answer that you don't know for absolute sure.
Well since I've never been there and can't get a visa (just like 99.9999% of the people in the world), I can't "know for sure." I can give you lots of links to Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, the US State Department, and lots of other organizations that report on human rights. But most of them have never been to North Korea either. I imagine you know this and are just being contrary because you know you're argument doesn't make sense.

Are you denying that North Korea employs the methods of punishment you're suggesting here? If not, tell me how your methods differ from those of Kim Jong il.
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Kandahar said:
Well since I've never been there and can't get a visa (just like 99.9999% of the people in the world), I can't "know for sure." I can give you lots of links to Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, the US State Department, and lots of other organizations that report on human rights. But most of them have never been to North Korea either. I imagine you know this and are just being contrary because you know you're argument doesn't make sense.

Are you denying that North Korea employs the methods of punishment you're suggesting here? If not, tell me how your methods differ from those of Kim Jong il.
I'm sorry. I misread. I thought you said South Korea, which is a democracy.

North Korea is communist. They have no respect for human rights, and because they kill people for the slightest infraction, North Koreans are intimidated into obeying their laws. I'm not saying we should remove every right in the Constitution. I'm just suggesting that we can reduce crime by dishing out harsher punishments.

EDIT: Perhaps you'd see where I'm coming from if I told you a story from my childhood. I grew up in a time when there were child abuse laws, but they were very difficult to enforce because children could not report anything to the law and third parties were considered to have no business in the issue.

Because of the leniency, my father abused me. He would put me on the ground face first, put my hands behind my head as if I were going to do a sit-up, stand on them so I couldn't move them, and take a belt to my ass like an Egyptian taking a whip to a Jew in the times of Exodus for about five to ten minutes, until my underwear was ripped and my butt was bleeding (literally). Early in my life, I realized "Hey, if I don't obey Daddy, he'll beat me until I'm bloody," and I obeyed him.

The moral: While harsh and seemingly unreasonable punishment may not be a popular way to deal with innapropriate behavior, there is one thing that anyone who's been in my shoes agrees with: It works. Bottom line, it works, and the sooner you accept that, the sooner we come to a virtually crimeless society, just like North Korea. I wouldn't expect anyone who hasn't been abused to understand (I didn't accept the truth until age 23 myself), but have you noticed that, in Japan, where stealing a shirt is enough to get you knocked out by a kendo stick-weilding samuia, hardly anybody commits crime?
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
dstebbins said:
See number 3


you forget about the many loopholes that the law provides. Depending on what lawyer you have, you can get aquitted of even rape or murder if you have the proper loophole. So no, not everything is a crime.
Nice way to avoid what I posted. Good times, good times.
 

McWilliamson

New member
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
dstebbins said:
Because of the leniency, my father abused me. He would put me on the ground face first, put my hands behind my head as if I were going to do a sit-up, stand on them so I couldn't move them, and take a belt to my ass like an Egyptian taking a whip to a Jew in the times of Exodus for about five to ten minutes, until my underwear was ripped and my butt was bleeding (literally). Early in my life, I realized "Hey, if I don't obey Daddy, he'll beat me until I'm bloody," and I obeyed him.
Hypothetically:
Little dstebbins comes home from school with a hickey at just thirteen years of age. Daddy beats the **** out of dstebbins. Little dstebbins never comes home with a hickey again.

I should not have to say anything more. That, in and of itself, is a brutal, unnecessary thing. But, for completeness:

Little dstebbins disagreees with Daddy. He thinks Daddy is wrong about hickeys. Does he have any say in the matter? No. Daddy will beat the living hell out of little dstebbins no matter what, because Daddy is Daddy, and what Daddy says, goes.

Moral of the story:
What Daddy says should not always be solid gold. Daddy can be wrong too. Who is going to beat Daddy until he can't feel pain anymore? Not you.
 

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
69,449
Reaction score
15,335
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
dstebbins said:
I'm sorry. I misread. I thought you said South Korea, which is a democracy.

North Korea is communist. They have no respect for human rights, and because they kill people for the slightest infraction, North Koreans are intimidated into obeying their laws. I'm not saying we should remove every right in the Constitution. I'm just suggesting that we can reduce crime by dishing out harsher punishments.

EDIT: Perhaps you'd see where I'm coming from if I told you a story from my childhood. I grew up in a time when there were child abuse laws, but they were very difficult to enforce because children could not report anything to the law and third parties were considered to have no business in the issue.

Because of the leniency, my father abused me. He would put me on the ground face first, put my hands behind my head as if I were going to do a sit-up, stand on them so I couldn't move them, and take a belt to my ass like an Egyptian taking a whip to a Jew in the times of Exodus for about five to ten minutes, until my underwear was ripped and my butt was bleeding (literally). Early in my life, I realized "Hey, if I don't obey Daddy, he'll beat me until I'm bloody," and I obeyed him.

The moral: While harsh and seemingly unreasonable punishment may not be a popular way to deal with innapropriate behavior, there is one thing that anyone who's been in my shoes agrees with: It works. Bottom line, it works, and the sooner you accept that, the sooner we come to a virtually crimeless society, just like North Korea. I wouldn't expect anyone who hasn't been abused to understand (I didn't accept the truth until age 23 myself), but have you noticed that, in Japan, where stealing a shirt is enough to get you knocked out by a kendo stick-weilding samuia, hardly anybody commits crime?
I knew a kid who took his abusive father's gun and shot him in the head in his sleep. Perhaps it didn't work in that case huh? Instead of conforming to authority he eliminated that authority. Are you sure society wouldn't do the same thing?
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
McWilliamson said:
Hypothetically:
Little dstebbins comes home from school with a hickey at just thirteen years of age. Daddy beats the **** out of dstebbins. Little dstebbins never comes home with a hickey again.

I should not have to say anything more. That, in and of itself, is a brutal, unnecessary thing. But, for completeness:

Little dstebbins disagreees with Daddy. He thinks Daddy is wrong about hickeys. Does he have any say in the matter? No. Daddy will beat the living hell out of little dstebbins no matter what, because Daddy is Daddy, and what Daddy says, goes.

Moral of the story:
What Daddy says should not always be solid gold. Daddy can be wrong too. Who is going to beat Daddy until he can't feel pain anymore? Not you.
Did I ever say I liked what my father did to me? I think not. What I said was that because he did something to me that I didn't like, he intimidated me into obeying his rules. The whole idea behind punishment is that the one being punished doesn't like it. Otherwise, it's not punishment.

alex said:
Nice way to avoid what I posted. Good times, good times.
wtf are you talking about? The only time you posted was when you said North Korea had little crime, and I responded to that with the loopholes.

independent_thinker2002 said:
I knew a kid who took his abusive father's gun and shot him in the head in his sleep. Perhaps it didn't work in that case huh? Instead of conforming to authority he eliminated that authority. Are you sure society wouldn't do the same thing?
And what exactly happened to that kid afterwards? Did he become head of the household? I think not. In fact, I think he was convicted of MURDER.

Now, if this metaphor comes true and a citizen rebells against the government, that's treason, the only crime worse than murder, which would, under this new government, constitute crusifiction. And then they'd let me drink the blood! Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm blooooooooooooooooood.:mrgreen:
 

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
69,449
Reaction score
15,335
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
dstebbins said:
Now, if this metaphor comes true and a citizen rebells against the government, that's treason, the only crime worse than murder, which would, under this new government, constitute crusifiction. And then they'd let me drink the blood! Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm blooooooooooooooooood.:mrgreen:
Saddam was an abusive authority. How's that working out for him?
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
independent_thinker2002 said:
Saddam was an abusive authority. How's that working out for him?
There are two keen differences between the United States and Iraq: We're the most powerful country on earth. Iraq wasn't, so therefore, if we remove the 8th Amendment, no one's going to do anything about it.

Two, Suddam Hussain was a tyrant, as in he was the only person in charge. With the United States, we have a shitload of government representatives making and enforcing the laws through our consent. One little forfitted right is not going to make the United States a dictatorship like Iraq, North Korea, or China.
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
dstebbins said:
Two, Suddam Hussain was a tyrant, as in he was the only person in charge. With the United States, we have a shitload of government representatives making and enforcing the laws through our consent. One little forfitted right is not going to make the United States a dictatorship like Iraq, North Korea, or China.
You can be a tyrant without being a dictator, and vice versa. The only difference is that the voters can (and would) remove someone from office who implemented the kind of policies you're suggesting, and then you'd be back to square one.
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Kandahar said:
You can be a tyrant without being a dictator, and vice versa. The only difference is that the voters can (and would) remove someone from office who implemented the kind of policies you're suggesting, and then you'd be back to square one.
WHOA! WHAT AN AMAZING COMEBACK! I'm astonished at your intellect! no seriously! *cough cough* sarcastic.

But if I can be serious for a minute, that's why I'm coming here. To show you the light.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,914
Reaction score
6,029
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
dstebbins said:
WHOA! WHAT AN AMAZING COMEBACK! I'm astonished at your intellect! no seriously! *cough cough* sarcastic.

But if I can be serious for a minute, that's why I'm coming here. To show you the light.
And this type of response proves what?

Me smells a troll. Please prove me wrong.
 

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
69,449
Reaction score
15,335
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
vauge said:
And this type of response proves what?

Me smells a troll. Please prove me wrong.
Perhaps he can beat him like a red-headed stepchild until he "sees the light". Bullies think they can intimidate people into doin what they want but it only works short-term at best. Every school shooting shows how people can only be bullied for so long until they reach their boiling point. I worked with a guy who beat his son regularly. His son has put him in the hospital twice since becoming a man. You reap what you sow.
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
vauge said:
And this type of response proves what?

Me smells a troll. Please prove me wrong.
Maybe I'm not trying to prove anything in that post. I'm trying to clear up confusion. If I had event he slightest clue that this new policy would not be controversial, I would go straight to my Congressman (who is a republican, may I add) and suggest it. Instead, I'm coming to you so you can see things the way I am.

independent_thinker2002 said:
Perhaps he can beat him like a red-headed stepchild until he "sees the light". Bullies think they can intimidate people into doin what they want but it only works short-term at best. Every school shooting shows how people can only be bullied for so long until they reach their boiling point. I worked with a guy who beat his son regularly. His son has put him in the hospital twice since becoming a man. You reap what you sow.
okay, then explain China. I'm not saying their entire civil rights system is right. I'm just saying their penal system works. How many times do you see a high Chinese government official get assassinated or even hospitalized? Or even scratched with a finger nail? The people of China are scared into obeying China's laws, and it works.

There is a keen difference between that father and the government: The fights he has with his son are one on one. When you rebel against the government, you are one man against an army. You'd never win.
 

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
69,449
Reaction score
15,335
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
dstebbins said:
Maybe I'm not trying to prove anything in that post. I'm trying to clear up confusion. If I had event he slightest clue that this new policy would not be controversial, I would go straight to my Congressman (who is a republican, may I add) and suggest it. Instead, I'm coming to you so you can see things the way I am.


okay, then explain China. I'm not saying their entire civil rights system is right. I'm just saying their penal system works. How many times do you see a high Chinese government official get assassinated or even hospitalized? Or even scratched with a finger nail? The people of China are scared into obeying China's laws, and it works.

There is a keen difference between that father and the government: The fights he has with his son are one on one. When you rebel against the government, you are one man against an army. You'd never win.
Funny you should bring up China. Just because people aren't arrested and incarcerated at a high rate does not mean crime does not exist.Organized crime has ways around this: birbery, threats, and extortion. As if China would let derogatory news out about their country anyway. Look up triads and yakuza for starters.
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
independent_thinker2002 said:
Funny you should bring up China. Just because people aren't arrested and incarcerated at a high rate does not mean crime does not exist.Organized crime has ways around this: birbery, threats, and extortion. As if China would let derogatory news out about their country anyway. Look up triads and yakuza for starters.
maybe so, but that doesn't mean there would still be crime if bribery was illegal. If they wanted to, they would kill the bribers, and then they would have virtually no crime.

Do you think the US government will become subordinate to bribery? Maybe they could if they wanted to, but not punishing a bribery-accepter is unconstitutional.

Speaking of which, when did I ever say we should remove the right to [/i]protest[/i]? In fact, I think I said we should only implement harsher punishments. You still have the right to a fair and speedy, public trial. You still have the right to a lawyer. You still have the right to being innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. You still have the right to petition, peacefully assemble, and verbally critisize the government in all cases whatsoever. I don't see what you're bitching about when Congress is trying to limit the first amendment -- not the eigth -- by forbidding you to desecrate the flag. Removing the eigth amendment is much more legit, wouldn't you say? It's not like burning the flag ever hurt anybody, but crime does, and this is a way to control it.
 

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
69,449
Reaction score
15,335
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
dstebbins said:
maybe so, but that doesn't mean there would still be crime if bribery was illegal. If they wanted to, they would kill the bribers, and then they would have virtually no crime.

Do you think the US government will become subordinate to bribery? Maybe they could if they wanted to, but not punishing a bribery-accepter is unconstitutional.

Speaking of which, when did I ever say we should remove the right to [/i]protest[/i]? In fact, I think I said we should only implement harsher punishments. You still have the right to a fair and speedy, public trial. You still have the right to a lawyer. You still have the right to being innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. You still have the right to petition, peacefully assemble, and verbally critisize the government in all cases whatsoever. I don't see what you're bitching about when Congress is trying to limit the first amendment -- not the eigth -- by forbidding you to desecrate the flag. Removing the eigth amendment is much more legit, wouldn't you say? It's not like burning the flag ever hurt anybody, but crime does, and this is a way to control it.
First of all, Bribery is illegal. Perhaps you don't understand intimidation tactics that organized crime uses. Perhaps you don't understand that some officials are greedy. Can you really tell me that bribery doesn't happen in the USA? Check out campaign finance and tell me that the govt. isn't subordinate to bribery.

Next, You want to change the debate from the original topic (which you started). There is a forum for the first amendment. If and when I want to rant about that I will, thank you. Don't change the subject because this debate isn't going well for you. You are the one wanting to instill punishments that are archaic and only used in third world countries and countries that don't respect civil and human rights.
 

dstebbins

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
That's NOT what I said. I didn't change the subject, jackass. I asked how you can be bitching about some stupid penal system that may work when the government is trying to take away first amendment rights. I also pointed out that you wouldn't be loosing any right under this new penal system except the right against "cruel and unusual" punishment. I was not changing the subject. YOU were putting words in my mouth, you s.o.b.
 

Thorgasm

Bus Driver to Hell
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
69,449
Reaction score
15,335
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
dstebbins said:
That's NOT what I said. I didn't change the subject, jackass. I asked how you can be bitching about some stupid penal system that may work when the government is trying to take away first amendment rights. I also pointed out that you wouldn't be loosing any right under this new penal system except the right against "cruel and unusual" punishment. I was not changing the subject. YOU were putting words in my mouth, you s.o.b.
You said:"maybe so, but that doesn't mean there would still be crime if bribery was illegal."

Call it a straw man or red herring, but outrage over the first amendment has nothing to do with this discussion.

Ad hominem attack is a sure sign of "loosing" a debate. Perhaps you should study up on logic fallacies before you debate.
 
Top Bottom