who then cuts his bits off,
who administers this "justice" if someone makes a career out of punishing the criminals, what makes them any better than the criminals? Is it because the state tells them to they're allowed?

The benifits of 3 meals a day, a warm bed and TV are not the same as freedom.
TV is used in prisons to keep them in line, it's not a reward for their crimes it's a way to stop them from rioting all the time.
Meals and a warm bed are part of our responsibility to keep them healthy. Or should they all die of malnutrition?

I don't think a dream you had is really a useful example.
(PsychoChomp, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 12:41, 2 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

Rioting from no TV?
Cattle prods would soon sort that out. And why should they be kept healthy if they can't abide by simple laws of don't fucking steal stuff you townie twatbag.

Also that was a most excellent example
( TGB checking Off Topic is still shit at, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 12:43, Reply)

Depends on the level of crime, really.
Someone who's gone on the nick for a few years, and needs to be locked up for a few years, shouldn't have their health suffer.

In the same respect, P.O.Ws that shoot at your collegues and comrads, who I'd be more inclined to hurt due to them attacking you personally, even deserve human rights.
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 12:48, Reply)

They really wouldn't,
your idea that you just have to keep upping the violence to stop the violence is absolutly retarded. It's been proven again and again that it doesn't work. It just fulfils the bloodlust of the stupid, while not helping the problem in any way.

If your ideas were implemented there would be more violent crime, prison services would cost more and you'd put the country back to pre WWII levels of cruelty and ignorance.

You're an idiot.
(PsychoChomp, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 12:51, Reply)

I think for the reason of science
we should implement my ideas and see what happens.
( TGB checking Off Topic is still shit at, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 12:54, Reply)

Like in china,
or saudia arabia, or in everyfucking country that tried it before we knew better?

Don't think your stupidity is a new thing, you're practically medieval in your convictions.
(PsychoChomp, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 12:57, Reply)

In regards to your first point....
Is a soldure at the end of a gun responsible for carrying out his orders? Does the weight of the entire army, whatever army that be, lay in the hands of an individual? The Corperal who tells the private, the general who tells the corperal, the politition that tells the general or the public that votes in the politition ?
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 12:46, Reply)

I was just following orders
isn't a legal justification for war crimes.
(PsychoChomp, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 12:54, Reply)

No, but it can be used to justify the killing of accidental-innocents.

( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 13:05, Reply)

Accidentally killing civillians isn't a war crime
deliberatly targeting them is.
(PsychoChomp, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 13:08, Reply)

You'd still feel gutted if you found out that happened to you though.
gutted is probably an understatement.
( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 13:14, Reply)

What I mean is, you found out, after the act, that they were innocent and people above you knew that.

( G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩&#128, Tue 5 Jan 2010, 13:14, Reply)