Texas man uses Apple AirTag to track down person who stole his truck, then kills him

[tuna]

Yeah, that's not how the law works. I mean, let's go back to Mosaic and Hammurabi codes. Eye for an Eye wasn't to ensure justice. It was to ensure that the aggrieved didn't extract MORE for the offense. Watch two young siblings interact. One will accidentally whack the other. The whack-ee then wallops the whack-er. Now wallop-ee gets a bat against wallop-er. It just escalates.

The penalty must be just. You want to shoot someone over a penny? A PENNY??? Now you're just being dramatic or selfish. LOL

Or, to put it in the 2000 language (and I always found this funny. . . )

LOL

Yes, I'm being a bit over dramatic. However, the question was "What's the property value that equals a human life?" And for most scumbag thieves, it ain't much more than a penny. How much injury would these bastards be willing to cause to relieve someone of their property? I'm not going out on a limb to call these lives priceless. Maybe not a penny, but definitely in the realm of walking around money, I'd say $75 if I had to put an absolute value on their lives. (maybe $50)

I would love to go back to Mosaic law when we're talking an eye for an eye. You're correct that it set a limit on punishment, so that one couldn't extract more for an offense, but it also establishes a minimum penalty, too. You don't get a slap on the wrist for killing someone, you get dead.

A particular verse I love is regarding false witnesses in Deut 19: 15-21.

15 One witness is not enough to convict anyone accused of any crime or offense they may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.
16 If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse someone of a crime,
17 the two people involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the LORD before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time.
18 The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against a fellow Israelite,
19 then do to the false witness as that witness intended to do to the other party. You must purge the evil from among you.
20 The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you.
21 Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

 

[heck ya beaches]

...except that it never has been.

Britain had the death penalty for theft for many, many decades. The crime rate never went anywhere but up. Same thing happened in ancient Rome.

Everyone who claims exorbitant punishments are an effective deterrent to even petty criminals (nevermind hard core felons) is disregarding history. We've tried all this before, many many times in many many places. Even here: many states had pretty draconian criminal codes in the past. It's never worked. Why try it again?

Because the rate of criminality is increasing with more liberal approaches. The catch and release, hugs for every miscreant turns society into san fran or detroit

 

[Picton]

Because the rate of criminality is increasing with more liberal approaches. The catch and release, hugs for every miscreant turns society into san fran or detroit

I'm not saying that works either. There are a million ways we can find a middle ground, if we care enough to try. Alas. We don't. We either go too far one way, or too far the other.

 

[heck ya beaches]

I'm not saying that works either. There are a million ways we can find a middle ground, if we care enough to try. Alas. We don't. We either go too far one way, or too far the other.

Honest question, what do you suggest? I think we're lost on approaches because good, moral, orderly people are trying to run a society with an increasing number of people that aren't capable of being part of our civilization. I think that's how states like Maine or Minnesota turn to shit -- people want to keep pretending that their fellow residents just need some help or compassion.

 

[Picton]

Honest question, what do you suggest? I think we're lost on approaches because good, moral, orderly people are trying to run a society with an increasing number of people that aren't capable of being part of our civilization. I think that's how states like Maine or Minnesota turn to shit -- people want to keep pretending that their fellow residents just need some help or compassion.

The Scandinavians seem to have figured out incarceration far, far better than we have.

They do pay for it, in taxes. But so do we, and we probably pay more for prisons per capita because our costs are so high and our recidivism rate means we pay for these people twice or three times. They appear to have solved that. I don't know whether that model would work here, but I do know the status quo is NOT working here.

 

[SpaceCritter]

The Scandinavians seem to have figured out incarceration far, far better than we have.

They do pay for it, in taxes. But so do we, and we probably pay more for prisons per capita because our costs are so high and our recidivism rate means we pay for these people twice or three times. They appear to have solved that.

That seems to have worked when Scandinavia was, um, Scandinavian. It doesn't seem to be working much anymore, what with all the "migrants" and - for example - their propensity for something less than voluntary physical relationships with the natives.

 

[Picton]

That seems to have worked when Scandinavia was, um, Scandinavian. It doesn't seem to be working much anymore, what with all the "migrants" and - for example - their propensity for something less than voluntary physical relationships with the natives.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not morally opposed to vigilante justice, nor Mosaic law.

But this is a question of practicalities, and I'm not fond of pissing money endlessly into a failed prison system FAR past the point where everyone admits it's not working.

 

[heck ya beaches]

The Scandinavians seem to have figured out incarceration far, far better than we have.

They do pay for it, in taxes. But so do we, and we probably pay more for prisons per capita because our costs are so high and our recidivism rate means we pay for these people twice or three times. They appear to have solved that. I don't know whether that model would work here, but I do know the status quo is NOT working here.

Sweden seems to have no longer figured it out. You can't rehabilitate some people.

 

[Picton]

Sweden seems to have no longer figured it out. You can't rehabilitate some people.

Again, it's not perfect and I'm not sure it'll work here. But neither the status quo, the San Francisco Method, nor the "kill-em-all" method is doing any better.

Me, I'm kinda in favor of Purge. Good flick.

 

[heck ya beaches]

Again, it's not perfect and I'm not sure it'll work here. But neither the status quo, the San Francisco Method, nor the "kill-em-all" method is doing any better.

Me, I'm kinda in favor of Purge. Good flick.

I haven't seen the movie, but I'm getting increasingly concerned things will come to a breaking point.

Also, we haven't tried the cleaning house method.

 

[Picton]

Also, we haven't tried the cleaning house method.

Others have, countless times throughout history. It's never worked.

A man violent enough to commit crimes for no reason, or desperate enough to commit crimes because he sees no other way to get ahead, or immature enough to commit crimes simply for the thrill of it, is not going to be deterred by anything. He will always convince himself "it won't happen to me!" History is pretty clear on that, except in places like Nazi Germany or modern Nork. Neither of which is a good comp for modern America.

Secret police and unaccountable prisons are not the American way, so there's no use pretending they're a viable solution.

 

[tuna]

Despite my earlier post that quotes the Bible saying eye for eye justice will work to discourage others, I'm not a big believer in the idea of rehabilitating prisoners. I think the idea of keeping someone locked up for over 10 years to be dumb. Those crimes should be capital offenses, and execution should be swift. Incarceration should be for petty crimes where harm isn't done, and the idea of "learning your lesson" has a chance to take root.

The argument that heavy punishment doesn't prevent crimes isn't a factor. It's punishment, not rehabilitation, and you can't argue that the recidivism rate on those who are executed is perfect.

 

[heck ya beaches]

Others have, countless times throughout history. It's never worked.

A man violent enough to commit crimes for no reason, or desperate enough to commit crimes because he sees no other way to get ahead, or immature enough to commit crimes simply for the thrill of it, is not going to be deterred by anything. He will always convince himself "it won't happen to me!" History is pretty clear on that, except in places like Nazi Germany or modern Nork. Neither of which is a good comp for modern America.

Secret police and unaccountable prisons are not the American way, so there's no use pretending they're a viable solution.

Who said anything about secret police? I mean a wave of capital punishment for career felons and making it commonplace for people like carjackers or hobo muggers to get ventilated. It's a good practice to flush a toilet before worrying about scrubbing it.

 

[Picton]

Who said anything about secret police? I mean a wave of capital punishment for career felons and making it commonplace for people like carjackers or hobo muggers to get ventilated. It's a good practice to flush a toilet before worrying about scrubbing it.

You favor summary execution as a way of keeping order. My point is that that's only worked in police states.

You might wish to live in a place like that, but I don't.

 

[Coyote33]

Secret police and unaccountable prisons are not the American way

Who said anything about secret police?

https://www.northeastshooters.com/xen/threads/fbi-agents-busted-the-wrong-hotel-room-in-boston.450789/

 

[heck ya beaches]

You favor summary execution as a way of keeping order. My point is that that's only worked in police states.

You might wish to live in a place like that, but I don't.

When you get to the point of a police state, citizens aren't walking around armed. I'm advocating for flushing prisons of liabilities and useless eaters, while normalizing lethal self-defensive.

 

[Picton]

When you get to the point of a police state, citizens aren't walking around armed. I'm advocating for flushing prisons of liabilities and useless eaters, while normalizing lethal self-defensive.

You know that's a pipe dream, though. Right?

Due process exists. It's one of our oldest and most cherished legal principles. There's a very good reason for it. You're welcome not to like that (and I admit, it's a drag sometimes), but if it goes away, that's more tyranny. No thanks.

 

[heck ya beaches]

You know that's a pipe dream, though. Right?

Due process exists. It's one of our oldest and most cherished legal principles. There's a very good reason for it. You're welcome not to like that (and I admit, it's a drag sometimes), but if it goes away, that's more tyranny. No thanks.

Of course it's a pipe dream. As well as "who decides which useless eaters are euthanized? me, of course".

I think the problem ultimately comes from not protecting our borders, being too soft on crime, encouraging problem populations to have more children by funding their lives, and by putting a monopoly on justice/protection in the police. Criminals that think they might get killed in the act of a crime think twice. Due process is great, except it's now weaponized against people that refuse to be victims. If someone breaks into your house or steals your car, the thought of "how is the state and this loser's family going to f*** me over" shouldn't even cross your mind.