Whats wrong with violent punishment? - Debate in good faith or don't debate it all

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
KURDISH KANGAL

KURDISH KANGAL

Banned
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Oct 9, 2025
I personally believe in violence as a tool for justice.

Murder or attempted murder of an innocent person = death penalty
Rape or attempted rape(pedophilia , necrophila , zoophila are included in the rape category) = death penalty
Terrorism = death penalty
Theft = amputation of the hand
Child abuse = amputation of the hand
Sexting a minor or consuming child porn = castration


In my opinion, punishment in itself should be used as a deterrence for the crime

Niggas would be scared of robbing if the punishment was amputation.


Think of how Singapore managed to have a clean country(despite having a pajeet population) through punishing littering as harshly as possible.


What yall think?
 
KURDISH KANGAL said:
Murder or attempted murder of an innocent person = death penalty
Rape or attempted rape(pedophilia , necrophila , zoophila are included in the rape category) = death penalty
Click to expand...
The problem with the death penalty for non-murder cases is that you perversely incentivize murder. The person you raped could potentially testify against you and the punishment is the same, so there's only upside to killing them.
 
Ibanez RG 350EX said:
The problem with the death penalty for non-murder cases is that you perversely incentivize murder. The person you raped could potentially testify against you and the punishment is the same, so there's only upside to killing them.
Click to expand...
Damn.
Thanks bro, you really changed my mind about this one.

Rape or attempted rape = torture and life imprisonment.
 
I generally don’t believe in increased punishment as an effective deterrent (unless it is done publicly like in ye oldey times, but even then the effect is likely on the smaller side). We know the average criminal is too retarded to envision consequences for their actions and certainly too retarded to perform punishment calculus à la
Ibanez RG 350EX said:
The problem with the death penalty for non-murder cases is that you perversely incentivize murder. The person you raped could potentially testify against you and the punishment is the same, so there's only upside to killing them.
Click to expand...

The real advantage of the death penalty is to save money (only de facto not true nowadays because of the absurd amount of bureaucracy which has been introduced to the process) and to make sure some libtard schmuck doesn’t pardon or “exonerate” the criminal in the future.
 
KURDISH KANGAL said:
Rape or attempted rape(pedophilia , necrophila , zoophila are included in the rape category) = death penalty
Click to expand...
Ibanez covered why this can backfire, which I agree with
KURDISH KANGAL said:
Terrorism = death penalty
Click to expand...
This would be good. In fact, it should be public torture and execution televised on live TV
KURDISH KANGAL said:
Theft = amputation of the hand
Click to expand...
Theft is already split into multiple categories, for good reason. Stealing a mars bar from Walmart by not scanning it at the self checkout isn't the same as breaking into a jewelry store and grabbing $800k of chains.
KURDISH KANGAL said:
Child abuse = amputation of the hand
Click to expand...
I guess, amputation of the hand seems arbitrary though
KURDISH KANGAL said:
Sexting a minor or consuming child porn = castration
Click to expand...
Unlike the above 4 these aren't violent offenses, and while I agree with the sentiment behind it I don't think it'd work. 18yos sexting 15-16yos happens all the time in highschools despite being a federal crime. CSAM charges already come with a minimum of 5 years and the prospect of way, way more. If that doesn't deter people then I doubt the threat of cutting their dick and balls off would.
 
It didn't work to deter crime and allowing people to legally torture others brings some seriously bad people into law enforcement as well as allows that abuse to happen for lesser crimes. It's about justice more than anything, the punishment has to fit the crime.

And there's also the possibility of wrongful conviction - what do you say to someone whose hand you lopped off or you tortured? "Sorry, our bad?" Being in prison for decades because of something you didn't do is bad enough but if you suffered physical torture or loss of a body part from it what then?
 
It's great, until you get falsely accused, or the attorney is a snake who wants to advance his career, or you get a corrupt niggo judge
Remember how they almost sent Kyle Ritenhouse to jail, as a sacrifice to Saint George Floyd?
Imagine hooking up with some BPD girl, and then getting the death penalty over her false rape allegations
 
The problem is that the majority of the public doesn't have the stomach for it. I'd happily abolish the death penalty if we could get meaningful sentences for the majority of sex offenders and murderers however.
 
Murder or extreme violence against an innocent person should always result in death or life in prison depending on details.

Sex crimes against humans should vary from death penalty in the worst cases (literal baby rapers) to a slap on the wrist (slapping a waitress' ass or something). Against animals it should be like a couple years in prison.

Theft requires no violence, just prison time, and quite long depending on the circumstances. If a weapon is involved it should be treated as attempted murder, even if it's only a threat of violence.

Ibanez RG 350EX said:
The problem with the death penalty for non-murder cases is that you perversely incentivize murder. The person you raped could potentially testify against you and the punishment is the same, so there's only upside to killing them.
Click to expand...
Correct, usually it's imprudent, but sometimes the violence involved causes such great bodily harm that it's effectively attempted murder anyway.
 
Most violent criminals are deeply irrational people. They're not weighing up the pros and cons of murdering someone, they're just doing it. Adding more downsides to the already long list (already including decades in jail to life imprisonment) won't make a difference.
I'd argue that normalising these barbaric punishments would encourage a more violent culture. Like why think "Hey, let's take a page out of Afghanistan's book".
 
Ok. Let's say OP is accused of theft. They didn't do it but circumstantial evidence is enough to get a judge to rule for the Saw treatment. Chop chop. Now you're disabled. Later on they catch some thug stealing and forensics links him to the crime OP was Saw'd for. But it's too late because your hand gone homie. It gone.
 
We limit the ability of our error-prone government to mete out extreme punishments for our own safety's sake. Before taking this desert nigger's emotional plea for introducing a savage torture-murder base nigger justice system, just cool your head a minute.
 
The lack of punishment is the reason why our current society is what it is.

It's crazy to see what you can get away with nowadays, because certain rules dictate that we have to treat every human being with dignity and respect. Even if for example Mr.Wilson raped this little child three times in a row, and stabbed it afterwards. 15 years in prison surely will enlighten this man. No, it actually will not. A bullet into this mans head however will.
 
I think OP is part-right.

What gets me is the focus on "punishment," but I think the actual issue is there's too many rules that take away a person's right to self-actualization.

It used to be, you could just go out there and do stuff. If there was a beef between you and another person, you could take it up between yourselves. You could even have formal duels.

I remember this story I once heard about in Texas, this one town had this guy who would rape all the women, and kill anyone who was gonna testify... so one day the people in town got together, surrounded him in a bar, and shot him. And then everyone agreed to just say "I didn't see faces because I was hiding under a table." Even at this time though, their actions were illegal, even though even the cops knew the targeted guy was bad news and had only escaped justice through technicality.

Can't do that now... it's gonna all be lawsuits, or sometimes criminal trials for trying to do good. Law is set up entirely to incentivize people to let evil win because evil knows how to game the system. Someone breaks into your house with plans to molest your daughter, and you decide to kill them? Oops, you're a murderer now.

Yeah, this shit needs to change.

You might take from all this, I'm all for prevention. And think how much money the courts will save not having to prosecute all those dead crooks!
 
Physical violence is an, over the entire existence of complex beings on planet earth, true and tested method to establish dominance, be it that of a group or among individuals - though I would say its the second last method to apply, the last being ending a life. Justice on the other hand is an abstract concept that tries to pose as universal misconstrued imagination of morals to hide the will to power of an individual or a group; slave nominalism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom