Should a criminal be acquitted if the victim is homeless and penniless?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for skcus_pmahcner
skcus_pmahcner

15

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poll: Should a criminal be acquitted if the victim is homeless and penniless? (21 votes)

Yes 24%
No 76%

Think about it.

If the victim of a crime cannot generate any income, does not contribute to the economy or nation building in anyway (such as beggars, homeless, etc), is it really economically wise and practical to render punishment on a crime perpetuator? The criminal may be earning income or even be a Billionaire responsible for helping the lives of thousands other people in employment, punishing these people may hurt the economy and put burden on the state in term of prison management.

IN SHORT: Do you think there should be an alternate approach to sentencing crimes as to focus on how valuable the victim's life is? For example: If a rich or highly educated person was murdered, the penalty should be higher, but if its a beggar it shouldn't matter a whole lot.

Discuss

 • 
Avatar image for dernman
Dernman

26665

Forum Posts

10082

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

#1  Edited By Dernman

I tried but it's getting impossible to defend these threads.

Avatar image for skcus_pmahcner
skcus_pmahcner

15

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By skcus_pmahcner

@dernman: in case anyone invokes godwin's law and accuse this thread of trolling attempt, its not.

It's a thought process for people to re-think the current society dynamics and societal order and what are the ways that can be improved. No politician is calling for this to be implemented, but it's a "what if" scenario so discussion can be encouraged.

Trying to imply someone is fanning flames is to imply you are doing it yourself

Avatar image for lan_fan
Lan_Fan

19051

Forum Posts

294

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#3  Edited By Lan_Fan

I think murdering someone is totally okay if the victim is a dunce like you.

Avatar image for skcus_pmahcner
skcus_pmahcner

15

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@lan_fan: I am sorry if you are a member of the lower social status, but as Ben Shapiro said, facts don't care about your feelings.

It is a fact that rich or educated people had better contributions to nation building and the economy, and are more responsible for generating jobs and higher quality of life.

Avatar image for seagod
SeaGod

5106

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 SeaGod  Online

CCthor that you?

But anyway no allowing murder at all shouldn't be allowed. Not only is it a slippery slope as eventually it may reach the point where only the top 1% are protected for murder but it is also morally and ethically wrong to kill outside of self defense.

Avatar image for lan_fan
Lan_Fan

19051

Forum Posts

294

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#6  Edited By Lan_Fan

@skcus_pmahcner: Nah, you don't know me nor my social status.

It is a fact that rich or educated people had better contributions to nation building and the economy, and are more responsible for generating jobs and higher quality of life.

Not looking to debate someone like you, since you're clearly a sociopath, but while the statement above is true, doesn't mean your idea isn't horrible.

Avatar image for seagod
SeaGod

5106

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 SeaGod  Online

@lan_fan: he's clearly a troll so best not to argue with him

Avatar image for lan_fan
Lan_Fan

19051

Forum Posts

294

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#8  Edited By Lan_Fan
Avatar image for mimisalome
mimisalome

5965

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Criminal offenses is different From civil disputes

Criminal acts are typically considered as crime against the society in general, not just against a person.

Hence they are often titled as "(insert name of the accused here) vs people of (insert the name of the states or country here)"

Murder for example is usually considered as a crime against the people instead of just the victims involved.

Avatar image for kgb725
kgb725

20151

Forum Posts

227

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The billionaire could also be destroying nature. Having billions doesnt make them any better

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

5979

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#11  Edited By dshipp17

Before making a judgment, would you consider the person's backstory and how they became homeless? Factor in socioeconomic factors and the society in which the person has to live? Creating jobs can be very misleading; usually, it's all based on greed; I'm not sure if there is anywhere on the global that creates an economy that is actually as benign as creating jobs to help people.

Case and point and going back to the economic crisis in 2008 and early 2009 in the United States; there were two options available: give help to big business and Wall Street or give help to the poor, helpless, and small business; Obama chose to help big business and Wall Street; however, the other available option was helping the poor and reshaping how the economy operates to dish out injustice in the United States, where the latter would have had just as profound or even more profound impact on the US economy. Obama had the opportunity to overhaul all of the employment laws in such a way to help job applicants and barriers to entry into the court system to obtain redress and corrective action for the employee victim; right now, the courts mostly protect big business.

There are a whole lot of stereotypical presumptions built into your statement mostly about the homeless, but also about business owners and the rich in terms of having benevolent motive in their pathway to wealth and maintaining wealth.

Avatar image for uttarashada
Uttarashada

206

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Should a rich person have the right to butcher dogs & cats cause they don't contribute to economy?

If da answer is no, then based on what twisted ideology is animal life > human life.

If the answer is yes then u're disturbed in da head.

Avatar image for ghostodoofus2
Ghostodoofus2

3075

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Never.

Avatar image for marvelanddcfan24
MarvelandDCfan24

8624

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14  Edited By MarvelandDCfan24

This question is really, really stupid

Yes it is as they broke the law and hurt someone, a human being. Plus there's always the possiblity they could do it again.

If a billionaire goes down nothing happens to the company or his emoloyees hell Steve Jobs died and Apple still thrives. Someone would replace them. One person doesn't have that much influence.

Avatar image for lan_fan
Lan_Fan

19051

Forum Posts

294

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Should a rich person have the right to butcher dogs & cats cause they don't contribute to economy?

If da answer is no, then based on what twisted ideology is animal life > human life.

If the answer is yes then u're disturbed in da head.

I don't think this type of analogy works against this guy since he's clearly sick in the head.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

A criminal should pay for their time in prison

They should pay according to their means

Avatar image for juiceboks
juiceboks

25316

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 juiceboks  Moderator

Not gonna encourage these kinds of arguments..