# Crime and punishment



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

On another thread started by DoctorShadow titled "Stolen! It has already started", a discussion of sorts was started regarding theft of props. On it I expressed some pretty strong opinions about the sorry state of our justice system, the sad fact that many parents seem to allow their children to create thier own rules without consequence, and that _we the people _seem to have little recourse, legally.

I am just curious about others opinion on these matters. Do I seem like a maniacal vigilante?

I do admit, it does bother me that I, as a citizen, have to sensibly be afraid to walk down some streets at night in any number of cities in this country, due to possible criminal elements. It just seems to me that the criminals should be the ones who are afraid. Is that a twisted philosophy?

Shouldnt those who seek to ignore the rules of law be the ones held accountable, rather than _we the people_? is that so off base?


----------



## dflowers2 (Mar 5, 2007)

I think maybe you are were a little too harsh. I mean I think that law enforcement should have rocket launchers on their patrol vehicles to use when someone decides to run and cause a high speed chase. I also think that current prisoners should be used to clean up the aftermath and the parts and pieces left over after the rocket hit its target. But I certainly would never think you should booby trap your yard and possible hurt some innocent criminal that is trying to steal your property or harm your family. That's just not right.


----------



## IMU (Apr 8, 2009)

> possible hurt some innocent criminal


I hope that was supposed to be humorous.


----------



## Devils Chariot (May 23, 2007)

Since the Magna Carta here's how it works. Police collect people who appear to have violated the law. The court system then determines whether there is evidence to prosecute, and a jury of your peers decides your guilt. Then the judge sentences based on law and precedence. That's the rule of law.

The only thing that's changed is that right wing groups, mostly the NRA have tried to make people feel unsafe and that they need guns and vigilante justice, because the system doesn't work, or doesn't work the way you want it to - it's just not the same viceral thrill you get from beating someone. The classic example is when a suspect of a terrible crime gets off on a technicality. No one says "well the cops should be doing their job right, lets punish lazy and crooked cops!", they say "lets punish criminals even more!", either it be by more extreme sentencing (3 strikes) or by taking away civil rights.

It's conservative anti-government clap trap and fear mongering. If you feel the need for vigilante justice you should consult your local and state castle laws, you might be able to get your pound of flesh, legally, though not morally.


----------



## The Archivist (May 31, 2009)

If you know how or know the right people, the sudden disappearance of a known criminal is not going to attract a lot of sadness on the police department's part. I won't admit to anything, but this has worked before. To those who think I'm joking, I'm not...


----------



## BioHazardCustoms (Aug 5, 2009)

As a correctional officer, I feel the need to defend the law enforcement community here. A lot of times, we as officers believe that criminals deserve more strict sentencing. As officers, though, our hands are normally tied in regards to inmates. I currently work in a medium security facility (drug dealers and penny ante convenience store robbers, mostly.) Most of these guys are facing 5 to 10 years, not counting parole opportunities. 95% of the ones who will get parole, or finish their time and get out, will go back to the activity that landed them in my house to begin with. The rehabilitation system in this country's legal system is flawed. Sure, due to right wing groups crying their eyes out, most of my inmates will leave prison with a bachelor's degree in some field. The sad part is that with the record, they can't get a job at McDonald's. Hence, the reason that most go back to dealing or knocking over liquor stores for the cash in the till, because they believe they have no other recourse. 

As the Archivist says, knowing the right people, you can make a known criminal disappear, and the local P.D. will not be very upset about it. They see it as the choices that person made in life catching up with him/her. 

In order for this country's crime rate to drop, there needs to be some severe change to the U.S. Penal Code. All of the shyster lawyers need to be rounded up and re-trained to uphold the law, instead of manipulating it.All of the liberal groups that scream about an inmate's rights are violated because he doesn't have cable television, a single bed suite, and conjugal visits with more than one woman a week, should be silenced. These people are imprisoned because they committed a crime, whether it be selling marijuana within 1000 feet of a school or playground, or serial homicide. Crime is crime. If you commit a felony in the U.S. you lose certain constitutional rights, such as your second amendment right to bear arms, or the right to vote. If you are going to strip some rights from criminals, strip all rights. Free speech, right to due process, right to appeal. Also, make sure before you lock someone up that they are the person who has committed the crime.


----------



## Spooky1 (Aug 25, 2008)

To quote the song from the Gilbert and Sullivan Operetta "The Mikado", "Let the punishment fit the crime".


----------



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

I never said anything negative about those who enforce the law, ie the police. They have a tough job, are underpaid (as far as I am concerned), are short staffed and have to take the nasty end of the stick for things that are not thier fault. I am speaking of a justice system that has been turned on its head. Frivolous lawsuits, criminals rights supercede victims rights, and as Biohazard points out shyster lawyers.


Devilschariot, I mentioned not feeling safe walking down certain streets in ANY city. Name a city, and there is a place that a normal law abiding citizen should not go at night. If you dont accept that as fact you need to remove your rose colored glasses. That is not NRA right wing propaganda, that is simple fact. And that fact is what I find most disturbing. That somewhere exists in this country that I as a taxpaying citizen would be advised to avoid after dark. That concept boogles the mind. How can criminals have that much power?

The stealing of props is just a microcosm of a greater problem. Why did these slimeballs steal that prop? They are not afraid. There is no fear or respect for the law. Instead, we are afraid. We fear that our hard work will be stolen or damaged. How is that right? We are the law abiding, tax paying, hard working citizens. We should never have to harbor any sort of concern that are property will be taken. That is the deal. Thats the bill of goods we are supposed to be supporting. That would be right and just. I dont see how it is possible to oppose that idea.


As far as punishment goes, let me throw out an example. Most people exceed the posted legal speed limit (at least occasionally). Why? Its simple, we are really not afraid of being caught. If we are caught breaking that law, the worst that will happen is we will pay a nominal fine, 100 dollars at most. What if that fine were 10 thousand dollars? How many people would speed then?

I wouldnt. That would certainly deter the crime of exceeding the posted speed limit. I guess a harsher penalty would be effective, hmmm? Make the penalty high enough, and the crimes will dry up. That seems logical to me. Unfortunately there are hoards of bleeding heart liberals who make it thier duty to weep for the poor little criminals. What about the victims? Who weeps for them?


----------



## hauntedyardofdoom (Nov 6, 2008)

jaege said:


> As far as punishment goes, let me throw out an example. Most people exceed the posted legal speed limit (at least occasionally). Why? Its simple, we are really not afraid of being caught. If we are caught breaking that law, the worst that will happen is we will pay a nominal fine, 100 dollars at most. What if that fine were 10 thousand dollars? How many people would speed then?
> 
> I wouldnt. That would certainly deter the crime of exceeding the posted speed limit. I guess a harsher penalty would be effective, hmmm? Make the penalty high enough, and the crimes will dry up. That seems logical to me. Unfortunately there are hoards of bleeding heart liberals who make it thier duty to weep for the poor little criminals. What about the victims? Who weeps for them?


That's because we have a Constitution in this country that prevents the courts from meting out "cruel and unusual punishment". $10,000 fine for going 66 in a 65 MPH zone is excessive. And by the way, the fine is not "nominal" to me. Over here, the minimum fine is closer to $200 for the lowest speeding ticket + whatever points they give. Those points mean I have to pay a higher insurance premium for 3 years. So anyway, this is why we don't cut off people's hands for shoplifting and execute folks for smoking a joint. Yeah it would be an effective deterrent, but it would also be unconstitutional.

And for the record, I'm far from a bleeding heart liberal.


----------



## Hauntiholik (May 17, 2006)

If this thread gets nasty or violates the forum rules in any way it will be closed.


----------



## Rahnefan (May 1, 2009)

Not to take sides jaege, but you did ask if we think you sound like a merciless vigilante: your older posts in the other thread read together to send a clear message that if someone's child -- even your own -- suffered permanent mutilation while trespassing and attempting to steal a haunt prop, you'd not like it, but ultimately shrug it off and chalk it up to experience.

Like it or not, I think you stand alone there. I've yet to see a prop worth a child's eye.

Not every child is blessed with parents who care a lot about instilling ethics into them; but more importantly, every kid will at some point do something outside of their character and contrary to their upbringing, sometimes even crossing the line into theft. Only a few of them never feel remorse and become career criminals.

Even the best parenting cannot guarantee any sort of behavior; children are individuals.
And most importantly, no child -- not ANY child, anywhere -- is a "worthless piece of human waste." That alone is offensive enough to warrant shutting down the other thread.

I don't know what bad thing was done to you or someone you love, but they were wrong to do it. I'd make it up to you if I could but I can't and most likely, no one can. That's up to you. You are in my prayers, friend.


----------



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

Okay, maybe I am coming on too strong. In fact I did and I do apologize if you found that comment offensive. In hind sight I can see where someone might and I regret the addition of it. Although, my low opinion of some people is not in any way altered.


Let me be clear. I do not condone torture or mutilation of anyone or any living thing over a prop, or nearly any actual crime you could name. If I gave that impression I wish to correct it. 
My point was that a homeowner should not be held resposible for something that happens to a trespasser on his property. I understand that the concept of booby traps is illegal because some innocent bystander could be hurt. My point is, why is the innocent bystander on someone elses property to begin with? If he is univited, he is trespassing, thereby a criminal. If my child trespassed and then suffered an injury as a result, I couldnt, in good conscience hold the homeowenr responsible. I am not speaking about my reaction to such an event beyond that. Certainly I would be upset, and concerned over the injury. I would just not sue the property owner.

Let me throw some examples out there to express my point.

Example 1:
You have a neighbor. He has a fenced yard with a locked shed in the back, in which he keeps power tools. A kid, jumps the fence, breaks the lock, and while toying with the tools the kid gets injured.
Should the guy who owns the tools be sued or in some way or held liable for the kids injuries?

Example 2
Same situation, but there is no fence, and no shed. The guy is doing some wood working out on his patio and leave his table saw out while he goes inside for lunch. A kid trespasses, toys with the saw and suffers an injury. Should this guy be held criminally liable?

Example 3
Something closer to home. A haunter has a MOB that he built. He isnt the greatest craftsman so if jogged, the motor may come on an inopurtune times. AT 2:00 am a kid enters the yard, opens the MOB to check it out. In the process the motor goes off, the kid gets hurt. Should this guy be held liable in some way?

Again, I would be upset if my kid got hurt in such an event, but I couldnt blame the homeowner in any of those events. At least that is the way I see it.

As far as me, I have led a fairly charmed life. I and no one that I know has ever been a victim. I have lost some loved ones, but to natural causes. I hardly need or want you to make anything up to me, and please, save your prayers to someone who needs and wants them. Being agnostic, they are wasted on me.


----------



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

I do want to seriously apologize if my extreme posts were offensive to anyone. I know I have..well..extreme opinions regarding such things. As this is not really the forum for such things, I will refrain from making comments of that nature anymore.

Again, I do apologize.


----------



## Rahnefan (May 1, 2009)

I agree with you on all three examples, it would be tragic for the kid but not the homeowner's fault. But those examples don't involve booby traps or other deliberate intention to cause irreparable harm to potential thieves.

Don't you realize that claiming agnosticism will only make someone pray more?  Sorry to sound pompous or anything such though.


----------



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

That was really my only point; the laibility issue, besides respecting others property rights and the law in general. Although it seems unfair somehow that I cannot legally booby trap my yard. Seems like an invasion of my rights somehow. You can trap animal "pests" in your yard, so why not prowlers? Oh well. 

The agnositc thing is not a claim its a fact, but if it makes you feel better, by all means proceed.


----------



## joker (Sep 25, 2007)

So you just need to make your booby trap a hair trigger table saw, poorly made MOB and/or various sharp and rusty tools laying around your other props.


----------



## jaege (Aug 23, 2009)

Lol. Touche.


----------



## hauntedyardofdoom (Nov 6, 2008)

I'd agree with you in those examples, but I know that usually when kids come onto my property it's because they're playing and don't pay close attention to the boundaries. I don't have a fence up along my entire property and even then, I still find some tennis balls and a soccer ball every now and then. If a kid jumps the fence to get his ball back, should he have to risk a booby trap? What if someone is chasing their dog that got off the leash? What if the wind blows their garbage can onto your lawn? There are way too many innocent reasons for someone to cross onto someone's property...


----------



## joker (Sep 25, 2007)

jaege said:


> Lol. Touche.


Ehhh....thought the thread needed some humor


----------



## Rahnefan (May 1, 2009)

Here's what I wonder about though.

A lot of (most?) haunts include gore, and some of them suggest that awful things happened to ToTs (eaten by witches, nailed upside down to a tree, about to get shredded by monsters), but all in fun. The best defense people have for using props like that for the sake of fun (or art) is to get and keep a reputation for being absolutely vigilant regarding the safety of children (or anybody) wandering onto your property. It'd be clever to have a mannequin sign-thief strung up by the neck, for example, until a neighborhood kid comes into your yard and gets mangled by a trap (or something construed to be a trap). Then all of a sudden your props are not so fun or artsy, they are evil, and your neighborhood or city might take a real interest in shutting haunts down.


----------



## Devils Chariot (May 23, 2007)

yeah I don't care about convicts having cable TV or any of the BS and I never met a liberal who does. Have you? ( they are urban legends or possible agent provocateurs?) I also didn't hear anyone beating up on cops either. 1/3 of my relatives are cops. My grandma, my her brother, my uncle form the other side of the family, just in my close family not even counting the multitudes of cousins. My grandma and her brother took the job very seriously and were honorable officers but my uncle, he's the kinda guy to get a criminal off the hook by breaking all the rules to fulfill his sense of justice. He was just a vigilante with a badge. It caught up with him and now he's just a mailman, and he got lucky.


----------

