To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *17416 (-10)
  Re: Criminal Justice
 
(...) When a child does something antisocial (aka "wrong") many parents/authorities have the first impulse to punish the kid. Current thinking in child development and parenting philosophy says (and I'm pretty sure I agree) that when a punishment is (...) (22 years ago, 19-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Criminal Justice
 
(...) Well, you've tempted me out of my shell again... I just came up with some ideas which may explain our issues with justice, especially in these most difficult cases. While I didn't read the specific case at hand, from a quick visit to the (...) (22 years ago, 19-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Criminal Justice
 
(...) Well, speaking only for myself, I am more interested in restitutional justice -- which has little to do with our current conception of justice. When things can be made right through some monetary or labour means, I think we should force the (...) (22 years ago, 18-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Criminal Justice
 
Hi all, There is a recurring notion, in some debates here and in conversations in real life, about justice that concerns me. It seems that there are many people who think that it is "just" for someone who does something bad to have something bad (...) (22 years ago, 18-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
 
(...) But you're also saying, in essence, that two is just as bad as ten. And that's simply not so. Two is a big improvement over ten. And it's reasonable to think that maybe whatever tactics can move the number from ten to two might also move it (...) (22 years ago, 16-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
 
(...) My point is that *any* amount of terrorism is unacceptable. So the fact that the number of homicide bombers reduces from say 10 a month to 2 a month is irrelevant-- *any* amount is too many. (...) What I am trying to point out is that as long (...) (22 years ago, 16-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
 
(...) What do you mean? Isn't that the goal? The only goal? Isn't saving lives the whole reason for concern? I hope it's not just about retribution for you. (...) This can only be said if you extend the timeframe infinitely. It's like saying there (...) (22 years ago, 16-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
 
(...) I was making a distinction of intent. The IDF does not *target* the civilian population as Hamas does. Yes, innocents are killed, but not intentionally. I find the distinction crucial. But if you want to make comparisons, answer this: why do (...) (22 years ago, 16-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Operation TIPS
 
(...) And did you hear of Bush scrapping the 5 billion (?) towards national security? I hope the fearless at ground zero will long remember how Bush shook their hands when the cameras surrounded him, but also how Bush stabbed each and every one of (...) (22 years ago, 14-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Operation TIPS
 
I am not a big fan of the Village Voice... or of Dick Armey either for that matter. But one has to secure allies where one can, I guess. This may be old news at this point but I did want to highlight it. (URL) (the link is a reprint of a Hentoff (...) (22 years ago, 14-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR