Post your random thoughts.

I wouldn't say impractical. Just might need a bit of tweaking as it goes along, when new circumstances arise.

All systems do.

Bleeding heart I am, I consider an execution of an innocent to be absolutely unacceptable, no matter how many guilty are allowed Karma Houdini as a result of not doing it. And the possibility of making a mistake and getting the wrong man is always above zero. So in practice I am against inflicting anything permanent and irreversible as a punishment, even though I consider it just and fair.

Unfortunately, the need to consider human factor does not allow justice.

edited 18th Oct '10 9:05:54 AM by Beholderess

Here's my question, though: is putting an innocent person in jail for the rest of his natural life, surrounded by people who really did commit a terrible crime, really that much better than killing him?

In any given system, there will be people who slip through the cracks. It's unfortunate, but true. Those people get screwed either way.

^^ No, it's better to have a requirement for very strong evidence. I can't really describe what exactly that is, but nonetheless it is possible to convict someone with absolute certainty, if there are specific pieces of evidence - both direct and circumstantial, which make innocence impossible unless the defendant has been framed - and there should be strong safeguards to ensure impartiality and openness on the part of the justice system. Thankfully, in the most brutal or prolific cases multiple leads should end up at one source - the killer.

The disposition of a criminal should also weigh against them. If they are smirking and sneering at their victims then surely that ought to be used in court. You don't do things like that if you are innocent.

edited 18th Oct '10 9:19:58 AM by Shichibukai

Okay, may I ask something? How the heck murderers are Karma Houdini if they aren't executed? (Prison escapes aren't that common)

^^^Well, some people were found innocent after more than 10 years of being sentenced, so yes, it is better, for a chance remains.

^I'm fine with life imprisonment, but some of them do get only a few years. Even in some...extreme cases when there was no circumstances making them sympathetic at all.

edited 18th Oct '10 9:23:20 AM by Beholderess

If there is no alternative suspect then you are guilty until proven innocent in the eyes of the court and especially the mass media. Some people have been undoubtedly executed for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. That needs to stop, without abolishing the death penalty and compromising justice.

edited 18th Oct '10 9:26:36 AM by Shichibukai

^No doubt about that. But until it is done, I'd rather not use death penalty.

But it is damn unjust(((

^^^...But isn't that with current system in the west where death sentence exists? Can't death sentence be removed, replaced with real life time sentence and murder sentences be harsher?

In fact, why the heck do obviously idiotic laws(I'm not talking about death sentence, I'm talking about things like too easy sentences and those lists which prevent people with coincidentally similar names going into planes) keep existing? Do politicians think that they are so unimportant that they do not need the change?

edited 18th Oct '10 9:31:44 AM by SpookyMask

Do politicians think that they are so unimportant that they do not need the change?

Essentially. Nobody in Nebraska is going to bother asking a senator to petition that elephants be allowed to till fields again.

The problem is, you will never have 100% accuracy with any system. Never. There will always be a chance greater than 0% for someone to slip through the cracks.

Trying to eliminate this chance is futile. Trying to minimize it, on the other hand, is an important effort, but putting justice on hold until you have a Perfect System is unfeasible.

^^^

^^ Yep, I've read something about that too. There are lots of stupid (and hilarious) laws that are not enforced but not changed either, for changing them is really long, involved and expensive process

edited 18th Oct '10 9:38:55 AM by Beholderess

...Dang bureaucracy...

*sigh* It would be nice if they did to something to stupid laws that are actually harmful... But every single government seems to consider economy more important thing than people... People shouldn't exist so economy is good, it should be other way...

edited 18th Oct '10 9:42:22 AM by SpookyMask

Sorted in MS Excel and then trivially summed with the following assembler:

[code]

Don't let people fool you about assembler being hard - it is just not in fashion. Every new language looks like Greek to you until you learn it (unless you are Greek :P).

But why

^^Agreed

^^^Thirthed.

Random: Who names their kid Big Vai Liswill?!

edited 18th Oct '10 10:09:03 AM by Set

Steve Vai?

Full name is Big Vai Liswill Cruz Pérez. Which makes it even weirder

Why do I suddenly have the urge to make a roguelike?

With characrers named Dawn-Jean Cruller, Rowan Glike, and Nathaniel Halk?

There's always room for new roguelikes.

I like questioning rhetorical questions.

What's the point of that?

The emphasis would be on comedy.

"Oh no! The aliens kidnapped the orphans! Do you know what this means?"
"Yeah! Those poor orphans are all alone! *sniff* Poor little guys..."
"No! It means they could take over the world!"
"What in tarnation d'you mean by that, Dawn?"
"That orphanage was also a Wizarding School for the most powerful magically-endowed orphans on the planet!"

^^[1]

edited 18th Oct '10 10:36:23 AM by Myrmidon

Odin was the king of the gods, god of death, war and knowledge, unreliable, and bisexual. The last thing is rarely mentioned because it was just implied but never shown in the stories (He practised sejd, a form of magic only women and gay/bisexual men used).

source

Orly? I did not know?