Recruiting forum off topic thread (no politics, covid, or hot button issues)

#3,453
#3,453
The US justice system is designed for three things: punishment; deterrence: and rehabilitation. The punishment component is supposed to satisfy the natural human desire for retribution in sufficiency to prevent vigilantism and never ending eye for an eye-feuding. We’ve somehow lost sight of this and the punishment component of US justice has been watered down to the point that very few people are satisfied with it so they create a fiction whereby they are able to delude themselves into believing that the natural human need for vengeance can somehow be satisfied through self-serving acts of capitulation. The problem with the US justice system is that our process takes far too long and punishment does not come close to fitting the crime in most cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: feathersax
#3,454
#3,454
VolunteerHillbilly said:
The US justice system is designed for three things: punishment; deterrence: and rehabilitation. The punishment component is supposed to satisfy the natural human desire for retribution in sufficiency to prevent vigilantism and never ending eye for an eye-feuding. We’ve somehow lost sight of this and the punishment component of US justice has been watered down to the point that very few people are satisfied with it so they create a fiction whereby they are able to delude themselves into believing that the natural human need for vengeance can somehow be satisfied through self-serving acts of capitulation. The problem with the US justice system is that our process takes far too long and punishment does not come close to fitting the crime in most cases.
Click to expand...

We are far more punishment oriented now than we've ever been. The founding fathers and early reformers that devised the modern penal system in lieu of other punishments would be absolutely appalled on that count. Habeas Corpus is absolutely foundational in American law because the idea of the state locking someone up without damn good cause was repugnant to the framers of the Constitution as was the idea of mob rule.

As for the developers and early adopters of the penal system (something the US invented), the goal was to reform the person but we've not focused on reform in decades and have instead doubled down on punitive oriented punishments in order to satisfy the 'get tough' rhetoric that's been popular for the past 50 years. Vengeance is about all we do and we keep company with China and Saudi Arabia due to it.

With regards to our prison system... it was exclusively designed with reform in mind, even the language of the system reflects it's roots - a penitentiary is for penitents to reflect upon their crimes/sins. They are housed in cells (just like monks and other cloistered individuals) and initially those cells were designed the same way (one person and for reflection and prayer). The entire idea behind the Pennsylvania system was reform and rehabilitation rather than punishment. Prior to the widespread adoption of the Pennsylvania system, punishment was meted out and the offender was on his or her way afterwards. Incarceration was relatively rare. Penitentiaries were conceived as places where offenders could reform through prayer and solitude.

The earliest ones took the monastery model of solitary prayer and reflection so far that it had the side effect of driving inmates insane. The initial idea of near total solitude had to be modified because of that.

As for vengeance and natural needs... it's all well and good that an offended party has anger but the state should be dispassionate when it comes to rendering verdicts and handing out sentencing. IOW, it's normal for folks to get angry but we shouldn't act on that anger any more than we should go driving after drinking -- white hot passion and anger impairs good judgement. I don't know what you mean when you say "self-serving acts of capitulation." We incarcerate more people than any nation despite having a crime rate that's been at turns declining or holding steady since the 70s. We could start putting people in the stocks or give them lashings I guess but in some ways that's more humane than many of the sentences we hand out now.
 
#3,455
#3,455
SoilVol said:
Plowman's decision to have an internal investigation then clean house before Danny White came in was 100% her.
Click to expand...
Funny seeing y’all argue with someone who donates to the University and talks to people from the University on a regular basis lol.

@JacketVol is saying that Plowman is not the individual who was telling the NCAA to kick rocks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: #1GatorHater and VolsDoc81TX
#3,456
#3,456
cHiZzLeVOL said:
Funny seeing y’all argue with someone who donates to the University and talks to people from the University on a regular basis lol.

@JacketVol is saying that Plowman is not the individual who was telling the NCAA to kick rocks.
Click to expand...
When did I say she was the one telling the NCAA to kick rocks?

The only thing I said was that her internal decisions in handling the situation early on appear to have been the correct ones. And she appears to have made the correct decision in hiring Danny White who has taken that over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsDoc81TX
#3,458
#3,458
SoilVol said:
When did I say she was the one telling the NCAA to kick rocks?

The only thing I said was that her internal decisions in handling the situation early on appear to have been the correct ones. And she appears to have made the correct decision in hiring Danny White who has taken that over.
Click to expand...

Reading comprehension man…. Good lord.

You literally responded back to Jacket saying she wasn’t the individual handling the NCAA stuff now.
 
#3,460
#3,460
@SoilVol you literally responded back to @JacketVol saying that Plowman wasnt responsible for UT telling the NCAA to kick rocks by stating “Plowman started the investigation”

Again, reading comprehension lol, she has nothing to do with the recent news other then getting the initial investigation started.

But, you would probably know that if you know, you could properly read and respond. Instead of “arguing” a point that makes you look dumb.
 
#3,461
#3,461
cHiZzLeVOL said:
Reading comprehension man…. Good lord.

You literally responded back to Jacket saying she wasn’t the individual handling the NCAA stuff now.
Click to expand...
And.... your point? I know exactly what I said. It seems to be obvious to others what is being said in the conversation. I don't know what you're missing, though.
 
#3,462
#3,462
SoilVol said:
And.... your point? I know exactly what I said. It seems to be obvious to others what is being said in the conversation. I don't know what you're missing, though.
Click to expand...
Lol 😂 I’m done with you. You should probably go re-read your messages and your response back to Jacket. You obviously can’t keep up with your own conversation and responses. Good job.
 
#3,463
#3,463
cHiZzLeVOL said:
@SoilVol you literally responded back to @JacketVol saying that Plowman wasnt responsible for UT telling the NCAA to kick rocks by stating “Plowman started the investigation”

Again, reading comprehension lol, she has nothing to do with the recent news other then getting the initial investigation started.

But, you would probably know that if you know, you could properly read and respond. Instead of “arguing” a point that makes you look dumb.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I'm the one arguing a worthless point and making myself look dumb here....

1. I made a joke in reference to people sh*tting on Plowman and DW for their handling of this entire thing.
2. Jacket said Plowman isn't in charge in this.
3. I clarified my reference to Plowman by talking about her decisions at the very beginning, which were instrumental to getting us where we are now (for better or worse).
4. You jumped in for no apparent reason, and built up a straw man argument then started insulting me.
5. Now you're misrepresenting what happened and still insulting me for no reason.

But.. reading comprehension.
 
#3,464
#3,464
cHiZzLeVOL said:
@SoilVol you literally responded back to @JacketVol saying that Plowman wasnt responsible for UT telling the NCAA to kick rocks by stating “Plowman started the investigation”

Again, reading comprehension lol, she has nothing to do with the recent news other then getting the initial investigation started.

But, you would probably know that if you know, you could properly read and respond. Instead of “arguing” a point that makes you look dumb.
Click to expand...
And by the way I did not say, "Plowman started the investigation."

You can't even accurately make a direct quote. Might be worth bowing out before we both make ourselves look like @sses (well, at least more than we already have).
 
#3,465
#3,465
SoilVol said:
And by the way I did not say, "Plowman started the investigation."

You can't even accurately make a direct quote. Might be worth bowing out before we both make ourselves look like @sses (well, at least more than we already have).
Click to expand...

Something get under your skin? You still posting? I said I was done lol.
 
#3,466
#3,466
cHiZzLeVOL said:
Lol 😂 I’m done with you. You should probably go re-read your messages and your response back to Jacket. You obviously can’t keep up with your own conversation and responses. Good job.
Click to expand...
You couldn't even make a direct quote of a conversation in plain text but I'm the one that should reread the conversation...

That's rich.
 
#3,467
#3,467
SoilVol said:
You couldn't even make a direct quote of a conversation in plain text but I'm the one that should reread the conversation...

That's rich.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t “trying to direct quote” but again I said I was done. You should learn to let things not bother you so much lol.
 
#3,468
#3,468
cHiZzLeVOL said:
Something get under your skin? You still posting? I said I was done lol.
Click to expand...
Classic response from someone who realizes they screwed up and lost the point. 1. Try to trigger an emotional response 2. Pretend like you're above them and are "done" with it.

Have a fantastic day Chizz.
 
#3,469
#3,469
cHiZzLeVOL said:
I wasn’t “trying to direct quote” but again I said I was done. You should learn to let things not bother you so much lol.
Click to expand...
Another attempt to trigger an emotional response because your argument was defeated.

Btw, quotation marks go around direct quotes.
 
#3,470
#3,470
SoilVol said:
Classic response from someone who realizes they screwed up and lost the point. 1. Try to trigger an emotional response 2. Pretend like you're above them and are "done" with it.

Have a fantastic day Chizz.
Click to expand...
Anyone can see you were arguing back with @JacketVol s comment. It doesn’t take a genius. I won my argument and your frustration shows it.

You have yourself a fantastic day
 
#3,472
#3,472
cHiZzLeVOL said:
Anyone can see you were arguing back with @JacketVol s comment. It doesn’t take a genius. I won my argument and your frustration shows it.

You have yourself a fantastic day
Click to expand...
Yes, I was responding back with Jacket (not you, but you inserted yourself, and not arguing but clarifying my point) yet you can't seem to process what I was saying and think I'm the one failing at reading comprehension.. unironically, you're the only one who thinks that. Which is HILARIOUS.

Btw, I thought you were done? Any last things you're desperately trying to grab ahold of in your attempt at superiority in a discussion you weren't invited to?
 
#3,473
#3,473
And Jacket isn't going to sleep with you. They can talk for themselves. Don't need a white knight.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top