Unpopular Opinions - OP Updated with Threadban List 4/5/21

Irish Guitarist

Pringles taste terrible. The sole reason for their popularity is the gimmick of putting 'crisps' in a can. If they were sold in bags no one would buy them.

Oreos taste like shite too.

Blueshoe

wiggle16 wrote: »

I'm not conservative in any way, except for one thing. I'm fully in favour of the death penalty. Most people who know me don't believe me when it comes up.

I think there are some things which are so bad that you forfeit your right to be tolerated by society in a prison system. Premeditated murder, child sexual abuse, rape.

Monsanto parent company Bayer have proposed an 8 billion dollar payout to people who contracted cancer from glyspholate . Court papers have shown that Monsanto tried to block investigation into their products and the link to cancer.

If it turns out that roundup does cause cancer and that Monsanto purposely covered it up should those responsible be given the death penalty?

They may have been directly responsible for countless people getting cancer and many many deaths.

wiggle16

Blueshoe wrote: »

Monsanto parent company Bayer have proposed an 8 billion dollar payout to people who contracted cancer from glyspholate . Court papers have shown that Monsanto tried to block investigation into their products and the link to cancer.

If it turns out that roundup does cause cancer and that Monsanto purposely covered it up should those responsible be given the death penalty?

They may have been directly responsible for countless people getting cancer and many many deaths.

Yes.

Raconteuse

wiggle16 wrote: »

I'm not conservative in any way, except for one thing. I'm fully in favour of the death penalty. Most people who know me don't believe me when it comes up.

I think there are some things which are so bad that you forfeit your right to be tolerated by society in a prison system. Premeditated murder, child sexual abuse, rape.

The liberal in me is "The state shouldn't have the power to end a life, an innocent person could end up on death row" but then when I hear of some piece of sh1t who abused and murdered children getting the injection, "Meh, excellent".

Blueshoe

wiggle16 wrote: »

Yes.

Good. I agree.

I'm also in favour of if someone attacks someone and leaves them with life changing injuries that they should have the same done to them. It would be a huge deterrant .

Example : Blind someone? Lose your own eyes

An eye for an eye does not leave the world blind.

the beer revolu

Blueshoe wrote: »

Good. I agree.

I'm also in favour of if someone attacks someone and leaves them with life changing injuries that they should have the same done to them. It would be a huge deterrant .

Example : Blind someone? Lose your own eyes

An eye for an eye does not leave the world blind.

Deterrent??
Right. Because the death penalty has worked wonderfully as a deterrent in the USA?

wiggle16

Blueshoe wrote: »

Good. I agree.

I'm also in favour of if someone attacks someone and leaves them with life changing injuries that they should have the same done to them. It would be a huge deterrant .

Example : Blind someone? Lose your own eyes

An eye for an eye does not leave the world blind.

Well I would say it's a mistake to view it as a deterrent. People who do these things aren't deterred by whatever penalty is imposed - typically they think more about not getting caught.

There are countries which do carry out retributive punishment such as blinding a person if they blind someone else, one example being Iran, and it does not serve as a deterrent there. These crimes still happen.

Blueshoe

the beer revolu wrote: »

Deterrent??
Right. Because the death penalty has worked wonderfully as a deterrent in the USA?

I'm not talking about the death penalty. It's the middle of the day sleepy head

Raconteuse

Scott Glenn the actor who played Jack Crawford in Silence of The Lambs did research for his role at the FBI Behavourial Analysis unit with profiler John Douglas - and went from being anti death penalty to in favour of it when Douglas played him a recording of a girl being tortured by the Toolbox Killers.

It's a difficult subject - I'm not sure I could say I'm totally in favour of it, but in very extreme cases like the above, I can't help feeling justice is done for the victim and their family.

Like who would really give a sh1t if the murderer of Peter Connelly (Baby P) were put to death...

the beer revolu

Blueshoe wrote: »

I'm not talking about the death penalty. It's the middle of the day sleepy head

You are talking about deterrents, so am I.

You have also expressed favour for the death penalty. Do you not see that as a deterrent?
And if not, why do you consider losing your eye a deterrent but losing your life isn't?

Blueshoe

wiggle16 wrote: »

Well I would say it's a mistake to view it as a deterrent. People who do these things aren't deterred by whatever penalty is imposed - typically they think more about not getting caught.

There are countries which do carry out retributive punishment such as blinding a person if they blind someone else, one example being Iran, and it does not serve as a deterrent there. These crimes still happen.

They will still happen but reoffending will drop massively. Kick someone in the face and break their nose or crack their skull? Get the same back . A person would be less likely to re offend if they are forced to go through the same pain themselves.

Too many people going around with dozens of convictions

Blueshoe

the beer revolu wrote: »

You are talking about deterrents, so am I.

You have also expressed favour for the death penalty. Do you not see that as a deterrent?
And if not, why do you consider losing your eye a deterrent but losing your life isn't?

Death penalty is only for the most serious of crimes and most people just end up on death row for years. Some die on death row.
Equal punishment should be for all violent crimes.
Stab someone in the liver. Get a blade stuck in your liver. And a jail sentence.

the beer revolu

Blueshoe wrote: »

Death penalty is only for the most serious of crimes and most people just end up on death row for years. Some die on death row.
Equal punishment should be for all violent crimes.
Stab someone in the liver. Get a blade stuck in your liver. And a jail sentence.

So, you believe that it will work as a deterrent?
You've already stated that it would be "a huge deterrant", so I'll take that as a yes.

It is generally accepted that the death penalty does not act as a deterrent to murder.
Why do you think that your lesser punishment will act as "a huge deterrant" to lesser crimes?

Blueshoe

the beer revolu wrote: »

So, you believe that it will work as a deterrent?
You've already stated that it would be "a huge deterrant", so I'll take that as a yes.

It is generally accepted that the death penalty does not act as a deterrent to murder.
Why do you think that your lesser punishment will act as "a huge deterrant" to lesser crimes?

Would you stab someone if you knew as part of your punishment you will also be stabbed.
Would you kick someone in the face knocking their teeth out of you knew that as part of your punishment you would be getting your teeth kicked out?

A group of people attack someone and leave them paralyzed. The group are caught and each member of the attack is left paralyzed themselves as punishment.

Etc.

It's a deterrent to scum who feel if they are caught all they will receive is another conviction to add to the 40 or so already beside their name.

This system would work. Crime will still happen but reoffending rates for violence would drastically drop.
Otherwise we just continue as they are. If people are happy with things as they are and don't have the stomach for harsh punishment that's ok. I'm just throwing out a suggestion

Airyfairy12

The death penalty doesn't work, it doesn't deter people from committing crimes, it's also legalised murder, no matter what someone has done, no one has the right to take their life.
Education, reduction of poverty, adequate health care, therapy and appropriate convictions stop crime.

the beer revolu

Blueshoe wrote: »

Would you stab someone if you knew as part of your punishment you will also be stabbed.
Would you kick someone in the face knocking their teeth out of you knew that as part of your punishment you would be getting your teeth kicked out?

A group of people attack someone and leave them paralyzed. The group are caught and each member of the attack is left paralyzed themselves as punishment.

Etc.

It's a deterrent to scum who feel if they are caught all they will receive is another conviction to add to the 40 or so already beside their name.

This system would work. Crime will still happen but reoffending rates for violence would drastically drop.
Otherwise we just continue as they are. If people are happy with things as they are and don't have the stomach for harsh punishment that's ok. I'm just throwing out a suggestion

Who would rape the rapists?

Airyfairy12

Blueshoe wrote: »

Would you stab someone if you knew as part of your punishment you will also be stabbed.
Would you kick someone in the face knocking their teeth out of you knew that as part of your punishment you would be getting your teeth kicked out?

A group of people attack someone and leave them paralyzed. The group are caught and each member of the attack is left paralyzed themselves as punishment.

Etc.

It's a deterrent to scum who feel if they are caught all they will receive is another conviction to add to the 40 or so already beside their name.

This system would work. Crime will still happen but reoffending rates for violence would drastically drop.
Otherwise we just continue as they are. If people are happy with things as they are and don't have the stomach for harsh punishment that's ok. I'm just throwing out a suggestion

This is horrific.

Blueshoe

the beer revolu wrote: »

Who would rape the rapists?

Surgically ensure that their raping days are over

Blueshoe

Airyfairy12 wrote: »

This is horrific.

Those poor criminals huh.

Either get tough on crime or stop complaining about the system in place. Not you specifically but society in general

wiggle16

Blueshoe wrote: »

They will still happen but reoffending will drop massively. Kick someone in the face and break their nose or crack their skull? Get the same back . A person would be less likely to re offend if they are forced to go through the same pain themselves.

Too many people going around with dozens of convictions

There is no legal system which can act as a real deterrent to violent crime. There will always be people who either don't care about the consequences if caught or don't consider being caught a risk. The majority of the population is law abiding and that's not because they are afraid of what would happen if they weren't, it's because most people want to do the right thing most of the time and don't like hurting other people.

The death penalty is not a deterrent and never has been. My line of thinking is the same as that of raconteuse, it's about justice - that if someone rapes and murders a defenceless child, the idea that that person will live out their days in a prison cell is unjust, it is an injustice to the victim.

It is unjust that the likes of Graham Dwyer or Ian Huntley will live out their days in prison - Dwyer will be relased if he lives long enough. Malcolm McArthur is out and about, living his life after doing "his time". There is no justice in that.

Blueshoe

wiggle16 wrote: »

There is no legal system which can act as a real deterrent to violent crime. There will always be people who either don't care about the consequences if caught or don't consider being caught a risk. The majority of the population is law abiding and that's not because they are afraid of what would happen if they weren't, it's because most people want to do the right thing most of the time and don't like hurting other people.

The death penalty is not a deterrent and never has been. My line of thinking is the same as that of raconteuse, it's about justice - that if someone rapes and murders a defenceless child, the idea that that person will live out their days in a prison cell is unjust, it is an injustice to the victim.

It is unjust that the likes of Graham Dwyer or Ian Huntley will live out their days in prison - Dwyer will be relased if he lives long enough. Malcolm McArthur is out and about, living his life after doing "his time". There is no justice in that.

I'm agreeing with you but I'd also like to see a system introduced to deal with violent crime. As I showed above.

Paddy Cow

mr_fegelien wrote: »

In what way is there a stigma?

Try explaining a gap on a cv as time off due to stress/anxiety/depression and see how many interviews you get.

Paddy Cow

wiggle16 wrote: »

I'm not conservative in any way, except for one thing. I'm fully in favour of the death penalty. Most people who know me don't believe me when it comes up.

I think there are some things which are so bad that you forfeit your right to be tolerated by society in a prison system. Premeditated murder, child sexual abuse, rape.

The problem with the death penalty is that you cannot bring someone back to life if it's found that they are innocent. You can release someone from prison though.

Game of Thrones Fan

Airyfairy12 wrote: »

The death penalty doesn't work, it doesn't deter people from committing crimes, it's also legalised murder, no matter what someone has done, no one has the right to take their life.
Education, reduction of poverty, adequate health care, therapy and appropriate convictions stop crime.

I don't know if I'd consider that an unpopular opinion, but why not use both approaches? What's wrong with legalised murder? I never thought of it as a deter, and always thought of it as a punishment. It gives comfort to the families of the deceased and it suits the tax payer. A win win.

JohnnyFlash

The death of faith and religion has made people and society extremely unhappy.

wiggle16

Paddy Cow wrote: »

The problem with the death penalty is that you cannot bring someone back to life if it's found that they are innocent. You can release someone from prison though.

This is my only reservation with it, but for me it's not a strong enough argument against the death penalty as a whole. If someone serves 20 years in prison and later has their conviction overturned, they will never get that 20 years back either.

For a justice system to work we have to have confidence that, when a person is convicted of a crime, we can say that we are as certain as we can be that the conviction was correct, whether the penalty is a fine, life in prison or death. I agree with what you mean but in a way it isn't good enough to say that capital punishment is abolished as an insurance policy against potential miscarriages of justice.

It's hypothetical obviously, I know it will never be reintroduced in Europe at least. I just don't consider it justice that a murderer will draw breath while their victim doesn't. That's just me tho.

Blueshoe

Blueshoe wrote: »

Public sector pensions should be abolished. All workers should be on the contributory state model.

You're full of all these fantastically enlightened initiatives today, aren't you. I'm sure you'd also be willing to stop charging public sector workers that 10% plus tax (on top of all their other taxes) that they pay entirely for the same public sector pension?

Additional Superannuation Contribution (ASC)

Blueshoe

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You're full of all these fantastically enlightened initiatives today, aren't you. I'm sure you'd also be willing to stop charging public sector workers that 10% plus tax (on top of all their other taxes) that they pay entirely for the same public sector pension?

Additional Superannuation Contribution (ASC)

Yes definitely. Level playing field for all

BDI

All public service workers are unionized within their first year and taught a culture of grabbing everything they can and doing as little as possible.

Maternity leave is absolutely abused by them. I know schoolteachers plan their babies around the summer holidays so they don’t lose any maternity leave during the summer holidays. They discuss this with no shame.

wiggle16

BDI wrote: »

All public service workers are unionized within their first year and taught a culture of grabbing everything they can and doing as little as possible.

Maternity leave is absolutely abused by them. I know schoolteachers plan their babies around the summer holidays so they don’t lose any maternity leave during the summer holidays. They discuss this with no shame.

I'm a civil servant. I am not like this and I have never worked with anyone like this. I worked in a teacher training college in a previous life, I know plenty of primary school teachers and I don't know anyone who does this. Idiotic assertion.