Twisted morality

So, what causes people to think robbers and violent criminals should have equal rights as other citizens?

Empathy, Reality, Humanity.

The line (of morality and ethics) between robbers and violent criminals and "law abiding citizen" is ultra thin. Heroes of the history often turn out to be the worst people obviously capabile of the most henious acts. The most violent criminals are usually normal people who just one day "snap".

There's no such thing as someone who is a genetic criminal due to the fact that it takes a certain amount of social conditioning to bring someone to that point. People will always be bad because society is inherantly bad. (But nessacary and also, often good).

In other words: It's complicated. Very complicated. And not only does this answer not do it justice, but I suspect your view on the issue is intellectual immature by virtue of the fact that you'd asked such a loaded question to begin with.

>>2
Yes there  are genetic criminals.  Saying otherwise is denying the facts.  They can find brain structures that are completely missing in some people, the structures responsible for empathy. 

BTW, just because you can easily imagine yourself beating up a white guy and stealing his car because you're jealous of how he's rich doesn't mean the same for everyone.  Some people can't imagine themselves ever commiting a crime, and even backed into a corner wouldn't (I'm not one of these people btw). 

Let's see, empathy you're wrong about...  Not everyone has it.  Reality you have no room to talk about (you live in a twisted fantasy world where humans are defined by their choices, but at the same time, they are helpless against rich opressors).  And humanity cannot be applied hamhandedly regardless of the situation behind it. 

So, shut up.

>>2

I guess you don't believe in hereditary dementia then.

>>4
No, it's just a conspiracy created by the zionists to make you  believe that people can be superior to each other.

>>3
>>4

Proof please of these "genetical criminals". Besides, you basically missed my point. Crime itself is subjective. You're talking about stealing some dude's car. What about taking someone's life (doesn't matter what the cause)? What about the guys at Enron stealing peoples money? What about slavery?

Again, "some people" doesn't account for the entire human race does it? (No it doesn't.)

Finally, there is a difference between dementia and the ability to commit a crime. Stealing doesn't make you crazy. Stealing because you think the Illuminati is controlling you with sublimital lazer beams made of space diamonds- does.

Did you really want to debate this issue, >>1? Or is this just leading to some off-kilter rant on Eugenics or "how niggers should die"? I just want to know so that I can remove myself from this post.

Proof please of these "genetical criminals".

Anti-socials, schizophrenics, psychopaths.

We're all capable of crime, don't kid yourself.

Of course we are. But some are (a lot) more likely to do it than others.

>>8
Note that this thread is not about all crimes. This is about most lowest crimes with real victims such as armed burglary, assault, murder, rape etc. In most cases criminals who have fallen that low are beyond redemption. I do agree criminals should have same rights as anyone, but not when it comes to self defense.

>>9

Well, then provide proof. Anti-socials, schizophranics, psychopaths aren't criminals. A crime committed out a mental illness isn't a crime. That's why you're able to "plead insanity". Use your brain please or just hang it up right now- you can't win every debate. (Or in your case: Any)

>>10

Again, that's all subjective. What percieved as criminal, could in the right curcumstances, be heroic. Like Raping the bitch who killed your brother. Or the government executing you for raping the girl who killed your brother.

Only inbred Christian and mental cripples still see morality in black and whites.

Grow up, >>10.

>>11
You are a shithead.

>>1
I agree with you on the violent crimes bit. Rapists, and child molesters, and murderers should not be alowed most basic human rights, but you have to consider that 2/3 people are involved with the breaking of some kind of law during their lives. (Let's face it, shop lifting from Wal-Mart and other large chain stores is not a crime anymore it's a hobby)

The black man is born into crime

>>14

>A black man is born a crime
fixed

>>12

So should I take that as your concession? "You're a shithead" is far from an apt defense.

That's just a legal definition that happens to work well in the US.  It doesn't mean a crazy person really didn't do anything wrong.

>>1
Retardation, corwardry, hipocresy.

>>18

and a complete lack of correct spelling.

>>17

It "works well" everywhere. The mentally sick tend to not understand the difference between right and wrong in the first place. Just like a child, it usually doesn't have a first grasp on ethics to begin with. And there are no absolutes with human morals, there's a justification for everything these days. That's the problem with thread- it ignores times in history when certain behavior were considered moral. The poster tries to highlight petty crimes as being "criminal" without addressing a whole plethora of others... it's his wishy-washiness that leave room for the discussion of what is trully amoral and criminal behavior- he himself doesn't seem to have have a first grasp on what the absoluteness of evil or wrong doing even is. 

>>20
Petty crimes? Are rape, assault, murder, armed burglary and such petty crimes in your opnion? They're worst crimes possible, even with pure rational thinking. Those crimes directly hurt victim both mentally and physically. That's why they're very wrong and victim should be able defend him/herself with deadly force.

>>20

It's up to the legislators to determine what things are considered crimes, not you.  Crazy people do commit crimes.  In most cases they will pay for what they did while in others the insanity plea works due to crafty lawyers.  Morality, on the other hand, up to the individual person.

>>21

And what is your arugment exactly? You didn't ask if whether or not people should use deadly force to protect themselves. You asked: "Why do people treat criminals as equals?"

If murder is a crime, is it still a crime when someone is protect themselves? It's not a loaded question- it's a point I'm making about the subjectivity of what is amoral behavior.

>>22

Legislators invoke the will of a collective of individuals. What is your point? You keep repeating "Crazy people do commit crimes" over and over like that distills my argumentment. In science and in rational thinking you can't just disregard the mechanisms for actions- in this case the mechanism for a crazy person commiting a crime is his craziness. And in that state of insanity it is possible for one to not know he is commiting a crime.

>>23

Newsflash!  We not all the same person.

shitty thread

pele wins his life is clean