Uberstein Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 "Or we could simply hang them if they are found guilty and give their property to their closest living relatives." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justinian the Mighty Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 "Or we could simply hang them if they are found guilty and give their property to their closest living relatives." And risk creating martyrs for other fascist fanatics to use in order to justify their actions. I think we should avoid execution of Nordic leaders if possible, and prevent suicide attempts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthey Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 To contain political fallout and keep them away from thugs? You could have said that without so many words. I like my way better. "Or we could simply hang them if they are found guilty and give their property to their closest living relatives." That's fun too I guess... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Terra Di Agea Posted June 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) *They are not presently violent criminals, placing them in prison could turn them into violent criminals and therefore contribute to the violent element already present in society. *Housing prisoners is quite costly house arrest however has to be paid for by the criminal in question. *Individuals intermingle in prison, and often times gangs and underground organizations form within them; prison is just another opportunity for these individuals to gain influence and commit harmful acts via proxies. A large influx of these powerful figures into them would only increase this potential, and spreading them out over many prisions would only widen the scope these powerful figures have. *Prison overcrowding doesn't need to be added to. *Political resentment in their home nations will only damage European unity and cooperation. Moreover home leadership being imprisoned in a foreign nation only increases nationalist fervor and creates a scapegoat. That being said keeping them under house arrest in their own nation blacklisted from political participation would prevent all of that and keep them isolated from prison societies from which they could harvest influence and connections. Blacklisting these men and women will achieve nothing except letting them worm back into power. Putting them in prison will not turn them into violent criminals, and ADI's prison system makes sure of that. Rather than imprison them in cells, we have what we lack to call "Prisons without walls," Wherein the convicted do manual labor out in the open, building their own houses and growing their own food. Though the name is not entirely accurate (There are walls around the outermost reaches of the areas), the prisoners are aloud to learn to work in a society wherein they cannot get away with robbery or crime. This prevents the cabin fever caused by traditional prisons, where the prisoners band together to keep their sanity and are often forced to embellish their crimes to not be injured in prison. ADI's prisons are best described as "Long Term Team Building Retreats" rather than the soul crushing camps you seem to think. Edited June 22, 2009 by Il Terra Di Agea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthey Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 (edited) Blacklisting these men and women will achieve nothing except letting them worm back into power. Putting them in prison will not turn them into violent criminals, and ADI's prison system makes sure of that. Rather than imprison them in cells, we have what we lack to call "Prisons without walls," Wherein the convicted do manual labor out in the open, building their own houses and growing their own food. Though the name is not entirely accurate (There are walls around the outermost reaches of the areas), the prisoners are aloud to learn to work in a society wherein they cannot get away with robbery or crime. This prevents the cabin fever caused by traditional prisons, where the prisoners band together to keep their sanity and are often forced to embellish their crimes to not be injured in prison. ADI's prisons are best described as "Long Term Team Building Retreats" rather than the soul crushing camps you seem to think. Worm their way back into power... no. I mean while they are under house arrest they would obviously be monitored and there would be restrictions on outside communication. As for your prison system, I don't take issue with it, nor do I think they are soul crushing camps. Im just saying typically when you spend time with violent criminals you become a violent criminal. Unless the person already is one there is no reason to do that. In the case of these individuals we are not talking about common thugs we are talking about former heads of state individuals who merely abused their power, and fought wars. Any crime they committed was done behind the curtain of government operation, a pathology far different than the one which drives petty crime. In either case its clear these trials are merely about retribution rather than protecting society, otherwise prison... and execution would be deemed unnecessary. That being said further debate isn't going to convince anyone, so we take our leave. OOC: Build their housing... aren't we talking about arctic condition; without a heater they would freeze to death . Its cool I just have fun with this stuff; its all IC. Edited June 22, 2009 by iamthey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 OOC: My, every time I look at the topic description, I think of trail mix. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumeragi Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 OOC: I wouldn't feel safe with you on the jury. You threatened on MSN to attack me with your carrier fleet if I pushed terms on Martens, and frankly, that shows a violent bias I don't want on the jury. OOC: And? That's the position of Monika Speer- she's sick of both the corrupted Second Nordland and the whiny, good-for-nothing TEC. She would rather just let TEC go under a nuking to end all idiocy of Europe. Note that this is OOC info on IC, not a pure OOC comment. Frankly, I don't feel safe with anyone except Sarah in this, including myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahsir Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) Dranagg offers our own method of dealing with world political leaders convicted by trial. They may join our glorious bi-annual convict expedition to the North Pole. This winter's expedition is expected to be quite good. Also it will certainly be more thrilling than staying in sunny, almost tropical by comparison, ADI territory. Edited June 23, 2009 by Tahsir Re Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 OOC: And? That's the position of Monika Speer- she's sick of both the corrupted Second Nordland and the whiny, good-for-nothing TEC. She would rather just let TEC go under a nuking to end all idiocy of Europe. Note that this is OOC info on IC, not a pure OOC comment.Frankly, I don't feel safe with anyone except Sarah in this, including myself. OOC: That isn't the way you put it on MSN. You said it was YOUR OOC position that the TEC was whiny. I fully belive that you are not seperating your OOC position from your IC position, and thus, do not feel you have any position on the jury. Frankly, when people threaten me with carrier groups OOC for OOC motives, I tend to doubt their objectivity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mergerberger II Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 OOC: And? That's the position of Monika Speer- she's sick of both the corrupted Second Nordland and the whiny, good-for-nothing TEC. She would rather just let TEC go under a nuking to end all idiocy of Europe. Note that this is OOC info on IC, not a pure OOC comment.Frankly, I don't feel safe with anyone except Sarah in this, including myself. OOC: I would feel comfortable only with Hawk_11 on the jury. No other is as impartial as he is, none more neutral. Sarah has been plotting against Nordland for some time, and has called us 'arrogant' and told us that she has been planning this for awhile. She is not neutral, in fact she organized the anti-Nordlandic coalition. No person in the world is more neutral than Hawk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 OOC: I would feel comfortable only with Hawk_11 on the jury. No other is as impartial as he is, none more neutral. Sarah has been plotting against Nordland for some time, and has called us 'arrogant' and told us that she has been planning this for awhile. She is not neutral, in fact she organized the anti-Nordlandic coalition. No person in the world is more neutral than Hawk. OOC: And you lost the war. The Coalition forms the jury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 OOC: I would feel comfortable only with Hawk_11 on the jury. No other is as impartial as he is, none more neutral. Sarah has been plotting against Nordland for some time, and has called us 'arrogant' and told us that she has been planning this for awhile. She is not neutral, in fact she organized the anti-Nordlandic coalition. No person in the world is more neutral than Hawk. OOC: Note that it was all because she was nuked by a Nordlandic country. You seem to keep forgetting that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 OOC: No person in the world is more neutral than Hawk. OOC: What about V The King and Lavo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mergerberger II Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 OOC: Note that it was all because she was nuked by a Nordlandic country.You seem to keep forgetting that. OOC: I did not say it was illegitimate, I said that she is not as neutral as the world believes her to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah Tintagyl Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 OOC: Hawk, Lavo, V, I don't care. I had no intention of serving on this jury anyways. I just said that it shouldn't just be Uber and ITDA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 OOC: Hawk, Lavo, V, I don't care. I had no intention of serving on this jury anyways. I just said that it shouldn't just be Uber and ITDA. OOC: I will admit that I have a bias, and I have no wish to be the only one on the jury, I just don't think non-coalition forces have a right to be on the jury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamthey Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) OOC: I personally don't really care but I think a RNG would be a more accurate representation of a jury. Generally speaking juries are basically just the product of random choosing, ideally they are chosen in such a way to create an objective apolitical pool, but no juror is going to think the same. In such a high profile case such as this, and considering the fact that you are talking about political leaders and government policy where the morality of the matter is mostly gray their is the random possibility that one juror is going to say nay and acquit the individual in question. Perhaps a better trial model would be baron/adi (or whoever) acting as prosecutor; a more apolitical/neutral member of the coalition acting as a judge who sets the punishment for a guilty conviction (the choices being, house arrest/imprisonment/execution and varying specifications of those); based on the arguments of the prosecution and defense; and then the RNG determines guilt/or non-guilt. Those could be the more high profile cases. The boring ones could just be coin tosses, and no real RP'd trial proceedings. I mean otherwise we might as well just assume people like martens get a guilty conviction so KM can just void the trial and make him rise from the dead once more lol. Edited June 23, 2009 by iamthey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 (edited) Blacklisting won't stop the official. You are talking under the assumption that the Martens family have only committed murder through politics - though isn't it true that the family is known to be on the field, murdering along with their soldiers? You wish to leave these politicians in their comfortable homes while "blacklisting" them, which is a slap on the wrist compared to the crimes they have committed. Then they were acting in the capacity of soldiers, you don't intend to put the army on trial do you? As for their crimes as I said, it doesn't matter what they did, all that matters is preventing future crimes. Criminal Justice as retribution achieves nothing, it just satisfies the blood lust of those issuing it. Giving a thief thirty lashes doesn't mean anything if they just steal again, in the same way cutting their hands off while preventing future theft is overkill. The martens like any other criminals are the the product of their environments. They have been taught and raised in a culture that teaches them to be contemptuous of the lives of others, and the ultimate result is a group of people who are inclined towards insane nationalism, and violent expansionist acts. They have proven this and therefore should never be allowed to take up the reigns of power again. That being said its unnecessary to utilize prison which is a device used to physically separate the dangerous from society. The goal of these trials should not be to "punish" or "give them what they deserve" as such a goal is neither rational or quantifiable, but rather to issue sentences which are preventative in nature. If they were acting in the capacity as soldiers--then that makes them even more deadly. Soldiers are trained to kill. Those that need to be put on trial need to be isolated from mainstream society...and placed in a maximum security facility of some sort, to prevent the possibility of them killing again. OOC: If you like, i can serve on the jury. I can promise to be impartial. Edited June 23, 2009 by Subtleknifewielder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.