http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/07/killer.bar.ap/index.html

Interesting.  Good to know though

Something as bad as murder should have implications throughout one's life.

Doesn't that destroy the whole argument that the intention of serving prison time is for rehabilitation?  According to how your legal system is supposed to work, when somebody gets out of jail, they should be considered rehabilitated and return to being a contributing member of society.  Isn't that the point?

In fact, since this guy is persuing higher education, it seems to me that he has been rehabilitated, and cleaned up, and is trying to make something of his life.  Then, he's denied.  He would have been better off selling drugs and killing people.  Is that what they want criminals to think?

Yeah, this is completely messed up.

100% disagreed with this.

Felons are treated differently.  They may be rehabilitated, but they aren't "as good as" normal citizens.

It's like a car that has been totalled.  @ 1 point it was a perfectly good car, then it was destroyed & utterly useless to the world, then someone fix it...however, you can't fix a car to an "as new" state without building a new car.

He may be better than when he went into prison, but come one, he killed 2 people over drugs.  Would you leave your kids alone with this guy?  I don't think anyone here (as far as I know) can honestly answer yes to that because they don't have kids.


EDIT:
HEH, realization:
Japan broke, we fixed them by making a new Japan, hmm, new=fixed, old=broken.
(all in reference to Pearl Harbor)

No. Bad.

Hmm, I didn't read in the article where he was applying for a nanny position.  He has graduated from law school and is applying for the state bar.  This would enable him to be someone's legal representative who has accused of wrongdoing.  How could he be in any other job which is more closely watched by the judicial system than for him to spend 60 hours a week in court cases?

Also they're a little pissed because he "never accepted full responsibility for his crimes" .. well what if he is innocent and found guilty?  That HAS happened and quite more often than you would think.  A person in that position is more likely to want to enter law and represent people so they don't get screwed over like he did.

[quote author=iago link=topic=13449.msg136767#msg136767 date=1133999753]
Doesn't that destroy the whole argument that the intention of serving prison time is for rehabilitation? According to how your legal system is supposed to work, when somebody gets out of jail, they should be considered rehabilitated and return to being a contributing member of society. Isn't that the point?

In fact, since this guy is persuing higher education, it seems to me that he has been rehabilitated, and cleaned up, and is trying to make something of his life. Then, he's denied. He would have been better off selling drugs and killing people. Is that what they want criminals to think?
[/quote]

IMO, we stuck the dude in jail to say "BAD BOY, THATS NOT OK TO DO", in hopes that sometime in his sentence he understands that, and goes back to being.. rehabilitated. I was going to disagree but my argument doesn't work for that! =p

[quote author=Joe link=topic=13449.msg136788#msg136788 date=1134013811]
[quote author=iago link=topic=13449.msg136767#msg136767 date=1133999753]
Doesn't that destroy the whole argument that the intention of serving prison time is for rehabilitation? According to how your legal system is supposed to work, when somebody gets out of jail, they should be considered rehabilitated and return to being a contributing member of society. Isn't that the point?

In fact, since this guy is persuing higher education, it seems to me that he has been rehabilitated, and cleaned up, and is trying to make something of his life. Then, he's denied. He would have been better off selling drugs and killing people. Is that what they want criminals to think?
[/quote]

IMO, we stuck the dude in jail to say "BAD BOY, THATS NOT OK TO DO", in hopes that sometime in his sentence he understands that, and goes back to being.. rehabilitated. I was going to disagree but my argument doesn't work for that! =p
[/quote]

We had that argument in another thread. I think we agreed that the point to sending somebody to jail was to punish/rehabilitate them, but it sucks at that, which means the current legal system (of both our countries) sucks

[quote author=Grok link=topic=13449.msg136787#msg136787 date=1134013414]
Hmm, I didn't read in the article where he was applying for a nanny position.  He has graduated from law school and is applying for the state bar.  This would enable him to be someone's legal representative who has accused of wrongdoing.  How could he be in any other job which is more closely watched by the judicial system than for him to spend 60 hours a week in court cases?

Also they're a little pissed because he "never accepted full responsibility for his crimes" .. well what if he is innocent and found guilty?  That HAS happened and quite more often than you would think.  A person in that position is more likely to want to enter law and represent people so they don't get screwed over like he did.
[/quote]He did it, he said he did it, he said he didnt mean to do it though.

I recall reading something along the lines of him saying he just wanted to rob them, then it got complicated & he killed them.  His fault, his bad, his problem.
He is a murderer, a cold bolded evil man.

He passed the bar, if I were him I would move out of arizona and get my licences else where.

[quote author=Forged link=topic=13449.msg136814#msg136814 date=1134029781]
He passed the bar, if I were him I would move out of arizona and get my licences else where.
[/quote]He mya have to move out of the country to do that (I hope)

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136820#msg136820 date=1134050958]
[quote author=Forged link=topic=13449.msg136814#msg136814 date=1134029781]
He passed the bar, if I were him I would move out of arizona and get my licences else where.
[/quote]He mya have to move out of the country to do that (I hope)
[/quote]

Hopefully the 5 people that voted for him not getting to work will be sentenced to life in prison for abetting crime....

how so?

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136797#msg136797 date=1134019749]
[quote author=Grok link=topic=13449.msg136787#msg136787 date=1134013414]
Hmm, I didn't read in the article where he was applying for a nanny position.  He has graduated from law school and is applying for the state bar.  This would enable him to be someone's legal representative who has accused of wrongdoing.  How could he be in any other job which is more closely watched by the judicial system than for him to spend 60 hours a week in court cases?

Also they're a little pissed because he "never accepted full responsibility for his crimes" .. well what if he is innocent and found guilty?  That HAS happened and quite more often than you would think.  A person in that position is more likely to want to enter law and represent people so they don't get screwed over like he did.
[/quote]He did it, he said he did it, he said he didnt mean to do it though.

I recall reading something along the lines of him saying he just wanted to rob them, then it got complicated & he killed them.  His fault, his bad, his problem.
He is a murderer, a cold bolded evil man.
[/quote]

I don't see how your last statement follows from your premise.  Shit happened, he's sorry about it.  He's paid his tie, and is ready to go back to being a functional member of society.  As I said, if he has gone through law school, he's obviously trying to be a useful member of society, so why discourage that?  People, once they're out of jail, should be encouraged to live a normal life, otherwise they're going to go back to crime and make the world a worse place.

Although there is something to be said about lawyers making the world an even worse place than criminals, but....

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136820#msg136820 date=1134050958]
[quote author=Forged link=topic=13449.msg136814#msg136814 date=1134029781]
He passed the bar, if I were him I would move out of arizona and get my licences else where.
[/quote]He mya have to move out of the country to do that (I hope)
[/quote]
He should be forced to spend the rest of is life working at mcdonalds because he made a mistake in the 1960's?  Granted it was a huge fucking mistake, but it was also a long time ago and he has already served his time out.  I think if he bothers to take this to the courts he will probablly win, this is blatant discrimination.

This guy robbed people for drugs/drug money (I dont remeber) & ended up killing them.

As a lawyer you are expected to be a 'good' person in the sense that you have a high moral standard.  You are dealing with people's lives (criminal & civil law) as a lawyer.  This man showed he had no regard for the basic human being, why should he be trusted with a little old lady's $2.3 million will?...he could easily decieve her and the reap a whole new benfit.  Why doesn't he get a job in construction?...that isn't hard to do, money is good right now, & eventhough houses can be life & death, it is easier to spot someone duping you over while they build your dream home.

HOW IS THAT DISCRIMINATION!?
Discrimination is treatment based on class/category, not individual merit.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discrimination
His individual merit is that he murdered two living souls in cold blood.  Could you forgive that man if he had killed your parents & was let out 17 years later only to  be sworn to uphold the law in every aspect.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136826#msg136826 date=1134057530]
how so?
[/quote]

Well, they have made it quite clear that they do not want criminals to abandon crime and turn into lawful citizens. Once a criminal - always a criminal. What would that be if not encouraging crime?

You can't tell me that you really believe that.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136833#msg136833 date=1134059004]
You can't tell me that you really believe that.
[/quote]

I 100% believe that. If a man spends 17 years in prison, then goes through law school, that is plenty of time to have changed his mind about things. People can get religious and completely reformed in a matter of months. This decision of theirs is just spitting justice in the face.

Spitting justice in the face?
Do you really think that it is just that this man is alive & well after being fed & clothed & watching cable TV for 17 years while there are two families that will never see thie relatives again?  Is it just that some kid may no longer have a father?  Is it just that those two people no longer live while he can enjoy a good sunny day or a delicious meal?
Is that really just?

The details of the crime are completely irrelevant. He was tried, prosecuted, served his time, and was released. Upon release, he should have the same rights and privileges as any other citizen.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136839#msg136839 date=1134059377]
Spitting justice in the face?
  Is it just that some kid may no longer have a father?  Is it just that those two people no longer live while he can enjoy a good sunny day or a delicious meal?
Is that really just?
[/quote]

Using your logic...  These people that where killed were drug dealers.  They kill people with their poison and they break the law.  The don't deserve to have a family or enjoy the sun, they should be stuck in a jail cell for the next 30 years.  Then, when they get out, they can be forced to work a low paying job even though they have law degrees, and when the hit 65 they will be denied social security because they fucked up when they where kids.

Adron is entirely correct.  If you pass judgment on someone, apply a sentence, and the person completes that sentence, you must either treat him like a regular citizen when done, or treat him like a criminal.  If you're treating him like a regular citizen, then he should have all the rights and responsibilities of one.  If you are treating him like a criminal, then you are saying there is further sentencing which was not disclosed -- i.e. secret sentencing.  If you are applying secret sentencing, punishments not disclosed at the time of judgment, then you should throw out the previous trial and grant a retrial, this time with honesty.

[quote author=Forged link=topic=13449.msg136844#msg136844 date=1134064030]
[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136839#msg136839 date=1134059377]
Spitting justice in the face?
  Is it just that some kid may no longer have a father?  Is it just that those two people no longer live while he can enjoy a good sunny day or a delicious meal?
Is that really just?
[/quote]

Using your logic...  These people that where killed were drug dealers.
[/quote]

Actually, let's get even more logical. Those people he killed were drug dealers. They deserved death. We should give this guy a medal and make him president.

Well, or we should put Bush in prison at least 17 years. It can't be just that people get sentenced to death by the state, so that some kid may no longer have a father, and the governor later gets made a president?

You appeal to our emotions for children, sunny days and good meals. But this is about justice, about serving a penalty, and about eventually becoming a law-abiding citizen. Or to remain a criminal forever.

Felons aren't regular citizens though.  It is common knowledge that felons do not have the same rights as law biding citizens as I recall learning


Looking through the 15th ammendment I guess that felons can/should vote.


Another situation:
Guy molests kids for 20 years.  Guy goes to prison for 5 years.  Guy gets teaching certificate & applies to get a teaching job w/young kids.  Should he be allowed in?
For those of you that say yes, do you have kids?


[quote author=Adron link=topic=13449.msg136848#msg136848 date=1134066620]
[quote author=Forged link=topic=13449.msg136844#msg136844 date=1134064030]
[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136839#msg136839 date=1134059377]
Spitting justice in the face?
  Is it just that some kid may no longer have a father?  Is it just that those two people no longer live while he can enjoy a good sunny day or a delicious meal?
Is that really just?
[/quote]

Using your logic...  These people that where killed were drug dealers.
[/quote]

Actually, let's get even more logical. Those people he killed were drug dealers. They deserved death. We should give this guy a medal and make him president.

Well, or we should put Bush in prison at least 17 years. It can't be just that people get sentenced to death by the state, so that some kid may no longer have a father, and the governor later gets made a president?

You appeal to our emotions for children, sunny days and good meals. But this is about justice, about serving a penalty, and about eventually becoming a law-abiding citizen. Or to remain a criminal forever.

[/quote]
Actually, he was the drug dealer enabling others to get high.
Sure they shouldn't be buy drugs, but he sure as hell wasn't doing anyone a service by killing them, he was the dealer.

Why should Bush go to prison?  Because a grown man/woman chose to put themselves in harms way?  Their choice.

I appeal to feelings because that is the gu instinct of what is right and wrong in society.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136851#msg136851 date=1134067330]
Felons aren't regular citizens though.  It is common knowledge that felons do not have the same rights as law biding citizens as I recall learning
[/quote]

This is right back to the argument that went on a few weeks ago, about the point of jail. 

I think the bottom line is, If criminals AREN'T in jail to be rehabilitated, and they are probably going to commit the crime again, they should be put to death.  Releasing a man who's going to kill back into society, whether or not he's a lawyer, he can easily kill again.  So he should be put to death.  A child rapist will probably rape children again, whether or not he's a teacher, to put him to death.  Kill 'em All.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136851#msg136851 date=1134067330]
Felons aren't regular citizens though.  It is common knowledge that felons do not have the same rights as law biding citizens as I recall learning
[/quote]

That's bad.


[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136851#msg136851 date=1134067330]
Another situation:
Guy molests kids for 20 years.  Guy goes to prison for 5 years.  Guy gets teaching certificate & applies to get a teaching job w/young kids.  Should he be allowed in?
For those of you that say yes, do you have kids?
[/quote]

That's appeal to ridicule. The situation you describe is unrealistic.

Nonetheless, I will answer: if, following his sentence, he is still judged to be a risk, then his sentence was insufficient or inappropriately designed. Had he been sentenced correctly, he would no longer be a risk to children, and should be able to teach if he so desires. This is why sentencing should concentrate on rehabilitation rather than revenge: paedophiles should be hospitalised, not imprisoned.


[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136851#msg136851 date=1134067330]
I appeal to feelings because that is the gu instinct of what is right and wrong in society.
[/quote]

That is entirely erroneous. Feelings are subjective, inquantifiable, and frequently illogical. Reason, not emotion, is the most appropriate tool for debate.

Additionally, I take issue with your assertion that people's feelings are a good indicator of the 'rights and wrongs' of society. Throughout history, things have been commonly accepted -- in other words, things that people have not had strong feelings against --- that we now consider bad. Examples: slavery, torture, feudal systems of government, dictatorship, rigid class systems.

Appeal to emotion is a bad debating technique: it generally only appeals to people who agree with you. Emotion is fickle. Reason is robust.

Appeal to ridicule looks like stuff that could be possible.  I could get shorter (not much) when I drive.  The gorilla thing is claimed wrong since gorillas stem from the same ancestors we do (as I understood from my anthro class).

Emotion & reason both say a murderer shouldn't be treated the same as a full functioning man of society

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136851#msg136851 date=1134067330]
Felons aren't regular citizens though.  It is common knowledge that felons do not have the same rights as law biding citizens as I recall learning
[/quote]

Are you advocating telling everyone found guilty of a crime that post-punishment they are not regular citizens and will be forever treated like criminals?

If you say yes, you are in favor of promoting crime as a lifestyle, because you have given lifetime sentences to those people and crime will be their only way to survive.

If you say no, then you are in favor of rehabilitation, saying that "ok you screwed up -- but complete this sentence or rehabilitation program and we will consider your forgiven, and restore you to regular society."

Finally, you must always consider that you or others around you can indeed be found guilty of something you are innocent.  Are you prepared to be bound by the lifetime sentence you have proposed for a crime you did not commit but were found guilty of?

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136860#msg136860 date=1134069657]
Emotion & reason both say a murderer shouldn't be treated the same as a full functioning man of society
[/quote]
By reading this thread, it seems to me that reason says otherwise.  Unless you agree that people can't change, in which case they should all be put to death. 

Promoting, no, acknowledging, yes.
Promoting would like saying "Look, that guy went to jail, you should kill people & go to jail too, thats fun."  Acknowledging the crime life would be "Hey look at that loser, he took the lives of the guys, now he has to live with the fact that he is a cold blooded murderer, forever."

& it's also not everyone, I believe only felons are treated in a "less than citizen" manner.

This guy was found guilty, he said he did it.  Also, the bar dismissed him on a per-case basis kind of thing, they may view misdemeanor offenses/possibly innocent people differently.


[quote author=iago link=topic=13449.msg136875#msg136875 date=1134079302]
[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136860#msg136860 date=1134069657]
Emotion & reason both say a murderer shouldn't be treated the same as a full functioning man of society
[/quote]
By reading this thread, it seems to me that reason says otherwise. Unless you agree that people can't change, in which case they should all be put to death.
[/quote]They all who?

You will get slightly shorter when accellerating. That is not ridiculous, it is physics. I don't know what the gorilla thing is.

The discussion is not about murderers, it is about criminals who have served their sentences. Reason says that, upon completing one's sentence, one should no longer be treated differently. If it did not, what would be the point in a sentence?

I don't know what emotion says to you, but I do know that it's irrelevant. Translate your emotion into a logical argument, and I'll be more interested.

Incidentally, it sounds like you are describing reductio ad absurdum, rather than appeal to ridicule.

The discussion topic is about a convicted murderer applying to the Arizona State Bar.

Are murders getting off too easy? I personally think the death penalty should be used more. I think that if he murdered someone, he should be sentanced to death.

Now, manslaughter is a diffrent case, because I know my argument would get turned into something about accidents.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136906#msg136906 date=1134096215]
The discussion topic is about a convicted murderer applying to the Arizona State Bar.
[/quote]

This is about a convicted murderer who completed his punishment as imposed by the people, went on to law school and tried to become a productive citizen, and got told no by the Arizona State Bar.

Maybe his punishment doesn't end?  Maybe the consequences of his actions go on forever, as they should.  He murdered people, those people don't have a second chance at anything.  They ended & ended abruptyl.

Haven't you considered that it might be beneficial to society to admit this man to the bar? That it could be better for everyone?

Could be, but a board of highly qualified legal minds don't so I'm gonna agree with them.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136960#msg136960 date=1134144045]
Could be, but a board of highly qualified legal minds don't so I'm gonna agree with them.
[/quote]

Wow, proxy by credentials?  I guess then that you agree with everything your government does agrees with you.  The ultimate "yes" man.

On most things, yeah.  They are more qualified than I am.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136968#msg136968 date=1134146008]
On most things, yeah.  They are more qualified than I am.
[/quote]

I am older than you are. Start agreeing.

Sorry to get into this late, but the man having served his time should be admitted to the bar.  17 years is a very long time, and having to carry the burden of taking away two people's lives is life-long.  That prison cell was his reminder of what he did, and I'm sure he regrets it.  Now that he's out, it's understandable how he wants to give back.

From what I read it didnt sound like he acknowledged that he did anything wrong, he just meant to rob them. 

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136996#msg136996 date=1134156837]
From what I read it didnt sound like he acknowledged that he did anything wrong, he just meant to rob them.
[/quote]

The article didn't delve into that aspect of his character.  Who's to say that he did or didn't acknowledge it?

[quote author=Explicit[nK] link=topic=13449.msg137006#msg137006 date=1134158576]
[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136996#msg136996 date=1134156837]
From what I read it didnt sound like he acknowledged that he did anything wrong, he just meant to rob them.
[/quote]

The article didn't delve into that aspect of his character.  Who's to say that he did or didn't acknowledge it?
[/quote]"and his failure to own up to his past."
Another quote...
"Chief Justice Ruth McGregor said the court has no rule automatically barring someone with Hamm's past from practicing law, but "an applicant with such a background must make an extraordinary showing of rehabilitation and present good moral character."

Among other things, the court said Hamm failed to take full responsibility for the murders. The justices cited Hamm's claim that he intended only to rob the men -- a statement the court said was inconsistent with the facts."

In a sense, he is owning up when he said that this was going to "atone for the lives I took."

"Hamm, initially charged with two counts of murder, pleaded guilty to one and was sentenced to life in prison."

Last I checked, pleading guilty and serving 17 years was taking responsibility.

His intentions, the 'facts', the trial, are all irrelevant: his sentence should be the end of it. Insofar as the state is concerned, the consequenses of his crime should have ended at the end of his sentence. If not, then your justice system is broken.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=13449.msg137068#msg137068 date=1134189347]
His intentions, the 'facts', the trial, are all irrelevant: his sentence should be the end of it. Insofar as the state is concerned, the consequenses of his crime should have ended at the end of his sentence. If not, then your justice system is broken.
[/quote]I believe that his sentence goes beyond just jail time.  That's the inital "don't do it again" thing, the part where he lives shunned by society because he is a murderer is the psychological part of the sentence so he REALLY feels bad about what he did

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137086#msg137086 date=1134226828]
I believe that his sentence goes beyond just jail time.  That's the inital "don't do it again" thing, the part where he lives shunned by society because he is a murderer is the psychological part of the sentence so he REALLY feels bad about what he did
[/quote]

Hold a sec. Do you want him to keep murdering people as a full-time murderer or do you want him to get a productive regular job?

He is a murderer, you can't change that fact.  I didn't say he should continue

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137105#msg137105 date=1134247817]
He is a murderer, you can't change that fact.  I didn't say he should continue
[/quote]

A murderer is someone who murders. Do you want him to keep murdering or do you want him to get a regular job?

Although having a job doesn't directly exclude killing again, he should be allowed a job.

Being allowed a job as a lawyer is another thing. If he has taken full responsibility and written letters of apology to all family members, he should have an equal chance at becoming a lawyer as others. From what CrAz3D has said (I didn't read the article), he hasn't met with that, and shouldn't.

[quote author=Joe link=topic=13449.msg137110#msg137110 date=1134249078]
If he has taken full responsibility
[/quote]

Better to be honest than to take responsibility for things you should not. One of the main issues supposedly is that he says he only intended to rob the victims, and the court does not believe him. Who are they to know his intentions?

If he didn't mean to kill them why did he?  There wasn't someone there "holding his hand" through the murders so to speak.  He pulled the trigger.  He killed the men.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137135#msg137135 date=1134256330]
If he didn't mean to kill them why did he?  There wasn't someone there "holding his hand" through the murders so to speak.  He pulled the trigger.  He killed the men.
[/quote]

You are avoiding the key question, over and over again.  Please answer:
[quote author=Adron link=topic=13449.msg137107#msg137107 date=1134247977]
A murderer is someone who murders. Do you want him to keep murdering[...]?
[/quote]
before continuing, please. 

I wonder where the accomplices of this man are.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137135#msg137135 date=1134256330]
If he didn't mean to kill them why did he?  There wasn't someone there "holding his hand" through the murders so to speak.  He pulled the trigger.  He killed the men.
[/quote]

Shit happens.

The man has paid his debt to society. Give him a break.

He didn't give those two other dudes a break.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137135#msg137135 date=1134256330]
If he didn't mean to kill them why did he?  There wasn't someone there "holding his hand" through the murders so to speak.  He pulled the trigger.  He killed the men.
[/quote]

They where attempting to buy 20lbs of pot from him.  He was robbing them of a shit load of money, I would imagine they put up a fight for it and he killed one of them before they could kill him.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137168#msg137168 date=1134324521]
He didn't give those two other dudes a break.
[/quote]

You haven't answered the most important question yet.  Are you intentionally avoiding it, or do you just keep missing it?

[quote author=iago link=topic=13449.msg137188#msg137188 date=1134337712]
[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137168#msg137168 date=1134324521]
He didn't give those two other dudes a break.
[/quote]

You haven't answered the most important question yet.  Are you intentionally avoiding it, or do you just keep missing it?
[/quote]what question?

[quote author=iago link=topic=13449.msg137141#msg137141 date=1134259017]
You are avoiding the key question, over and over again. Please answer:

[quote author=Adron link=topic=13449.msg137107#msg137107 date=1134247977]
A murderer is someone who murders. Do you want him to keep murdering[...]?
[/quote]

before continuing, please.
[/quote]

That question.

[quote author=Explicit[nK] link=topic=13449.msg137209#msg137209 date=1134358713]
[quote author=iago link=topic=13449.msg137141#msg137141 date=1134259017]
You are avoiding the key question, over and over again. Please answer:

[quote author=Adron link=topic=13449.msg137107#msg137107 date=1134247977]
A murderer is someone who murders. Do you want him to keep murdering[...]?
[/quote]

before continuing, please.
[/quote]

That question.
[/quote]

Yes, and it was asked at least 2 or 3 times in this thread, and has been consistantly ignored. 

It boils down to, would you prefer a criminal to stay a criminal all his life, and continue committing crimes when released from jail?  or would you prefer them to get a job and be a contributing member of society?

I'd say b.  There will be less crime in the world. 

I hope he doesn't kill anyone else...but what is to say he is a fully changed man?  The Arizona Bar obviously doesn't think he is a changed man.

The responders to this thread are taking one of these two positions:

A)  Once a criminal, always a criminal.

-- Someone who commits a crime, at least a felony, is not a normal person and should not be given normal rights, even after they complete the punishment that we normal people have assigned to them.  By not restoring their normal rights, the felon will have to resort to crime in order to survive, but I can ignore that fact because it is a self-fulfilling prophecy that these people are criminals and will repeatedly commit crimes, and this makes me correct to refuse their restoration of rights.

B)  Once a criminal completes his punishment, restore his full rights.

-- Someone who commits a crime, regardless of the crime, should be assigned an appropriate punishment and allowed to serve that punishment then have a chance to return to normal life.  These people may commit further crimes and are even at a higher risk of doing so than people who have never committed any crimes, at which time they will be given more severe punishment than first-time offenders.


I'm of course in (B) so my understanding of the (A) position is biased against, and it is probably written biased against too.

[quote author=Grok link=topic=13449.msg137245#msg137245 date=1134404516]
The responders to this thread are taking one of these two positions:

A)  Once a criminal, always a criminal.

-- Someone who commits a crime, at least a felony, is not a normal person and should not be given normal rights, even after they complete the punishment that we normal people have assigned to them.  By not restoring their normal rights, the felon will have to resort to crime in order to survive, but I can ignore that fact because it is a self-fulfilling prophecy that these people are criminals and will repeatedly commit crimes, and this makes me correct to refuse their restoration of rights.

B)  Once a criminal completes his punishment, restore his full rights.

-- Someone who commits a crime, regardless of the crime, should be assigned an appropriate punishment and allowed to serve that punishment then have a chance to return to normal life.  These people may commit further crimes and are even at a higher risk of doing so than people who have never committed any crimes, at which time they will be given more severe punishment than first-time offenders.


I'm of course in (B) so my understanding of the (A) position is biased against, and it is probably written biased against too.
[/quote]

Within those camps, I actually believe in position (A).  However, I argued against it here in a "convince me I've made the right choice" type of argument.  But the arguments for (A) that I've seen here are so weak that I'm wondering now if I was wrong..

"Once a criminal, always a criminal" is close to how I see it per your definition.  I believe that felonies are haneous acts & should not go without eternal punishment.  K, the guy gets out of prision, but that guy should live with the fact floating over his head everywhere he goes.  I'm sure he can find a job, there are programs for people like that.
Should we onnly forgive some felons & not other?  Sex offenders' names are posted on the internet & where ever they move the neighborhood is notified that a sexual predator has moved in.

It seems silly to punish a man after serving his 20 year sentence.  He is intelligent enough to get a good job, where he can make pretty decent money.  I do not see why he should not be able to get his job seeing as he paid his debut to society already, for something he did as a teenager. 
His only other option if he wants to live a nice life is to start selling drugs again, would you prefer he sell drugs?

He was like 26 when he murdered two people.
Maybe he is just deceitful enough to get a job as a lawyer so he can find out the loops holes of the law & dupe people out of their money.

Lawyer or drugdealer?  Those are his only options? 

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137272#msg137272 date=1134415901]
He was like 26 when he murdered two people.
Maybe he is just deceitful enough to get a job as a lawyer so he can find out the loops holes of the law & dupe people out of their money.

Lawyer or drugdealer? Those are his only options?
[/quote]

Don't you think you're speculating beyond reason?  His original sentence was life, but he was released after 17 years.  In order to do that, you'd have to show that you were rehabilitated, because otherwise, you'd still be in there rotting away.  The Arizona Bar should be taking that into consideration, but it's apparent that they could care less.

Being a lawyer is legitimate, and it's the path he chose.  He should at least be given a chance as opposed to being shut out.

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137272#msg137272 date=1134415901]
He was like 26 when he murdered two people.
Maybe he is just deceitful enough to get a job as a lawyer so he can find out the loops holes of the law & dupe people out of their money.

Lawyer or drugdealer?  Those are his only options? 
[/quote]

This is a great reason for not allowing any lawyers.  I think we should suspect everyone of being deceiptful enough to get a job as a lawyer so they can find out the loopholes and dupe people out of their money.

Because you have to get a job as a lawyer to learn the loopholes and you have to do both of those to dupe people out of their money.

You couldn't just study law and learn those things.

[quote author=Grok link=topic=13449.msg137275#msg137275 date=1134417341]
[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137272#msg137272 date=1134415901]
He was like 26 when he murdered two people.
Maybe he is just deceitful enough to get a job as a lawyer so he can find out the loops holes of the law & dupe people out of their money.

Lawyer or drugdealer?  Those are his only options? 
[/quote]

This is a great reason for not allowing any lawyers.  I think we should suspect everyone of being deceiptful enough to get a job as a lawyer so they can find out the loopholes and dupe people out of their money.

Because you have to get a job as a lawyer to learn the loopholes and you have to do both of those to dupe people out of their money.

You couldn't just study law and learn those things.
[/quote]You know what I meant

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg136772#msg136772 date=1134003299]
Felons are treated differently.  They may be rehabilitated, but they aren't "as good as" normal citizens.
[/quote]

To go along with this argument, what about the person who was murdered?

I like to think of punishments as adequate for the crime or wrongdoing (isn't this the theory behind capital punishment?)  If you've murdered someone, that someone can't ever hold a job.  That someone might have graduated law school but can no longer pass the bar.  That someone can never win the lottery.  That someone can never have a family.  Or what about a convicted rapist's victim(s)?  These are things that can never have restitution granted.  There isn't enough money in the world to offset the psychological damage caused by a rapist to his victim.  For rape, though, I tend to think prison punishment is appropriate, because that guy's new name is going to be Molly for the next several years.  Say hello to Bubba.

Obviously some of these punishments are extreme, and perhaps the bar would be something worthwhile to let a convicted criminal go to.  I think they should let him pass the bar and then flounder around trying to get a job.  What law firm wants to employ a convicted murderer with no law experience?

What if the person they killed was going to kill or rape somebody?  That's more likely than becoming a lawyer or winning the lottery. 

What if the rape victim becomes pregnant, and the child is a genius that solves world hunger?  All because one guy raped her!

My point is, you can't argue based on "what if"'s. :P

[quote author=iago link=topic=13449.msg137345#msg137345 date=1134446391]
What if the person they killed was going to kill or rape somebody?  That's more likely than becoming a lawyer or winning the lottery. 

What if the rape victim becomes pregnant, and the child is a genius that solves world hunger?  All because one guy raped her!
[/quote]
No, but you can argue punishment based on what has happened.  But thanks for making an argument against abortion!

[quote author=MyndFyre link=topic=13449.msg137349#msg137349 date=1134446779]
No, but you can argue punishment based on what has happened.  But thanks for making an argument against abortion!
[/quote]

My arguments were mean to ridicule the idea, jerk :P (that's not ad hominim, by the way.. I'm just joking around)

There's no telling what the people who died were going to do, and whether or not they were going to make the world a better place.  Speculating about it serves no purpose in deciding the fate of the man. 

So the man's past merits shouldn't be taken into consideration when applying for a job either?

[quote author=CrAz3D link=topic=13449.msg137373#msg137373 date=1134461372]
So the man's past merits shouldn't be taken into consideration when applying for a job either?
[/quote]

The fact that he did serve time for the crime he committed should at least bid him a second chance, rather than being shunned overall.