Another Ponzi schemer gets life in prison

[Syzygys]

After Madoff, here is another idiot who is going to spend his golden years behind bars:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin.../06/15/gJQAQ2kkeV_allComments.html?ctab=all_&

I don't really get, why these idiots don't they put a few millions away for rainy days, and what is good for society to keep a bunch of retired ex-millionaire around??? A few public hangings sure could create a little deterrent, but if nothing else, closure.

My main point is: If a youngster gets a few decades in jail, one could argue that he might be able to change, and live a decent life for the 2nd half of his life. But when one gets a basicly life sentence at an old age, we might as well just kill the poor/stupid bastard....

 

[Balerion]

After Madoff, here is another idiot who is going to spend his golden years behind bars:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin.../06/15/gJQAQ2kkeV_allComments.html?ctab=all_&

I don't really get, why these idiots don't they put a few millions away for rainy days, and what is good for society to keep a bunch of retired ex-millionaire around??? A few public hangings sure could create a little deterrent, but if nothing else, closure.

My main point is: If a youngster gets a few decades in jail, one could argue that he might be able to change, and live a decent life for the 2nd half of his life. But when one gets a basicly life sentence at an old age, we might as well just kill the poor/stupid bastard....

That's barbaric, for one, and also falls apart because the same logic could be applied to young offenders sentenced to life without parole.

 

[Syzygys]

That's barbaric, for one, and also falls apart because the same logic could be applied to young offenders sentenced to life without parole.

What same logic? The point was, that if prison can actually reform criminals, then there is a chance with a young men, but you run out of time with an old timer before he could reform himself. That's why certain countries don't have life sentences, but a maximum of 20-30 years....

But for someone already 62 years old, a 25 years no parole sentence is basicly death sentence, so we might as well put him out of his misery. Barbaric? I don't want to start again, but it depends on the definition. What is barbaric about putting someone to sleep forever???

Anyhow, about his company:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_Financial_Group

 

[quadraphonics]

But for someone already 62 years old, a 25 years no parole sentence is basicly death sentence,

You mean a life sentence.

so we might as well put him out of his misery.

You could say the same thing about any life sentence. Is it your position that life sentences should be abolished in favor of the death penalty?

 

[Balerion]

What same logic? The point was, that if prison can actually reform criminals, then there is a chance with a young men, but you run out of time with an old timer before he could reform himself. That's why certain countries don't have life sentences, but a maximum of 20-30 years....

Again, what about the young man given a life sentence? If you're advocating euthanasia for elderly criminals on account that they won't ever get out of prison, then the same argument would apply to anyone who is sentenced to spend the rest of their lives in prison.

I see you haven't thought this through very well. Take a few and get back to me.

But for someone already 62 years old, a 25 years no parole sentence is basicly death sentence, so we might as well put him out of his misery.

Actually, it's a life sentence. Do you understand the difference? And again, what if we're talking about a 21-year-old given 99 years? That person is not getting out of jail, and your argument should apply to them as well.

Barbaric? I don't want to start again, but it depends on the definition. What is barbaric about putting someone to sleep forever???

It's barbaric to rob them of what life they have left based on the fact that they will spend it behind bars. And we a graduated penalty system for a reason. Start killing off everyone who might not survive their sentence, and you start encouraging more violent crimes. For example, say a 50-year-old rapist gets 40 years. Chances are, he's not going to see the light of day again. If he knows, however, that this fact means he'll simply be put to death, he's more likely to murder his victim(s) to prevent them from talking. That's just one example. Imagine a felon on their second strike; a simple armed robbery turns into a triple homicide.

Again, try thinking this stuff through.

 

[Syzygys]

Edit: When I was thinking of life sentence, I had the possibility of parole in my mind...

You mean a life sentence.

I guess. What I am trying to get is, that when one gets a really long sentence, age makes a huge difference. When you are 20 getting a 30 years, no parole sentence, you are still out at 50. If the same sentence happens to you at 60, you will die in prison.

He got 110 years, so even if they let 75% of it go away, he will still die in jail...

 

[Syzygys]

Again, what about the young man given a life sentence?

See my previous post. I guess to correct myself, we have to talk about long sentences or life with the possibility of parole.

Take a few and get back to me.

I just did, so how about now? Do you see the difference?

Actually, it's a life sentence

Sure, and there is such a thing as parole...

It's barbaric to rob them of what life they have left based on the fact that they will spend it behind bars.

I really don't want to get into this part, but getting raped,abused for a few decades sounds more barbaric to me...

Again, try thinking this stuff through.

But I did, at this time I really did! Can I try one more time? About thinking criminals: In California, several of them getting huge penalties/punishments for small offenses, because of the 3 strikes law.(kind of barbaric, if you ask me) You really think most of the criminals think about the possible punishment (not to mention they actually know what they can get) when they planning the crime? Some do, most of them don't...

 

[quadraphonics]

What I am trying to get is, that when one gets a really long sentence, age makes a huge difference. When you are 20 getting a 30 years, no parole sentence, you are still out at 50. If the same sentence happens to you at 60, you will die in prison.

So what?

 

[Balerion]

See my previous post. I guess to correct myself, we have to talk about long sentences or life with the possibility of parole.



I just did, so how about now? Do you see the difference?

You didn't correct anything. You simply restated your assertion that old people getting long sentences will likely die in prison, and so should be put to death. You haven't changed your position at all, because your reasoning remains the same. If a person at 19 years old gets a life sentence without parole, they'll die in prison. Your logic mandates that they, too, be put to death.

Sure, and there is such a thing as parole...

Not always.

I really don't want to get into this part, but getting raped,abused for a few decades sounds more barbaric to me...

You don't want to get into because you can't defend it. And is that what you think prison is? I suggest you stop taking your cues from Oz and come back to reality.

But I did, at this time I really did! Can I try one more time? About thinking criminals: In California, several of them getting huge penalties/punishments for small offenses, because of the 3 strikes law.(kind of barbaric, if you ask me) You really think most of the criminals think about the possible punishment (not to mention they actually know what they can get) when they planning the crime? Some do, most of them don't...

I'm not arguing the effectiveness of the 3 strikes law, I'm saying that if you guarantee that people getting life in prison are actually getting a death sentence, then you're going to have a lot more violence where it might not otherwise be.

 

[Extrovert39]

After Madoff, here is another idiot who is going to spend his golden years behind bars:


I don't really get, why these idiots don't they put a few millions away for rainy days, and what is good for society to keep a bunch of retired ex-millionaire around??? A few public hangings sure could create a little deterrent, but if nothing else, closure.

My main point is: If a youngster gets a few decades in jail, one could argue that he might be able to change, and live a decent life for the 2nd half of his life. But when one gets a basicly life sentence at an old age, we might as well just kill the poor/stupid bastard....

More expensive to execute than to jail though actually

 

[Syzygys]

So what?

The main point of this thread...

 

[Syzygys]

You didn't correct anything.

I corrected 2 things, the parole thingy and long sentence thingy. A young guy with a life sentence but parole opportunities, might get out of prison, thus putting him to death would deny his chances.

An old guy with a long sentence has no time to reach the parole part. Actually, from society's POV, it would be easier to kick him out when he starts to get really old and sick, thus the hospital bills would come to him, not to the state.

You don't want to get into because..

...I usually get banned.

Seriously, that line of thought wasn't the topic of this thread...

I'm saying that if you guarantee that people getting life in prison are actually getting a death sentence, then you're going to have a lot more violence where it might not otherwise be.

I knew what you were saying. But following that logic (you like to follow conclusions, don't you?) you can apply that to any harsh sentence. So I could say, unless a criminal knows that he gets a beach front property with massage and donuts, they will be more and more violent, to try to avoid ANY kind of punishment.

Or follow this: I kidnap someone. Since there is no death penalty, after collecting the ransom, I might as well kill the hostage, so no eyewitness is left. What can I lose? Life in prison? They have cabel there....

See??? Your line of reasoning can be turned around just as easily... Oh yes, and there is such a thing as justice... If you think that the Green River Killer (about 50 dead women) got punished by life in prison, lift your hand up...

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

I don't really get, why these idiots don't they put a few millions away, for rainy days.

You have to be at least a bit of a sociopath to do so much harm to so many people. Sociopaths don't think like you and I do. Many of the traits we take for granted in civilized adults, such as altruism, deferred gratification and rational risk management, actually evolve very late in our maturation process, well beyond adolescence in our 20s. For some people they just never happen; sociopaths, for example.

A few public hangings sure could create a little deterrent. . . .

It's well attested that execution, caning, and other cruel punishments have virtually no affect at all on the crime rate. The reason is in my previous remark: people who do these things are not normal adults so they don't think like we do. Specifically, they do not practice what we consider rational risk management.

But for someone already 62 years old, a 25 years no parole sentence is basicly death sentence, so we might as well put him out of his misery.

Watch your glib math when you're talking to somebody who's 68. My mother-in-law is 96.

Barbaric? I don't want to start again, but it depends on the definition. What is barbaric about putting someone to sleep forever???

The first rule of civilization is that you don't get to kill another person except in the specific case of self-defense against a lethal threat on his part. In other words, the other guy has to voluntarily secede from the company of civilized human beings before you have a right to treat him with uncivilized behavior. The reason for this rule is that without it, we'd all have to devote so much of our time, energy and other resources into protecting ourselves from each other, that the economy could not produce the surplus that drives civilization.

You don't get to kill somebody because you don't like him. You don't get to kill somebody because you hate him. You don't get to kill somebody because he did something that pissed you off. You don't get to kill somebody because he did something that pissed everybody off.

You simply do not get to kill people at all, unless they're attacking you or someone in your community with a lethal weapon and there's no time or resources available to stop them with non-lethal force. This lets us all sleep more soundly. We're not going to wake up in the morning and find that our wacky neighbors have decided to shoot us because we disrespect their religion.

Once armed agents of the government have intervened, overpowered the miscreant, and locked him away, he is no threat to you. So you don't get to kill him, and you don't get to beg those government agents to kill him either.

One day you may wake up and discover that culture changed while you weren't looking. Now all your neighbors hate you because you have a dog, or because you drink alcohol, or because you allow your wife to walk down the street by herself without wrapping herself up like a mummy. You're be real happy to discover that even though they hate you, they're Americanized enough to stop short of killing you.

 

[quadraphonics]

The main point of this thread...

Is... what? That old criminals have a higher chance of dieing in jail than younger ones? Why should anyone care about that?

 

[Syzygys]

Sociopaths don't think like you and I do

Or they are just bad at math. Stanford was honestly disturbed by the notion that he intended to harm people, his reactions were genuine.

My mother-in-law is 96.

Remind me not to give her money to invest...

The first rule of civilization is ....

Never kill your own kind. Everybody else is fair game...

Remember, civilization has been around for about 10K year, and killing each other has been alright for 99% of that period. So majority rules...

protecting ourselves from each other, that the economy could not produce the surplus that drives civilization.

First, you are making this up. Second, military budgets have been one of the biggest % of the average society, through history...

You don't get to kill somebody because you don't like him.

True, but you can kill him if you want his land, wife or pet rabbit.

You simply do not get to kill people at all,

Written by Jeffrey Dahmer...

Once armed agents of the government have intervened, overpowered the miscreant, and locked him away, he is no threat to you.

Yeah, that's why the Witness Relocation Program exists.

One day you may wake up and discover that culture changed while you weren't looking.

No, we are still killers and always will be. Just check who are our biggest heros. Members of the military are automatically called heros...

Thank you for the sermon, but I am not religious...

 

[machaon]

These Ponzi schemes are nothing compared to what the federal government is doing with your money(in the US). Social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme in recorded history.

 

[aaqucnaona]

These Ponzi schemes are nothing compared to what the federal government is doing with your money(in the US). Social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme in recorded history.

How so?