Indeed I agree OM, but of course I live in the UK! I am Socialist sorta and o yes goverment must maintian control over such things.
On Aug 18, 1:47 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > The idea of building more prisons, hospitals, schools etc. is fine in > a society where these institutions are publically funded and run. > However, in a society (like the USA) where they are almost all > privatized and corporatized, the result will be lobbying for more > ‘customers’ and rules/laws to populate the brick and mortars so more > money can be made. This seldom is for the public good and is almost > always for the bottom line. > > On Aug 18, 4:37 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > It does seem ludicrus to me that with an ever expanding population > > that next to nowt has been done to expand our infrastructure. We need > > to be building more prisions, more hospitals, more shcools, more > > social houseing. I mean that is common sense innit? > > > It also occours to me that amongst the very best ways out of recision > > is building. > > > On Aug 18, 12:31 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > You will also wind up paying higher taxes for those that are sent to > > > prison according to a lawyer on BBC radio last night. I think he said > > > prisons are already burdened with 86,000 souls (but the USA beats that > > > figure by miles). It sounds like the courts are swamped and handing > > > down stiff sentences so the country can repair its moral core/civil > > > behavior. Besides, the Olympics are coming up and after all that money > > > is invested, one would not want to frighten away the tourists- like > > > they have in the Middle East. > > > > On Aug 17, 7:34 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Don't worry, archy. You will be paying higher insurance premiums to > > > > cover the losses anyway. Trickle down justice. > > > > > On Aug 17, 7:18 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I think Orn is right. Rationalists are often impossible fantasists > > > > > leading highly disturbed lives. But if emotions are an ever present > > > > > as I'd agree, one can deny them to some degree if you can catch > > > > > yourself (and as importantly others) in them when moral judgement runs > > > > > afoot. > > > > > That we are brainless in this area as a general population is obvious > > > > > from reaction to the UK 'riots' and demands for heavy punishments (our > > > > > courts are berserk at the moment) for these people but can't even see > > > > > that we are being looted by the rich and are not even investigating > > > > > them. > > > > > I'm an advocate of modern National Service that would involve > > > > > disciplined work but not necessarily armed service - but we can't pay > > > > > for it because the rich have looted the money and have > > > > > disproportionate influence on government through their rotten > > > > > accumulations. > > > > > We should be some time to such reactions before deciding, but if one > > > > > gives power such time it usually steal the moment and the decision for > > > > > itself. > > > > > > On Aug 17, 11:45 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Ohh Rigys, i don't doubt for a second that thoese effecthave every > > > > > > right to be angry, I question wether or not morality is best served > > > > > > with any emotional attachment. I have used anger as an example, but > > > > > > really I mean all emotions. > > > > > > > A freind of mine posted on facebook something along the lines of > > > > > > bring > > > > > > back national servic, as a punishment for the looters. This was said > > > > > > in anger and when it comes down to it, is it a good idea to teach > > > > > > thugs how to kill? > > > > > > > On Aug 16, 11:45 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > There must be laws on the books to cover riots, looting, damage to > > > > > > > property. This isn't the first era of a poor economy for Britain. > > > > > > > Has > > > > > > > networking changed the formulas? > > > > > > > > Another factor is immigration and clash of cultures and religions. > > > > > > > What if once cheap labor is no longer needed? It seems to me- > > > > > > > though I > > > > > > > may be wrong- that immigrants rarely return to their original > > > > > > > homeland > > > > > > > and bring their new skills and education forward in third world > > > > > > > countries. And social programs may quash desires to roll up their > > > > > > > sleeves once again in their homeland. > > > > > > > > I learned this weekend from a discussion that one cannot fire > > > > > > > upon a > > > > > > > thief- it's only permitted when one's life is in jeopardy. That > > > > > > > seems > > > > > > > a thin line- wait till the bloke attempts to kill you! Our laws > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > probably changed a great deal- I doubt cattle rustlers were > > > > > > > treated so > > > > > > > mercifully. > > > > > > > > As to anger, I think shop owners and home dwellers and townsmen > > > > > > > had/ > > > > > > > have every right to be blistering mad at the looters and rioters. > > > > > > > > I made a long list of non-lethal protective measures. Baseball > > > > > > > bats > > > > > > > were not on the list as they can crack a skull and kill someone. > > > > > > > > On Aug 16, 6:09 am, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Paradox, yes agreat frind of mine tells me the same sorta > > > > > > > > thing, that > > > > > > > > morality without emotion is somehow lacking. It is partly due > > > > > > > > to his > > > > > > > > words and my respect for him that I have started this thread. > > > > > > > > > However as Rigsy points out to evict a looter from his council > > > > > > > > home > > > > > > > > for his looting does not adress any problems, nor does it serve > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > adiquate punishment, and would I think only make things worse. > > > > > > > > > This course of actions is a fine example of thinking/talking > > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > > morality whilst angry, and is to my mind no good at all. > > > > > > > > > I maintian that morality is best sreved without emotions > > > > > > > > attached, can > > > > > > > > you show my why I am wrong? > > > > > > > > > On Aug 14, 5:31 pm, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Deep question, Lee; not an easy one. One who suffers injury > > > > > > > > > must have > > > > > > > > > the right of redress, be that restitution or retribution, or > > > > > > > > > else we > > > > > > > > > live in Hobbes's state of nature. The question of balance and > > > > > > > > > proportionality is the proper remit of the law courts and > > > > > > > > > great minds. > > > > > > > > > Where the injury in question falls outside the purview of the > > > > > > > > > collective good or the legal framework to that end, morality > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > values must act to constrain the individual in respect of > > > > > > > > > balance and > > > > > > > > > proportionality; that is why it's so very vital that we > > > > > > > > > understand > > > > > > > > > what we do when we tinker with the foundations and structures > > > > > > > > > of a > > > > > > > > > society's moral compass. > > > > > > > > > > Personally, i've always felt that emotions are the fuel for > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > directed mind. > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 12, 1:28 pm, Lee Douglas <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > So as we should all know we have had quite a week of it > > > > > > > > > > here in the > > > > > > > > > > UK. Facebook and many other web places have been inundated > > > > > > > > > > with all > > > > > > > > > > sorts of sillyness. > > > > > > > > > > > Calls to bring back national service, calls to evict those > > > > > > > > > > found > > > > > > > > > > guilty of the rioting and looting, calls to stop their > > > > > > > > > > benifits. I > > > > > > > > > > have witnessed some of my good good friends spew out all > > > > > > > > > > mannor of > > > > > > > > > > sillyness in their anger. > > > > > > > > > > > I have procliamed in the past that all questions of > > > > > > > > > > morality are > > > > > > > > > > better served sans emotions and I see much this week that > > > > > > > > > > has only > > > > > > > > > > firmed this view. > > > > > > > > > > > In order to discover though the validity of this thought > > > > > > > > > > tell me do > > > > > > > > > > you agree, or not and why? People of ME sway my opinion > > > > > > > > > > with your > > > > > > > > > > wise words. > > > > > > > > > > > What good can come of deciding upon a course of action > > > > > > > > > > whilst holding > > > > > > > > > > onto your anger? > > > > > > > > > > > I ask of course as a self confessed recovered angry man.- > > > > > > > > > > Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
