apparently, you think that killing a maniac is just as deplorable as killing an innocent person. well, we'll agree to disagree, I believe that people waive their right to live when they murder an innocent person. yeah, the innocent people in this case would still be dead whether Manson lives or dies. so it comes down to whether we'd be better off with Manson dead or alive. I'll take dead, because my perception is that he shouldn't be allowed to live after what he did.
i disagree that innocent people would be better off if manson was dead. it is enough to know that he can never again manipulate impressionable people as intimately as he's done on the past. i'm sure there are misguided people who are in contact with manson, just like there are with practically every other violent criminal within the prison system. but though i can not say with certainty that he(or anyone else for that matter) won't inspire some other misguided soul to reek havok upon society, i think his imprisonment is enough and he should remain there for the term of his natural life.
as a society i think we need to keep these people within our sights so we can look at ourselves as individuals and as a society and see exactly where it was we went wrong and where it is possible people lose track of themselves. killing them does not solve anything, though it does satiate our lust for revenge.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
it is enough to know that he can never again manipulate impressionable people as intimately as he's done on the past.
obviously not. because we wouldn't be having this discussion if the original poster hadn't asked if Manson should be paroled. and he was obviously leaning towards the opinion that he SHOULD be paroled and even referred to him as "Charlie" like he's a good ole buddy from up the road. my opinion is that it's pretty scary when people suggest somebody as dangerous as Manson should be out running free. if he were killed 35+ years ago when he should have been, discussing whether or not he should be roaming around society would not even be happening.
obviously not. because we wouldn't be having this discussion if the original poster hadn't asked if Manson should be paroled. and he was obviously leaning towards the opinion that he SHOULD be paroled and even referred to him as "Charlie" like he's a good ole buddy from up the road. my opinion is that it's pretty scary when people suggest somebody as dangerous as Manson should be out running free. if he were killed 35+ years ago when he should have been, discussing whether or not he should be roaming around society would not even be happening.
not so obviuosly. the original poster, though i do not know what his intention was cause i'm not a mind reader, started a discussion that has us looking into ourselves and what we deem acceptable. i am not under the impression that state sanctioned violence is the answer to anything. in fact all it does is exonerate 'law-abiding' society from any introspection at all. it deludes us into thinking we don't need to even bother trying to understand the motives and psychology behind someone like manson, because it shines a spotlight on that side of us we choose to sometimes not so successfully ignore.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
apparently, you think that killing a maniac is just as deplorable as killing an innocent person. well, we'll agree to disagree, I believe that people waive their right to live when they murder an innocent person. yeah, the innocent people in this case would still be dead whether Manson lives or dies. so it comes down to whether we'd be better off with Manson dead or alive. I'll take dead, because my perception is that he shouldn't be allowed to live after what he did.
I didn't say that killing a maniac was just as deplorable as killing an innocent person. I was trying to say that I wouldn't feel any better if I killed anyone. Period. By your own admission you said that you'd never killed anyone. Think about what that might feel like to you. You personally being responsible for killing someone else and tell me how it would solve anything? I mean really think about it. To my way of thinking death is too easy for some people anyway. In that they no longer have to think about what they've done, they would no longer have to live with their actions. Not to say that Charlie Manson living on has had any impact on him in terms of living with what he's done but if we kill him how are we any better? He's dead, his victims are still dead, we still have to live with also being killers, no one learns anything. I'm not saying that the desire to kill him hasn't crossed my mind, but after thinking about who I am and knowing how I'd feel if I did kill him or anyone else for that matter, I wouldn't want to live with knowing that I'd been directly responsible for his or anybody elses death. If you can live with that, really live with that ok. That's your call. I couldn't.
how did he "misunderstand"?? is he not the judge of how he perceives something? so by your logic, there is no such thing as understanding or misunderstanding. because "understanding" would be "right" and "misunderstanding" would be "wrong", which are things that cannot exist, correct? maybe by the way YOU perceive things, he's misunderstanding. but I think he's understanding it just fine.
Uphold and glorify ignorance, and then use your "justifications" to "excuse" and "rationalize" making degrading judgments. It represents the point about society and Charles Manson exactly.
Your opinion of something does not define it. The actuality of something defines it.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
obviously not. because we wouldn't be having this discussion if the original poster hadn't asked if Manson should be paroled. and he was obviously leaning towards the opinion that he SHOULD be paroled and even referred to him as "Charlie" like he's a good ole buddy from up the road. my opinion is that it's pretty scary when people suggest somebody as dangerous as Manson should be out running free. if he were killed 35+ years ago when he should have been, discussing whether or not he should be roaming around society would not even be happening.
Ok. I see your point. But if he had been killed 35+ years ago what's not to say that he didn't become even more powerful than he is now in his death?
What's not to say that he wouldn't have achieved some cult icon type status by now and be even more of a martyr? And even more dangerous as one?
Ok. I see your point. But if he had been killed 35+ years ago what's not to say that he didn't become even more powerful than he is now in his death?
What's not to say that he wouldn't have achieved some cult icon type status by now and be even more of a martyr? And even more dangerous as one?
he's already attained cult icon status and has had it for many decades now.
as for your previous response, who said that we could not study what made him tick whether he was alive or dead? afterall, what's important is what happened BEFORE he killed. you act as though we have obtained this wealth of insight into a killer's mind by having him around for nearly 4 decades, and we haven't. every parole hearing and interview he's had, all we get is that same maniacal horseshit that he's been spewing all along.
he had a shitty upbringing, turned into a petty criminal, saw openings into something MORE, came up with some delusional ideas, brainwashed some kids into doing what he wanted, had them kill for him. now what more do you need to understand and study about that. what Ahnimus has basically said is that we should all blame ourselves for Manson's shitty upbringing and prevent this from happening again. well guess what, EVERYBODY had shitty upbringings in some way, shape, or form. so no, there's nothing that can really be done to prevent maniacs from doing such things. so it then comes down to did he fully know and understand what he was doing, or was he insane? the evidence points to him knowing full well what he was doing.
as for how would I feel if I killed somebody. well, I don't know because I never have. I imagine if I killed someone while protecting myself or other innocent people, I'd feel just fine after the initial shock wore off. if I killed an INNOCENT person, even by accident, I imagine I would feel very bad about it and probably be scarred the rest of my life. If I flipped the switch on Manson, I probably wouldn't feel much at all other than "hey, I killed Charles Manson".
Considering that Juberoo is not a "he" that's one small misunderstanding I can clear up right now.
Interesting though, that if we are misunderstanding that then there may be other things we are misunderstanding as well.
you must not live in the bizarro universe that others around here (not naming any names) live in. you see, in the bizarro world, there is no such thing as sex and gender. so a male can be a female and vice versa. so Juberoo can be he or she or however else we perceive Juberoo. in fact, Juberoo may in fact be God.
I imagine if I killed someone while protecting myself or other innocent people, I'd feel just fine after the initial shock wore off. if I killed an INNOCENT person, even by accident, I imagine I would feel very bad about it and probably be scarred the rest of my life. If I flipped the switch on Manson, I probably wouldn't feel much at all other than "hey, I killed Charles Manson".
eloquently stated
all insanity:
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
Uphold and glorify ignorance, and then use your "justifications" to "excuse" and "rationalize" making degrading judgments. It represents the point about society and Charles Manson exactly.
Your opinion of something does not define it. The actuality of something defines it.
my opinion of something DOES define it because I'm the ultimate judge of what is and what is not. my opinion IS actuality.
"ignorance" can't be upheld if it does not exist, and it does not. also, "degrading" doesn't exist either.
your continued posts are contradicting (if contradictions are something that can actually occur) your earlier posts and the universe is folding over itself like a big black starry omelet.
not so obviuosly. the original poster, though i do not know what his intention was cause i'm not a mind reader, started a discussion that has us looking into ourselves and what we deem acceptable. i am not under the impression that state sanctioned violence is the answer to anything. in fact all it does is exonerate 'law-abiding' society from any introspection at all. it deludes us into thinking we don't need to even bother trying to understand the motives and psychology behind someone like manson, because it shines a spotlight on that side of us we choose to sometimes not so successfully ignore.
again, who said that we can't try to correct societal problems without keeping a dangerous killer alive? state sanctioned violence has actually been the answer to many things over the years, sometimes for the better and sometimes not. this whole post has got us into a good long argument like most posts on this forum do. I wouldn't say it's got me "looking into" myself, because how I see murder and how I think murderers should be handled is pretty much in line with what most of society thinks.
under the law, Manson was convicted and sentenced to death. he got out of death, and now somebody's talking about releasing him back into society. THAT, to me, is what's out of whack. we're arguing here about a guy who would've been dead several decades ago were it not for a temporary stoppage of capital punishment. and now we're discussing if he should be RELEASED????
"ignorance" can't be upheld if it does not exist, and it does not. also, "degrading" doesn't exist either.
When you ignore clarification, and continue to judge based on your false impression...well, you practice ignorance.
Plus, when you create your straw men and try to pin your false "assumptions" on me, it doesn't work (attributing to me assertions I did not make). That is because I am only accountable for what I do and say, and the intent with which I say it. I'm not accountable for how my words are misconstrued.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
When you ignore clarification, and continue to judge based on your false impression...well, you practice ignorance.
Plus, when you create your straw men and try to pin your false "assumptions" on me, it doesn't work (attributing to me assertions I did not make). That is because I am only accountable for what I do and say, and the intent with which I say it. I'm not accountable for how my words are misconstrued.
first off, "clarification" can't be "ignored". because if it were clarified, it would be unignorable. and if "unignorable" isn't a word in your universe, it IS in mine. further, an impression can't be false. also, ignorance can't be practiced if it does not exist.
I have made no straw men nor pinned nothing on anyone. it does or doesn't work depending on if it does or doesn't work for you. everything you've said is based on your own perceptions, which I myself do not perceive.
he's already attained cult icon status and has had it for many decades now.
That he has, but one has to wonder at what would happen if he was executed. I mean look at what the world has done to elevate the icon status of Elvis, Marilyn Munroe, James Dean, Jesus even. I don't know that I'd want to find out what would happen if Charles Manson was executed. I think the more we add to his story the more we enable others to find reasons to worship him and I wouldn't be surprised if in death he could have an agent, a whole Foundation/Religion/Cult dedicated purely to him and his evil behaviours. If we decided now to execute him anyway, imagine the media hype, the publicity, the opinion polls, the number of people that would become aware of him and his story that are not already aware? Seems to me, having watched humans in these situations, that killing him would only send him and his whole life into the spotlight and bring all kinds of strange and ridiculous behaviours out of the woodwork from other people. He may still be alive and he may at this point be able to "agitate" or get some attention and notiriety by doing so occassionally, but mostly he is ignored by the general population and left to rot away.
as for your previous response, who said that we could not study what made him tick whether he was alive or dead? afterall, what's important is what happened BEFORE he killed. you act as though we have obtained this wealth of insight into a killer's mind by having him around for nearly 4 decades, and we haven't. every parole hearing and interview he's had, all we get is that same maniacal horseshit that he's been spewing all along.
We could do that. We could kill him and study what made him tick but would we then have to examine our own motivations for killing him? He does get to rabbit on at his parole hearings, but they do him no good do they? He aint getting out. And much as it's awful that he is able to for the families of the victims, I think we are learning how to deal with him simply by keeping him alive and making it clear that he's not getting out. I mean in all the time he's been in there has he even come close to getting out? Think we've learned something there. Oh and I'm not acting like anything. I'm just stating my view and asking questions. No need to get antsy.
he had a shitty upbringing, turned into a petty criminal, saw openings into something MORE, came up with some delusional ideas, brainwashed some kids into doing what he wanted, had them kill for him. now what more do you need to understand and study about that. what Ahnimus has basically said is that we should all blame ourselves for Manson's shitty upbringing and prevent this from happening again. well guess what, EVERYBODY had shitty upbringings in some way, shape, or form. so no, there's nothing that can really be done to prevent maniacs from doing such things. so it then comes down to did he fully know and understand what he was doing, or was he insane? the evidence points to him knowing full well what he was doing.
Well I don't disagree with you here, in that we all have things in our lives that could contribute to us making good or bad choices and that some of us make bad choices and continue to do so and others do not. I think we could learn alot about why that is just for starters. I do think society has a responsibility to find out why people do bad things and learn how to prevent them from doing so and learn how to prevent others from doing so. Charlie did what Charlie did and I think we all agree that it was wrong. But if we do not attempt to learn why, what his motivations were and how to prevent it then we do need to look at our apathy and also at whether we are contributing to the horrible things that happen in society. Is our apathy or lack of understanding only perpetuating the problem? Ultimately wouldn't you prefer that this stuff just didn't happen? That there was no Charlie Manson or anyone else like him?
as for how would I feel if I killed somebody. well, I don't know because I never have. I imagine if I killed someone while protecting myself or other innocent people, I'd feel just fine after the initial shock wore off. if I killed an INNOCENT person, even by accident, I imagine I would feel very bad about it and probably be scarred the rest of my life. If I flipped the switch on Manson, I probably wouldn't feel much at all other than "hey, I killed Charles Manson".
Well I don't disagree with the first part of this, in that if it was a fight to the death, my life or that of a loved one over someone who was hellbent on doing us harm, then yeah, I don't know that I'd feel fine, but I think I could live with it eventually if I killed someone in those circumstances. And yes if I killed someone innocent even by accident I'd be devestated for ever. But there is no way that I'd feel nothing if I "flipped the switch" "pushed the button" or "pulled the lever" to execute Charlie Manson or anybody else.
first off, "clarification" can't be "ignored". because if it were clarified, it would be unignorable. and if "unignorable" isn't a word in your universe, it IS in mine. further, an impression can't be false. also, ignorance can't be practiced if it does not exist.
I have made no straw men nor pinned nothing on anyone. it does or doesn't work depending on if it does or doesn't work for you. everything you've said is based on your own perceptions, which I myself do not perceive.
Suit yourself.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
you must not live in the bizarro universe that others around here (not naming any names) live in. you see, in the bizarro world, there is no such thing as sex and gender. so a male can be a female and vice versa. so Juberoo can be he or she or however else we perceive Juberoo. in fact, Juberoo may in fact be God.
I have no idea if my universe if bizarro or not. I'm quite sure I have thoughts and ideas and opinions that other people would consider bizarre. Just as I find this in other people. But I do know that Juberoo is not in fact god in my world because no one is.
I was just attempting to help by clarifying. Would you prefer I didn't bother? (and there is no sarcasm or nastiness attached to that statement. It is simply a statement.)
again, who said that we can't try to correct societal problems without keeping a dangerous killer alive? state sanctioned violence has actually been the answer to many things over the years, sometimes for the better and sometimes not. this whole post has got us into a good long argument like most posts on this forum do. I wouldn't say it's got me "looking into" myself, because how I see murder and how I think murderers should be handled is pretty much in line with what most of society thinks.
under the law, Manson was convicted and sentenced to death. he got out of death, and now somebody's talking about releasing him back into society. THAT, to me, is what's out of whack. we're arguing here about a guy who would've been dead several decades ago were it not for a temporary stoppage of capital punishment. and now we're discussing if he should be RELEASED????
Just a quick question, are you referring to America having the death penalty with that statement regarding how your thoughts are pretty much in line with what most of society thinks? Because we don't have it here.
again, who said that we can't try to correct societal problems without keeping a dangerous killer alive? state sanctioned violence has actually been the answer to many things over the years, sometimes for the better and sometimes not. this whole post has got us into a good long argument like most posts on this forum do. I wouldn't say it's got me "looking into" myself, because how I see murder and how I think murderers should be handled is pretty much in line with what most of society thinks.
under the law, Manson was convicted and sentenced to death. he got out of death, and now somebody's talking about releasing him back into society. THAT, to me, is what's out of whack. we're arguing here about a guy who would've been dead several decades ago were it not for a temporary stoppage of capital punishment. and now we're discussing if he should be RELEASED????
please tell me what state sanctioned violence has been the answer to?
hey, i agree manson should never be released and anyone who thinks he should perhaps should go spend time with him. i don't think he is misunderstood. i think he is a very dangerous individual and i am more than pleased to have him separated from society.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
well...facts:
-manson is crazy - he DIDNT KILL nobody, he told his freinds to do it
and they listened
-he ran a gang/cult ... - he has a nazi svastika tatooted on his forhead...
-he is old now... - he stole cars - he wrote hippi music and did drugs
so...after looking at these things it seems that he got a
realy bad deal...jail for life...people that realy do kill somebody get off in 15 years...
This is a thick subject. I want to add some clarification to the conversation I missed. It seems like a pretty hot issue, and it would be so much more interesting if it didn't have so much emotional baggage.
Manson's ticking can't be studied very well if he's not ticking. You can perform some basic scans and an autopsy. But you can't stimulate the system to observe the brain's behaviour. You can't tell if he's deficient in some functional way, as opposed to an obvious trauma or stroke. Something like sythnesthesia has been discarded as "crazy" for a long time, but now is proving to be quite significant to understand human ticking for all people, not just the sythnesthetes. Check out the Bouba/Kiki effect. 95% of people guess which shape is bouba and which is kiki correctly. That is way better than chance, and it's made clear by understanding specific wiring in the brain which requires some serious observation of the patient to diagnose. Anyway, behavior studies with brain scans and such are the way to study a brain.
I want to try to add perspective to the idea of "IS". I think there are two perspectives to look at reality. Inside the system and outside of the system. You get a different perspective looking outside of reality back in. Then add in another perspective questioning the outside perspective. That is our cognitive power. To scrutinize our perspective. Anyway, the universe is "finely tuned" or rather is very specific to very small decimal places. I mean, we exist in the universe, right? Well it all seems to fit together, things happen in sequences, there are numerical patterns, and certain arrangements add perspective or create new things. Everything is ordered. When a person acts, they act exactly as they have to. No one can act differently than they act. It's fate. This topic is also fate. Ultimately whatever comes from our discussions is determined, as am I determined to write this, and you are determined to disagree with me. In this perspective of determination, things might be considered perfect. But the question arises, why 0.007? why doesn't 0.006 work? The implication is that it has to be that number. Just as humans and everything they do has to be. It's the evolution of the universe, or the natural progression of the system in which we exist. Looking at this system from the outside makes it apparent that no one is ultimately to blame for their actions. Rather, they are held "accountable", that is, actions are taken on them by other humans protecting themselves. Revenge and hatred are completely useless and actually really bad.
I know someone that really kind of bugs me almost daily. A friend at work. I call him a friend because I don't ultimately blame him for his behavior and I do like some aspects of him, as I do in all people I get to know. I could conspire against him with other co-workers. It would be really easy because he appears socially inept. He's a very dislikable guy. It would be very easy to hate him in a social environment with other's hating him and fueling my hate in return. We all would contribute to the environment that ultimately affects us as well. Anyway, I think he's frustrated. I don't think he has the history to really get along well with all people. I think he has a very narrow perspective and his awareness has never really ventured from himself. When I have an epiphany it's profound. As it is I imagine for all. Intuitively it seems like a new consciousness, or an awareness that was there all the time, but came it bright clarity, a life-changing event. In a way, I sometimes felt ashamed I hadn't realized the significance before. So I can't really blame someone for not having an epiphany about something. It's uncontrolled. Our awareness or consciousness as we call it, is just a cog in the machine, it serves it's purpose but it's neither responsible for it's self or in complete control of the system. It is just a piece of the machine.
There is so much depth to reality that I think Angelica is really getting at. I really think there has been a lot of misunderstanding and I hope I added a new narrative on the subject what's "perfect" or what "IS" and that. I could really go on for ever.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
So I see! Now give me a minute or 5, I'm gonna need them to plow through all that ^ at this late stage of the day! If my head hasn't exploded, I'll be back!
Just a quick question, are you referring to America having the death penalty with that statement regarding how your thoughts are pretty much in line with what most of society thinks? Because we don't have it here.
yes. I'm not sure where you are. I'm referring to the fact that I'm American, Manson is an American, and the crimes he committed were against Americans, and America has the death penalty. and the majority of Americans agree that the death penalty is the proper punishment for murderers, which I agree with. and most forget the fact that Manson was originally sentenced to the death penalty.
please tell me what state sanctioned violence has been the answer to?
hey, i agree manson should never be released and anyone who thinks he should perhaps should go spend time with him. i don't think he is misunderstood. i think he is a very dangerous individual and i am more than pleased to have him separated from society.
state sanctioned violence freed the nation from British rule. state sanctioned violence kept the nation together when half the nation wanted to leave the union. state sanctioned violence helped end Hitler and Japan's goal to rule most of the earth. the cold war led to all kinds of the technology that we now enjoy. so violence has played a big part in things.
if you agree with me that Manson should not be out in society, then we really don't have much to argue.
This is a thick subject. I want to add some clarification to the conversation I missed. It seems like a pretty hot issue, and it would be so much more interesting if it didn't have so much emotional baggage.
Manson's ticking can't be studied very well if he's not ticking. You can perform some basic scans and an autopsy. But you can't stimulate the system to observe the brain's behaviour. You can't tell if he's deficient in some functional way, as opposed to an obvious trauma or stroke. Something like sythnesthesia has been discarded as "crazy" for a long time, but now is proving to be quite significant to understand human ticking for all people, not just the sythnesthetes. Check out the Bouba/Kiki effect. 95% of people guess which shape is bouba and which is kiki correctly. That is way better than chance, and it's made clear by understanding specific wiring in the brain which requires some serious observation of the patient to diagnose. Anyway, behavior studies with brain scans and such are the way to study a brain.
I want to try to add perspective to the idea of "IS". I think there are two perspectives to look at reality. Inside the system and outside of the system. You get a different perspective looking outside of reality back in. Then add in another perspective questioning the outside perspective. That is our cognitive power. To scrutinize our perspective. Anyway, the universe is "finely tuned" or rather is very specific to very small decimal places. I mean, we exist in the universe, right? Well it all seems to fit together, things happen in sequences, there are numerical patterns, and certain arrangements add perspective or create new things. Everything is ordered. When a person acts, they act exactly as they have to. No one can act differently than they act. It's fate. This topic is also fate. Ultimately whatever comes from our discussions is determined, as am I determined to write this, and you are determined to disagree with me. In this perspective of determination, things might be considered perfect. But the question arises, why 0.007? why doesn't 0.006 work? The implication is that it has to be that number. Just as humans and everything they do has to be. It's the evolution of the universe, or the natural progression of the system in which we exist. Looking at this system from the outside makes it apparent that no one is ultimately to blame for their actions. Rather, they are held "accountable", that is, actions are taken on them by other humans protecting themselves. Revenge and hatred are completely useless and actually really bad.
I know someone that really kind of bugs me almost daily. A friend at work. I call him a friend because I don't ultimately blame him for his behavior and I do like some aspects of him, as I do in all people I get to know. I could conspire against him with other co-workers. It would be really easy because he appears socially inept. He's a very dislikable guy. It would be very easy to hate him in a social environment with other's hating him and fueling my hate in return. We all would contribute to the environment that ultimately affects us as well. Anyway, I think he's frustrated. I don't think he has the history to really get along well with all people. I think he has a very narrow perspective and his awareness has never really ventured from himself. When I have an epiphany it's profound. As it is I imagine for all. Intuitively it seems like a new consciousness, or an awareness that was there all the time, but came it bright clarity, a life-changing event. In a way, I sometimes felt ashamed I hadn't realized the significance before. So I can't really blame someone for not having an epiphany about something. It's uncontrolled. Our awareness or consciousness as we call it, is just a cog in the machine, it serves it's purpose but it's neither responsible for it's self or in complete control of the system. It is just a piece of the machine.
There is so much depth to reality that I think Angelica is really getting at. I really think there has been a lot of misunderstanding and I hope I added a new narrative on the subject what's "perfect" or what "IS" and that. I could really go on for ever.
why can't Manson's ticking be studied after he's no longer ticking?? it's the actions and events that led up to his crimes that we need to be concerned with, not what he's done and how he's acted since he's been behind bars. we've got out of Manson what we're going to get, it's not like we're learning anything new on this subject.
as far as the "reality" and the "IS" and the "perfection" and the "right/wrong", sorry, I just can't really get into that with a straight face. if you want to live by those kinds of philosophies and analyze every little minute detail of your existence, go for it. but I'm not, and I'm not going to get into a long drawn out discussion over it because while it's perfectly fine if it works for YOU, I think it causes you to miss the bigger picture. right and wrong are not so complex to me and that type of over analyzing of the concepts of right and wrong, I find to be quite fruity.
Although I haven't really read the entire thread about Charlie...I can tell you a little history about his stay in Vacaville Prison...He was there before they moved him a few years back for the duration of his incarceration. Vacaville State Prison is a medical facility. When Manson came in during the sixties, many of the inmates there were selling themselves to nuclear testing..I mean that I know of one person for certain who took shots of radiation to have a bit of money on his books...
Here the general population is selling their souls and body parts for existence beyond their .05 cents an hours while.......
Charlie Manson had an entire wing devoted to him in the prison..He was put on elitest status, even in the Penal Institution...Let him free??? The general population during that time, wanted to "off" him...So, if the boyz in orange couldn't see any worth, then.....How could he ever get parole???? He is a monster...He is the only example that I can use that actually supports good guy/bad guy philosophy....He is one example for myself that advocates law enforcement.
I doubt they will give him parole anyway..I have a friend who shot an off duty cop back in 1984 in a bar brawl (accidental shooting), he was sentenced to do 15-life...his basic time has been over due; each year we write a letter; each year it is denied...
I can only hope the same happens for Charlie....
all insanity:
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
I want to try to add perspective to the idea of "IS". I think there are two perspectives to look at reality. Inside the system and outside of the system. You get a different perspective looking outside of reality back in. Then add in another perspective questioning the outside perspective. That is our cognitive power. To scrutinize our perspective. Anyway, the universe is "finely tuned" or rather is very specific to very small decimal places. I mean, we exist in the universe, right? Well it all seems to fit together, things happen in sequences, there are numerical patterns, and certain arrangements add perspective or create new things. Everything is ordered. When a person acts, they act exactly as they have to. No one can act differently than they act. It's fate. This topic is also fate. Ultimately whatever comes from our discussions is determined, as am I determined to write this, and you are determined to disagree with me. In this perspective of determination, things might be considered perfect. But the question arises, why 0.007? why doesn't 0.006 work? The implication is that it has to be that number. Just as humans and everything they do has to be. It's the evolution of the universe, or the natural progression of the system in which we exist. Looking at this system from the outside makes it apparent that no one is ultimately to blame for their actions. Rather, they are held "accountable", that is, actions are taken on them by other humans protecting themselves. Revenge and hatred are completely useless and actually really bad.
Very nice Ahnimus!
To add, I am personally very glad that despite the fact that the legal system is quite imperfect, that it has some strict objective standards, that often prevents the lynch-mob mentality of a society, ignorant of understanding, from acting upon such ignorance. The current legal system in this case, although imperfect, demands that Charles Manson be treated fairly and humanely and not be abused, degraded and denigrated for his crimes or his illness/es, like the more mainstream ignorance sometimes calls for. The job of the system is rather to hold him simply accountable. It is not the system's job to satisfy the anger and lack of productive resolution society has on such matters. My guess is that there are flawed, and ignorant people within the system who do abuse the spirit and the letter of the law and with human fallacy, do not uphold the law, and who might denigrate or abuse Charles Manson, and thusly the accountabilty for that is on them. The same system does not allow unchecked human emotion and judgment to make the actual judgments in each case, knowing how flawed the human psyche is. Rather it has a strict system with checks and balances that focuses on the Is-ness (facts) and proof of Is-ness (evidence) alone. The system seeks to bring ignorance and human flaw/dysfunctionsal mystification to Light so as to demystify it and to understand. And ONLY when such process is followed, and demystification takes place to the highest degree possible given the many natural flaws, judgment comes into play. And even then, when such judgment is meted out, I don't think there is a human alive who believes in the perfection of the legal system, because such perfection is a fallacy. And even if it was believed to be perfect, we have case after case where errors and huge miscarriages of justice have been proven to taken place.
So, again, given the rampant ignorance abound, and given the lack of understanding among society about the "evil that THEY do" and must live with daily, I take solace in knowing natural law, and human systems with high intent to uphold the perfection of natural law, are in place and evolving.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
state sanctioned violence freed the nation from British rule. state sanctioned violence kept the nation together when half the nation wanted to leave the union. state sanctioned violence helped end Hitler and Japan's goal to rule most of the earth. the cold war led to all kinds of the technology that we now enjoy. so violence has played a big part in things.
if you agree with me that Manson should not be out in society, then we really don't have much to argue.
well my take is that violence,if it is to occur, is ALWAYS ALWAYs the last option in conflict. there are ways to remove leaders from office without involving the whole world or singular countries in a prolonged war.
we weren't in disagreement about freeeing manson. the clash came from your stand on the death penalty, which i am opposed to. i see execution merely as revenge cause we all know it doesn't deter murderers and the like.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Maybe if we went back to the "eye for an eye" philosophy, society would improve and the argument of morals would be erraticated. Whatever you do to someone else, is what you will get back immediately in return. I think it would definitely force people to rethink their behaviors and actions.
Makes much more sense, to live in the present tense.
A truly liberal person is conservative when necessary.
Maybe if we went back to the "eye for an eye" philosophy, society would improve and the argument of morals would be erraticated. Whatever you do to someone else, is what you will get back immediately in return. I think it would definitely force people to rethink their behaviors and actions.
an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Comments
i disagree that innocent people would be better off if manson was dead. it is enough to know that he can never again manipulate impressionable people as intimately as he's done on the past. i'm sure there are misguided people who are in contact with manson, just like there are with practically every other violent criminal within the prison system. but though i can not say with certainty that he(or anyone else for that matter) won't inspire some other misguided soul to reek havok upon society, i think his imprisonment is enough and he should remain there for the term of his natural life.
as a society i think we need to keep these people within our sights so we can look at ourselves as individuals and as a society and see exactly where it was we went wrong and where it is possible people lose track of themselves. killing them does not solve anything, though it does satiate our lust for revenge.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
obviously not. because we wouldn't be having this discussion if the original poster hadn't asked if Manson should be paroled. and he was obviously leaning towards the opinion that he SHOULD be paroled and even referred to him as "Charlie" like he's a good ole buddy from up the road. my opinion is that it's pretty scary when people suggest somebody as dangerous as Manson should be out running free. if he were killed 35+ years ago when he should have been, discussing whether or not he should be roaming around society would not even be happening.
not so obviuosly. the original poster, though i do not know what his intention was cause i'm not a mind reader, started a discussion that has us looking into ourselves and what we deem acceptable. i am not under the impression that state sanctioned violence is the answer to anything. in fact all it does is exonerate 'law-abiding' society from any introspection at all. it deludes us into thinking we don't need to even bother trying to understand the motives and psychology behind someone like manson, because it shines a spotlight on that side of us we choose to sometimes not so successfully ignore.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I didn't say that killing a maniac was just as deplorable as killing an innocent person. I was trying to say that I wouldn't feel any better if I killed anyone. Period. By your own admission you said that you'd never killed anyone. Think about what that might feel like to you. You personally being responsible for killing someone else and tell me how it would solve anything? I mean really think about it. To my way of thinking death is too easy for some people anyway. In that they no longer have to think about what they've done, they would no longer have to live with their actions. Not to say that Charlie Manson living on has had any impact on him in terms of living with what he's done but if we kill him how are we any better? He's dead, his victims are still dead, we still have to live with also being killers, no one learns anything. I'm not saying that the desire to kill him hasn't crossed my mind, but after thinking about who I am and knowing how I'd feel if I did kill him or anyone else for that matter, I wouldn't want to live with knowing that I'd been directly responsible for his or anybody elses death. If you can live with that, really live with that ok. That's your call. I couldn't.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Your opinion of something does not define it. The actuality of something defines it.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Interesting though, that if we are misunderstanding that then there may be other things we are misunderstanding as well.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Ok. I see your point. But if he had been killed 35+ years ago what's not to say that he didn't become even more powerful than he is now in his death?
What's not to say that he wouldn't have achieved some cult icon type status by now and be even more of a martyr? And even more dangerous as one?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
he's already attained cult icon status and has had it for many decades now.
as for your previous response, who said that we could not study what made him tick whether he was alive or dead? afterall, what's important is what happened BEFORE he killed. you act as though we have obtained this wealth of insight into a killer's mind by having him around for nearly 4 decades, and we haven't. every parole hearing and interview he's had, all we get is that same maniacal horseshit that he's been spewing all along.
he had a shitty upbringing, turned into a petty criminal, saw openings into something MORE, came up with some delusional ideas, brainwashed some kids into doing what he wanted, had them kill for him. now what more do you need to understand and study about that. what Ahnimus has basically said is that we should all blame ourselves for Manson's shitty upbringing and prevent this from happening again. well guess what, EVERYBODY had shitty upbringings in some way, shape, or form. so no, there's nothing that can really be done to prevent maniacs from doing such things. so it then comes down to did he fully know and understand what he was doing, or was he insane? the evidence points to him knowing full well what he was doing.
as for how would I feel if I killed somebody. well, I don't know because I never have. I imagine if I killed someone while protecting myself or other innocent people, I'd feel just fine after the initial shock wore off. if I killed an INNOCENT person, even by accident, I imagine I would feel very bad about it and probably be scarred the rest of my life. If I flipped the switch on Manson, I probably wouldn't feel much at all other than "hey, I killed Charles Manson".
you must not live in the bizarro universe that others around here (not naming any names) live in. you see, in the bizarro world, there is no such thing as sex and gender. so a male can be a female and vice versa. so Juberoo can be he or she or however else we perceive Juberoo. in fact, Juberoo may in fact be God.
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
my opinion of something DOES define it because I'm the ultimate judge of what is and what is not. my opinion IS actuality.
"ignorance" can't be upheld if it does not exist, and it does not. also, "degrading" doesn't exist either.
your continued posts are contradicting (if contradictions are something that can actually occur) your earlier posts and the universe is folding over itself like a big black starry omelet.
again, who said that we can't try to correct societal problems without keeping a dangerous killer alive? state sanctioned violence has actually been the answer to many things over the years, sometimes for the better and sometimes not. this whole post has got us into a good long argument like most posts on this forum do. I wouldn't say it's got me "looking into" myself, because how I see murder and how I think murderers should be handled is pretty much in line with what most of society thinks.
under the law, Manson was convicted and sentenced to death. he got out of death, and now somebody's talking about releasing him back into society. THAT, to me, is what's out of whack. we're arguing here about a guy who would've been dead several decades ago were it not for a temporary stoppage of capital punishment. and now we're discussing if he should be RELEASED????
Plus, when you create your straw men and try to pin your false "assumptions" on me, it doesn't work (attributing to me assertions I did not make). That is because I am only accountable for what I do and say, and the intent with which I say it. I'm not accountable for how my words are misconstrued.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
first off, "clarification" can't be "ignored". because if it were clarified, it would be unignorable. and if "unignorable" isn't a word in your universe, it IS in mine. further, an impression can't be false. also, ignorance can't be practiced if it does not exist.
I have made no straw men nor pinned nothing on anyone. it does or doesn't work depending on if it does or doesn't work for you. everything you've said is based on your own perceptions, which I myself do not perceive.
That he has, but one has to wonder at what would happen if he was executed. I mean look at what the world has done to elevate the icon status of Elvis, Marilyn Munroe, James Dean, Jesus even. I don't know that I'd want to find out what would happen if Charles Manson was executed. I think the more we add to his story the more we enable others to find reasons to worship him and I wouldn't be surprised if in death he could have an agent, a whole Foundation/Religion/Cult dedicated purely to him and his evil behaviours. If we decided now to execute him anyway, imagine the media hype, the publicity, the opinion polls, the number of people that would become aware of him and his story that are not already aware? Seems to me, having watched humans in these situations, that killing him would only send him and his whole life into the spotlight and bring all kinds of strange and ridiculous behaviours out of the woodwork from other people. He may still be alive and he may at this point be able to "agitate" or get some attention and notiriety by doing so occassionally, but mostly he is ignored by the general population and left to rot away.
We could do that. We could kill him and study what made him tick but would we then have to examine our own motivations for killing him? He does get to rabbit on at his parole hearings, but they do him no good do they? He aint getting out. And much as it's awful that he is able to for the families of the victims, I think we are learning how to deal with him simply by keeping him alive and making it clear that he's not getting out. I mean in all the time he's been in there has he even come close to getting out? Think we've learned something there. Oh and I'm not acting like anything. I'm just stating my view and asking questions. No need to get antsy.
Well I don't disagree with you here, in that we all have things in our lives that could contribute to us making good or bad choices and that some of us make bad choices and continue to do so and others do not. I think we could learn alot about why that is just for starters. I do think society has a responsibility to find out why people do bad things and learn how to prevent them from doing so and learn how to prevent others from doing so. Charlie did what Charlie did and I think we all agree that it was wrong. But if we do not attempt to learn why, what his motivations were and how to prevent it then we do need to look at our apathy and also at whether we are contributing to the horrible things that happen in society. Is our apathy or lack of understanding only perpetuating the problem? Ultimately wouldn't you prefer that this stuff just didn't happen? That there was no Charlie Manson or anyone else like him?
Well I don't disagree with the first part of this, in that if it was a fight to the death, my life or that of a loved one over someone who was hellbent on doing us harm, then yeah, I don't know that I'd feel fine, but I think I could live with it eventually if I killed someone in those circumstances. And yes if I killed someone innocent even by accident I'd be devestated for ever. But there is no way that I'd feel nothing if I "flipped the switch" "pushed the button" or "pulled the lever" to execute Charlie Manson or anybody else.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I have no idea if my universe if bizarro or not. I'm quite sure I have thoughts and ideas and opinions that other people would consider bizarre. Just as I find this in other people. But I do know that Juberoo is not in fact god in my world because no one is.
I was just attempting to help by clarifying. Would you prefer I didn't bother? (and there is no sarcasm or nastiness attached to that statement. It is simply a statement.)
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Just a quick question, are you referring to America having the death penalty with that statement regarding how your thoughts are pretty much in line with what most of society thinks? Because we don't have it here.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
please tell me what state sanctioned violence has been the answer to?
hey, i agree manson should never be released and anyone who thinks he should perhaps should go spend time with him. i don't think he is misunderstood. i think he is a very dangerous individual and i am more than pleased to have him separated from society.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
This is a thick subject. I want to add some clarification to the conversation I missed. It seems like a pretty hot issue, and it would be so much more interesting if it didn't have so much emotional baggage.
Manson's ticking can't be studied very well if he's not ticking. You can perform some basic scans and an autopsy. But you can't stimulate the system to observe the brain's behaviour. You can't tell if he's deficient in some functional way, as opposed to an obvious trauma or stroke. Something like sythnesthesia has been discarded as "crazy" for a long time, but now is proving to be quite significant to understand human ticking for all people, not just the sythnesthetes. Check out the Bouba/Kiki effect. 95% of people guess which shape is bouba and which is kiki correctly. That is way better than chance, and it's made clear by understanding specific wiring in the brain which requires some serious observation of the patient to diagnose. Anyway, behavior studies with brain scans and such are the way to study a brain.
I want to try to add perspective to the idea of "IS". I think there are two perspectives to look at reality. Inside the system and outside of the system. You get a different perspective looking outside of reality back in. Then add in another perspective questioning the outside perspective. That is our cognitive power. To scrutinize our perspective. Anyway, the universe is "finely tuned" or rather is very specific to very small decimal places. I mean, we exist in the universe, right? Well it all seems to fit together, things happen in sequences, there are numerical patterns, and certain arrangements add perspective or create new things. Everything is ordered. When a person acts, they act exactly as they have to. No one can act differently than they act. It's fate. This topic is also fate. Ultimately whatever comes from our discussions is determined, as am I determined to write this, and you are determined to disagree with me. In this perspective of determination, things might be considered perfect. But the question arises, why 0.007? why doesn't 0.006 work? The implication is that it has to be that number. Just as humans and everything they do has to be. It's the evolution of the universe, or the natural progression of the system in which we exist. Looking at this system from the outside makes it apparent that no one is ultimately to blame for their actions. Rather, they are held "accountable", that is, actions are taken on them by other humans protecting themselves. Revenge and hatred are completely useless and actually really bad.
I know someone that really kind of bugs me almost daily. A friend at work. I call him a friend because I don't ultimately blame him for his behavior and I do like some aspects of him, as I do in all people I get to know. I could conspire against him with other co-workers. It would be really easy because he appears socially inept. He's a very dislikable guy. It would be very easy to hate him in a social environment with other's hating him and fueling my hate in return. We all would contribute to the environment that ultimately affects us as well. Anyway, I think he's frustrated. I don't think he has the history to really get along well with all people. I think he has a very narrow perspective and his awareness has never really ventured from himself. When I have an epiphany it's profound. As it is I imagine for all. Intuitively it seems like a new consciousness, or an awareness that was there all the time, but came it bright clarity, a life-changing event. In a way, I sometimes felt ashamed I hadn't realized the significance before. So I can't really blame someone for not having an epiphany about something. It's uncontrolled. Our awareness or consciousness as we call it, is just a cog in the machine, it serves it's purpose but it's neither responsible for it's self or in complete control of the system. It is just a piece of the machine.
There is so much depth to reality that I think Angelica is really getting at. I really think there has been a lot of misunderstanding and I hope I added a new narrative on the subject what's "perfect" or what "IS" and that. I could really go on for ever.
So I see!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
yes. I'm not sure where you are. I'm referring to the fact that I'm American, Manson is an American, and the crimes he committed were against Americans, and America has the death penalty. and the majority of Americans agree that the death penalty is the proper punishment for murderers, which I agree with. and most forget the fact that Manson was originally sentenced to the death penalty.
state sanctioned violence freed the nation from British rule. state sanctioned violence kept the nation together when half the nation wanted to leave the union. state sanctioned violence helped end Hitler and Japan's goal to rule most of the earth. the cold war led to all kinds of the technology that we now enjoy. so violence has played a big part in things.
if you agree with me that Manson should not be out in society, then we really don't have much to argue.
why can't Manson's ticking be studied after he's no longer ticking?? it's the actions and events that led up to his crimes that we need to be concerned with, not what he's done and how he's acted since he's been behind bars. we've got out of Manson what we're going to get, it's not like we're learning anything new on this subject.
as far as the "reality" and the "IS" and the "perfection" and the "right/wrong", sorry, I just can't really get into that with a straight face. if you want to live by those kinds of philosophies and analyze every little minute detail of your existence, go for it. but I'm not, and I'm not going to get into a long drawn out discussion over it because while it's perfectly fine if it works for YOU, I think it causes you to miss the bigger picture. right and wrong are not so complex to me and that type of over analyzing of the concepts of right and wrong, I find to be quite fruity.
Although I haven't really read the entire thread about Charlie...I can tell you a little history about his stay in Vacaville Prison...He was there before they moved him a few years back for the duration of his incarceration. Vacaville State Prison is a medical facility. When Manson came in during the sixties, many of the inmates there were selling themselves to nuclear testing..I mean that I know of one person for certain who took shots of radiation to have a bit of money on his books...
Here the general population is selling their souls and body parts for existence beyond their .05 cents an hours while.......
Charlie Manson had an entire wing devoted to him in the prison..He was put on elitest status, even in the Penal Institution...Let him free??? The general population during that time, wanted to "off" him...So, if the boyz in orange couldn't see any worth, then.....How could he ever get parole???? He is a monster...He is the only example that I can use that actually supports good guy/bad guy philosophy....He is one example for myself that advocates law enforcement.
I doubt they will give him parole anyway..I have a friend who shot an off duty cop back in 1984 in a bar brawl (accidental shooting), he was sentenced to do 15-life...his basic time has been over due; each year we write a letter; each year it is denied...
I can only hope the same happens for Charlie....
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
To add, I am personally very glad that despite the fact that the legal system is quite imperfect, that it has some strict objective standards, that often prevents the lynch-mob mentality of a society, ignorant of understanding, from acting upon such ignorance. The current legal system in this case, although imperfect, demands that Charles Manson be treated fairly and humanely and not be abused, degraded and denigrated for his crimes or his illness/es, like the more mainstream ignorance sometimes calls for. The job of the system is rather to hold him simply accountable. It is not the system's job to satisfy the anger and lack of productive resolution society has on such matters. My guess is that there are flawed, and ignorant people within the system who do abuse the spirit and the letter of the law and with human fallacy, do not uphold the law, and who might denigrate or abuse Charles Manson, and thusly the accountabilty for that is on them. The same system does not allow unchecked human emotion and judgment to make the actual judgments in each case, knowing how flawed the human psyche is. Rather it has a strict system with checks and balances that focuses on the Is-ness (facts) and proof of Is-ness (evidence) alone. The system seeks to bring ignorance and human flaw/dysfunctionsal mystification to Light so as to demystify it and to understand. And ONLY when such process is followed, and demystification takes place to the highest degree possible given the many natural flaws, judgment comes into play. And even then, when such judgment is meted out, I don't think there is a human alive who believes in the perfection of the legal system, because such perfection is a fallacy. And even if it was believed to be perfect, we have case after case where errors and huge miscarriages of justice have been proven to taken place.
So, again, given the rampant ignorance abound, and given the lack of understanding among society about the "evil that THEY do" and must live with daily, I take solace in knowing natural law, and human systems with high intent to uphold the perfection of natural law, are in place and evolving.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
well my take is that violence,if it is to occur, is ALWAYS ALWAYs the last option in conflict. there are ways to remove leaders from office without involving the whole world or singular countries in a prolonged war.
we weren't in disagreement about freeeing manson. the clash came from your stand on the death penalty, which i am opposed to. i see execution merely as revenge cause we all know it doesn't deter murderers and the like.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
A truly liberal person is conservative when necessary.
Pro-life by choice.
an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say