|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 07/20/2005 : 07:54:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
With all of these things there is a second question of retirement. Expect to hear the sonic boom of law being changed to include it in their Medicare/Social Security laws. I'll be eligible for SS when I'm 67.5 years old. If this pill comes out, I can expect that to increase to 135 years old.
If lifespans are longer and more productive, then it only makes sense that individuals continue to contribute.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
 |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 09:02:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
With all of these things there is a second question of retirement. Expect to hear the sonic boom of law being changed to include it in their Medicare/Social Security laws. I'll be eligible for SS when I'm 67.5 years old. If this pill comes out, I can expect that to increase to 135 years old.
If lifespans are longer and more productive, then it only makes sense that individuals continue to contribute.
And if they choose not to imbibe the pill, they get screwed out of retirement completely. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 09:19:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
And if they choose not to imbibe the pill, they get screwed out of retirement completely.
The logical option would be to have the age adjustable depending on pill imbibage. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 10:22:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
And if they choose not to imbibe the pill, they get screwed out of retirement completely.
The logical option would be to have the age adjustable depending on pill imbibage.
And that falls afoul of the 14th amendment. And Congress and logic rarely coincide. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 13:03:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
(Q9) If you had the opportunity to take the 10,000-year pill right now, would you?
I sure would.
Hell yes.
[/quote]
No. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 13:38:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Perhaps there would be a different answer to this question:
(Q8B) if (for whatever reason) you only get one chance to take the pill or not, at age 40, is refusal a form of suicide?
No. People have the right to refuse medical care.
quote:
Or,
(Q8C) If you're on your deathbed with only age-related health problems, and refuse the pill, is that suicide?
No. See above reasoning.
[quote]
How about this one:
(Q9) If you had the opportunity to take the 10,000-year pill right now, would you?
I sure would.
No. I expend enough resources as it is. The population growth would be astounding. I'll pass on being around when the rediculous happens. Also, if you took this pill, were female, and post menopausal, would you get your period back? |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 13:41:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Actually, bored during an hour-long commute, on Monday morning. Heard on the radio about the possibility that Eric Rudolph could be looking at four life sentences, and thought, "I wonder how much time that'd take to serve consecutively."
I've been thinking on another thing, that strikes me as illogical.
I've been led to think you can get multiple life sentences, but only one death sentence. Why not multiple death sentence?
In today's episode of Alias, Jack Bristow strangled a guy to death while interrogating him for info to stop a bomb. The guy was strangled until he flat-lined, then they shocked him awake again with adrenalin and defibrillator and got him up and running again. Then Jack says something like "If you don't tell me, I'll kill you again. Until you comply..."
Though I think it would be too inhumane to take a convicted person's life more than once (I generally against the death-sentence), I'm surprised that it hasn't become practise in Texas already.
(Suddenly I'm struck with flashes of the episode in Michael Moore's The Awful Truth where Jay Martel goes to Florida and Texas to check the score in the Capital Punishment Race. Has anyone else see it?)
(edit: spelling) |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
| Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 07/20/2005 14:37:12 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 14:11:29 [Permalink]
|
Q1: No. And then there's the question really, of why a person is serving life: Is it meant as a punishment? Or is it to protect society from even more dammaged than what this person already have caused? I guess it's a bit of both, but in the latter case I would say releasing a guy while he is still a menace to society should be prevented.
Q2: Yes. However, the existance of drugs inside prison walls indicates that if someone inside really wanted to get their hands on a pill, they could possibly pull it off. Measures have to be taken to account for that: tests perhaps, and/or automatic conversions of sentences in order to compensate for the unexpected change in life expectancy.
Perhaps they can get an injection making them terminally allergic to the pill. Once they are sentenced to life.
Q3: Yes. At least in Sweden, the constitusion states that crime and punishmen should have some proportion to eachother. Double or longer life expectancy should absolutely be taken into account. Someone with natural age 40 facing 20 years inside have much more to loose than a 40 year old enhanced to die age 200 facing the same 20 years.
People are already getting reduced sentences because they are too young (which I think is wrong) or too old.
Q4: Jail until you die.
Q5: Given the expected technical advancement for such a long time, new methods of rehabilitation may be developed that is so much more effective. But until such technology is developed (A Clockwork Orange?) I don't think the time span should matter much, so I say no.
Q6: no.
Q7: no.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 14:17:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
(Q9) If you had the opportunity to take the 10,000-year pill right now, would you?
I sure would.
I would too. If living past 5000 years gets too tedious, one could always end it prematurely by some kind of means. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 14:18:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
I've been thinkin on another thing, that strikes me as illogica.
Off topic, but I think Illogica would be an awesome name for a dance club.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 14:26:43 [Permalink]
|
| Reading Tim's quote of the 14th Amendment, my interpretation of the quoted section is that the death sentence is unconstitutional. Yet many states still utilize it. I don't get it... |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 14:35:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by pleco
(Q9) If you had the opportunity to take the 10,000-year pill right now, would you?
I sure would.
Hell yes.
No.
Even if it restored you to full health (cured your physical ailments)? |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 14:40:18 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Reading Tim's quote of the 14th Amendment, my interpretation of the quoted section is that the death sentence is unconstitutional. Yet many states still utilize it. I don't get it...
Well, due process is what the states use to justify their death penalties. The criminal is given due process and multiple appeals before the death penalty is carried out.
The case against the death penalty has traditionally been on the grounds of the 8th Amendment. (Which in Texas, the death penalty is not unusual.)
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 16:36:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tim
Oh, here I go, again. I hope I don't start an argument...
An argument, with me, no but a nice discussion is always a welcome diversion...
quote:
I feel that 'Due Process' always applies when concerned with the application of law. We need to be sure that each law is not too vague or overly broad and that they are applied procedurally equal acroos the board.
But is Due Process applicible when it applies to voluntarily consuming an unnecessary medication, when you've (presumably) already ruled that the system can not force an individual to consume the same medication to 'more fully serve their sentence'? The pharmaceutical is not medically necessary to improve the lot of the incarcerated and therefore denying it to the inmate would in no way harm him.
Dave W, one bit of clarification if you please? Have laws already been drafted with regard to this medication, or are looking at another case of science ahead of the law and we are required to determine the ethics of application of medication?
quote:
This was the intent of my answer. In this case in particular we would need to delve deeply into previous decisions and legal opinion to set precedent on how the law is to be enforced. Whether that precedent is set in agreement or in opposition to the forced or voluntary prescription of Dave's super pill is beside the point. The point is that the precedent needs to be made.
Agreed, but again, have you not already begun by establishing that it is unconstitutional to force an inmate to take the pill to 'more fully serve their sentence'? Allowing an inmate to take the pill, in the hopes that he will outlive the term of his sentence. Why should this be at the expense of the state? I suppose this would come down to is this a covered medication vs a non-covered medication. That would ultimately be the decision of medicare/medicaid(?).
quote:
This is not the concern of any individual law, unless that law specifically addresses these regrettable conditions. A judge in criminal court should not have to take the condition of the penal system into account when sentencing a convicted felon. Unfortunately, we realize that's not happening. The conditions of prison overcrowding are the responsibility of the state, not the criminal court, (unless those conditions become criminal).
Would overcrowding not be considered criminal? (I really don't know, just asking.) Agreed, when sentencing, the conditions of the penal system should not be of concern. However, that is a consideration when granting parole and returning parolees to prison.
quote:
Would it, really? I think most of us would choose to live on in typical conditions of prison confinement than to die prematurely. And, with the release of Dave's super drug to the general population, dying in our mid-seventies would indeed be premature.
It's possible.
quote:
Trish, your assessment of a 'life sentence' may be accurate, though I was under the impression that the definition varied by state. In any event, this is an example of 'Due Process.' The defining of the sentence makes the law fair to all concerned. Dave's super pill requires the same consideration.
I see where the pill requires the same consideration. However, once sentenced (assume the typical life sentence is 99 years) as one who has not taken the pill, can that sentence be changed if they opt then to take the pill while incarcerated? Then you need only wait out your sentence to pick up your life again. While the sentence for the one who has taken the pill (assuming a doubling of life expectancy results in a doubling of the sentence: time served = 198 years), the actual period of incarceration for those who've already taken the pill is not balanced with those who have not, assuming they are allowed to take the pill after incarceration.
quote:
From the 14th Amendment quote:
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Emphasis mine, of course.
Is denying them the pill, denying them life? I don't think so. This pill serves no other medical purpose other than to prolong life and that alone is not enough to claim denial of life. He's already been given due process, through his trial and conviction for whatever crime it was. If it is policy to disallow administration of this pill while incarcerated, I don't see that it violates his right to due process, he's already had that. This is simply a question of the rules for those already convicted and serving their sentence.
Hope this makes some sense. No argument yet Tim? Hopefully not.
(I really hope that doesn't sound as bad as it did when I read it again. Please picture me asking this while laughing, meaning that we are still having a discussion rather than a shouting match - please.)
Edited because I didn't want that last to be taken as a snide remark - really. |
...no one has ever found a 4.5 billion year old stone artifact (at the right geological stratum) with the words "Made by God."
No Sense of Obligation by Matt Young
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I consider the capacity for it terrifying and vile!"
Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
They (Women Marines) don't have a nickname, and they don't need one. They get their basic training in a Marine atmosphere, at a Marine Post. They inherit the traditions of the Marines. They are Marines.
LtGen Thomas Holcomb, USMC
Commandant of the Marine Corps, 1943
|
| Edited by - Trish on 07/20/2005 16:42:42 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/20/2005 : 18:49:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Trish
Dave W, one bit of clarification if you please? Have laws already been drafted with regard to this medication, or are looking at another case of science ahead of the law and we are required to determine the ethics of application of medication?
This pill is hypothetically fresh on the market, just having passed FDA approval. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
