As a politician how can I be okay with helping bad victims and not just good victims? (2 Viewers)

[NightHawkBuzz]

I want to become a politician and I know I have to serve everyone. However I am having an issue doing that and I was wondering how I can fix that.

A bad victim to me would be someone that intentionally mistreats others with there words and verbally abuses them or physically abuses them. Also, a bad victim to me would be someone who was going to become a bad person. Someone who was going to grow up to be a bad person in life.

How can I help these controlling jealous boyfriends and verbally abusive people as well as criminals when they become the victims of crimes just like other good victims?

Also, a jealous boyfriend who displays jealous, controlling, psycho behaviors when he is at the bar with his girlfriend. Like if any guy even gets near her or he sees her talking to them he gets very controlling and confrontational. This guy actually comes close to or is ready to fight with people who get near his girlfriend or talk to her. This guy is starting a fight or is willing to start one because he is controlling over his girlfriend.

I have personally met a couple of bad men like this in bars who have tried to or were looking to start fights with me over their girlfriends. Also, verbally abusive people at the bad high school I went to. I would consider these people as bad victims for sure and I wouldn’t feel as successful helping them.

Now if these jealous boyfriends who start fights with men at the bar and these verbally abusive people were in a different situation and became the victims of a major crime like a mass shooting, terrorist attack, etc. How am I suppose to help these people successfully like I would other good victims?

Even though they didn’t deserve to have what happened to them I still would consider them bad victims because of their past behavior. I wouldn’t feel successful helping them as I would people that were actually good victims.

Also, bad victims would also be murders, rapist, robbers and terrorist to me as well. I wouldn’t feel as successful helping these people as good victims to.

How can I help these controlling jealous boyfriends and verbally abusive people as well as criminals when they become the victims of crimes just like other good victims?

 

[NightHawkBuzz]

So, your main aspiration for becoming a politician is to advocate for the death penalty? I always believed politicians were public servants of the people and their goals were to improve the lives of their constituents. That's including those "rude, ghetto and animalistic" CITIZENS!

I suggest you seek higher learning, maybe a semester or 2 of political science before seeking public service. Hell, just Google political science/public servant and you may learn that you have a greater responsibility to make those "rude, ghetto and animalistic" people into productive citizens instead of finding new ways to eradicate them from society.

No advocating for the death penalty is NOT my main aspiration. I want to get clear on this I literally had 40 other goals on politics that I want achieve. The only reason I am specifically just talking about this is because this is the only one I am struggling with.

I want to advocate for the death penalty but I can't trust my judgement because sometimes the victims are bad people. I want to fix this problem I am having so I can go into politics having no issues.

 

[MT15]

No advocating for the death penalty is NOT my main aspiration. I want to get clear on this I literally had 40 other goals on politics that I want achieve. The only reason I am specifically just talking about this is because this is the only one I am struggling with.

I want to advocate for the death penalty but I can't trust my judgement because sometimes the victims are bad people. I want to fix this problem I am having so I can go into politics having no issues.

You should always be willing to have issues, imo. People who are completely sure of their ideas don’t generally make great public servants. It’s fine to have some framework, it’s essential. But you have to be willing to consider other ideas from time to time. Consider the fact that you could be mistaken, and be willing to reevaluate constantly. To listen to your constituents and meet their needs, not lord over them.

The reason you are getting push back is that you seem to be completely focused on this one very narrow issue that isn’t really relevant to what you say you want to do. And you seem to be willing to judge people as either “good” or “bad” based on some actually trivial behaviors.

You also don’t seem to have a good grasp of what public servants do or their reason for existing. You don’t seem to be very familiar with some basic concepts of the US form of government. That’s why you are getting people speculating about your background or your actual existence as a human being.

 

[superchuck500]

I am saying politicians can help in criminal law by advocating for the death penalty but I am having a hard time trusting my judgement for the death penalty.

"Can help in criminal law by advocating for the death penalty"? Help whom?

Again, politicians don't influence whether the death penalty applies to a crime that has already happened - either the death penalty is in play by law or it isn't. Politicians do influence the death penalty as a matter of policy in the jurisdiction by setting what that law is. But I suspect that the average politician spends very little time thinking about death penalty policy - there's just way too much else to do.

Many politicians don't believe in the death penalty at all, full stop. Many believe that it should only be used in very compelling cases and where the evidence is incontrovertible (some states suspended their death penalty after some were later found to be innocent based on new evidence techniques and other recantations). Others take a more active view that it is important to have in the range of criminal sentencing.

I think whatever your personal belief is, there are others that likely share it. I personally don't think that one's position on the death penalty should be key reason why someone wants to enter politics.

 

[superchuck500]

I want to advocate for the death penalty but I can't trust my judgement because sometimes the victims are bad people. I want to fix this problem I am having so I can go into politics having no issues.

I think the problem can be "fixed" simply by how you view it. Even in the most death-penalty-friendly states, the death penalty only applies in cases where the first-degree murder had some aggravating factor. People aren't sentenced to death simply because they killed another person, there has to be some factor that puts the death penalty in play. And then, a jury has to be unanimous that the death penalty will apply and then the judge has to confirm that the sentence is appropriate.

That whole process tends to not favor the death penalty when the victim was also a "bad person" or at least a person doing bad things.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Because you are sitting over here judging my response saying I am not a real person when I am.

Unless you have had my experiences in life you have no right to judge me like that honestly.

A real person who copy/pasted this exact message on, like, ten different message boards? Sure, Jan.

 

[Optimus Prime]

I'm convinced this is some sort of experiment

It just doesn't make any sense

 

[superchuck500]

A real person who copy/pasted this exact message on, like, ten different message boards? Sure, Jan.

Oh I missed that part. I see that it’s true.

Has to be some kind of experiment or research project. But whatever, I stand by my comments.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

A real person who copy/pasted this exact message on, like, ten different message boards? Sure, Jan.

The "predicted" response would be:

It doesn't matter if this post was posted in another place. You literally just assume that because it was posted in another place that somehow this isn't a real post which isn't true.

You don't know what your talking about. I don't care what you think of me and I don't care what your opinion is. I am actually a real good faith person trying to find an answer you literally just wanna be a know it all and a smartass that thinks they know everything when it actuality you don't.

You seem to be one of those people who act like they know everything when they in reality you don't. Yet again you have added nothing here to the actual question and have just sat up here and caused conflict from the beginning like you always do because you think your a know it all...

 

[efil4]

So this was a program, designed to back door the API of some AI to generate replies to queries sent

wow.

so my sis, coder, is working on an app that will generate bed time stories just off of character name, theme and age/gender - it will hit the ChatGPT api ( or apu - i dont know the lingo ) and spit out a bed time story in 10 seconds. lolol

 

[superchuck500]

So this was a program, designed to back door the API of some AI to generate replies to queries sent

wow.

so my sis, coder, is working on an app that will generate bed time stories just off of character name, theme and age/gender - it will hit the ChatGPT api ( or apu - i dont know the lingo ) and spit out a bed time story in 10 seconds. lolol

Wut

 

[MT15]

The whole conversation was just “off”. This AI doesn’t do a very good job of emulating a real person. IMO, anyway.

 

[efil4]

Wut

wut wut? the first part or second? lol

first part wut is we were interacting with some sort of AI it appears.

second part is my sister is developing app - bedtime stories that will use ChatGPT ( or some other AI ) to generate a tailored story based on just a few parameters you input.

 

[NightHawkBuzz]

I'm convinced this is some sort of experiment

It just doesn't make any sense

I mean your not thinking about it the way I am though. Just cause it doesn't make sense to you doesn't mean it doesn't make sense to me.

 

[NightHawkBuzz]

"Can help in criminal law by advocating for the death penalty"? Help whom?

Again, politicians don't influence whether the death penalty applies to a crime that has already happened - either the death penalty is in play by law or it isn't. Politicians do influence the death penalty as a matter of policy in the jurisdiction by setting what that law is. But I suspect that the average politician spends very little time thinking about death penalty policy - there's just way too much else to do.

Many politicians don't believe in the death penalty at all, full stop. Many believe that it should only be used in very compelling cases and where the evidence is incontrovertible (some states suspended their death penalty after some were later found to be innocent based on new evidence techniques and other recantations). Others take a more active view that it is important to have in the range of criminal sentencing.

I think whatever your personal belief is, there are others that likely share it. I personally don't think that one's position on the death penalty should be key reason why someone wants to enter politics.

They help the victims receive proper justice by advocating for the death penalty. Yes politicians can ask that the death penalty be reinstated for certain crimes if they feel that it should be. It's not the key reason I want to enter politics but it is a reason that I do want to go into politics.

Politicans do influence whether the death penalty applies to a crime that has happened because they can ask the supreme court to reinstate the death penalty or to go forward with executions that have happened. Some examples are below.

1. Biden asked the supreme court to reinstate the death penalty for the Boston Bomber
2. Trump brought back federal death executions under his administration and asked the supreme court to let him execute five people before he left office and he did.
3. Desantis advocated that the death penalty laws change after the Parkland shooter killed 17 people and didn't get the death penalty he only got life in prison. The death penalty ended up being changed as well.
5. Desantis signed multiple death warrants for people to be killed for the crimes they have committed.
6. Trump said the NYC terrorist suspect who killed 8 people should receive the death penalty for his crimes.

So these are how politicians deal with the death penalty. These are situations where I do not fully trust my judgement for the death penalty because I don't have all the facts that I would like in these situations.

Quote Reply

 

[NightHawkBuzz]

I think the problem can be "fixed" simply by how you view it. Even in the most death-penalty-friendly states, the death penalty only applies in cases where the first-degree murder had some aggravating factor. People aren't sentenced to death simply because they killed another person, there has to be some factor that puts the death penalty in play. And then, a jury has to be unanimous that the death penalty will apply and then the judge has to confirm that the sentence is appropriate.

That whole process tends to not favor the death penalty when the victim was also a "bad person" or at least a person doing bad things.

Yeah that makes sense well I gave you some examples of what I am talking about for crimes of the death penalty that I have been thinking about.

 

[NightHawkBuzz]

A real person who copy/pasted this exact message on, like, ten different message boards? Sure, Jan.

And... so what. Why do you care so much.

 

[Optimus Prime]

I mean your not thinking about it the way I am though. Just cause it doesn't make sense to you doesn't mean it doesn't make sense to me.

I have no doubt

 

[NightHawkBuzz]

You should always be willing to have issues, imo. People who are completely sure of their ideas don’t generally make great public servants. It’s fine to have some framework, it’s essential. But you have to be willing to consider other ideas from time to time. Consider the fact that you could be mistaken, and be willing to reevaluate constantly. To listen to your constituents and meet their needs, not lord over them.

The reason you are getting push back is that you seem to be completely focused on this one very narrow issue that isn’t really relevant to what you say you want to do. And you seem to be willing to judge people as either “good” or “bad” based on some actually trivial behaviors.

You also don’t seem to have a good grasp of what public servants do or their reason for existing. You don’t seem to be very familiar with some basic concepts of the US form of government. That’s why you are getting people speculating about your background or your actual existence as a human being.

I just said though the reason why my focus in narrow is because before I fully commit myself to politics I wanted to clear up any issues that I have. When it comes to the 40 other topics that I want to achieve i am fine with them I have no issues on them. The reason I am completely focused on this is because this is the only issue that I have going into politics and I want to clear this up before I actually become a politician.

I feel that I can't fully excel in politics if I have this issue while I am going into it. I am familiar with the concepts of US government I just gave a ton of examples in my other reply of the situations politicians advocate or change laws for the death penalty and how that would apply.