Bank Error In My Favor

[runthemover 39]

you must be getting younger

[brvheart 1,755]

Every time I go to take this test again I get pissed."If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations."Are you serious with this BS, Political Compass?That being said....

[ezelisko 0]

Man, I can't wait until I am cool enough to get on the grid.

[rsmbox 1]

hmmm...

[digitalmonkey 929]

Man, I can't wait until I am cool enough to get on the grid.

Where would you like to be on the grid? I know people.

[mtdesmoines 3]

Every time I go to take this test again I get pissed."If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations."Are you serious with this BS, Political Compass?

I think that applies to about 70% of the questions. It's like they were made up by a PoliSci 101 class.

[AmScray 355]

Every time I go to take this test again I get pissed."If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations."Are you serious with this BS, Political Compass?

I'm pretty sure the test ascribes one data point per question (left, right, up, down) then increases or decreases your orientation based on your answer. This is why there's no one registering "authoritarian liberal" - because the data is clearly managed from a left bent ideological vantage where an "authoritarian liberal" is something they believe cannot possibly exist- whereas in real life, authoritarian liberals not only exist, but are VERY common. An example of a joke."In Criminal Justice, punishment should be more important than rehabilitation" would probably orient you left or right. "Its a waste of time to try and rehabilitate some criminals" is a statement that isn't opinion- it's just true. The objective answer is yes, it is indeed a complete waste of time to try and rehabilitate some criminals, yet what 'political ideology' am I designated to by saying this? Does this make me "conservative" or "authoritarian"? Pursuant to the ideological framework established by the test writers, probably, yes.

[chrozzo 19]

Did they at least give you some kind of prize for be an honest guy!?

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Did they at least give you some kind of prize for be an honest guy!?

Yeah, they lubed me up before bending me over and taking away about 20 grand.

[speedz99 145]

"Its a waste of time to try and rehabilitate some criminals" is a statement that isn't opinion- it's just true. The objective answer is yes, it is indeed a complete waste of time to try and rehabilitate some criminals, yet what 'political ideology' am I designated to by saying this? Does this make me "conservative" or "authoritarian"? Pursuant to the ideological framework established by the test writers, probably, yes.

I guess the objective answer is yes based on a strict interpretation of the statement. I think my answer came from the idea that it's probably too hard to classify exactly which criminals are impossible to rehabilitate, so it's necessary to make an attempt with all of them. Not sure if that's taking it a level too far for this kind of quiz.

[Balloon guy 158]

I guess the objective answer is yes based on a strict interpretation of the statement. I think my answer came from the idea that it's probably too hard to classify exactly which criminals are impossible to rehabilitate, so it's necessary to make an attempt with all of them. Not sure if that's taking it a level too far for this kind of quiz.

This question alone would be all I need to know about a person's political leanings.No liberal can ever admit that there are people in this world who are actually evil and killing them would be a plus for society.Just like you cannot allow people to talk about their kids with other people who also have kids, while you yourself have no kids.I read that question and my first thought: "Of course SOME people you can't help, so agree. Not strongly agree because that's silly"

[LongLiveYorke 38]

And I thought I was foolish:http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011/06/09...eturned.html?hp(Guy finds a bag with 17K in cash and turns it in...)

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Drats, double post! I knew it even before I pressed "Add Reply".

[AmScray 355]

I read that question and my first thought: "Of course SOME people you can't help, so agree. Not strongly agree because that's silly"

No, the objectively correct answer is Strongly Agree, there are some criminals who cannot be rehabilitated. Not "Yes, but with exceptions" or "Yes, maybe" or "kinda".The answer is absolutely yes, there is a class of people who are permanently damaged, completely anti-social, irreparable garbage. They usually commit crimes and will continue to do so for the rest of their lives, until they finally do something so heinous that they get locked up forever/put to death, or are killed in the process.You don't encounter this sort of person very often in daily life, but I lived with a large group of them for a period of time and can report back with the sort of credibility strictly reserved for those with with intimate, first hand knowledge of an issue that yes, indeed, these people not only exist, but are more common than you probably think and at any given time, they would rape and murder your wife, daughter or you, even if they haven't done anything quite that grave, just yet.And here's a little protip: the most anti-social, most dangerous, most disconnected, most "apt to do something awful for seemingly no reason" types I ever encountered were "occupied house burglars". Not rapists, not aggravated-assaulters, not drug dealers, pedophiles or car thieves... Show me someone who burglarizes a house with the occupant inside, I'll show you someone who has absolute no regard whatsoever for social mores unlike any other type of criminal, will eventually do something heinous and probably, already has.Other criminals have usually just compartmentalized the justification from their crime type away from an otherwise "normal" social construct (to varying degrees- some are more or less well socialized than others, but most have basic regard for the majority of social conventions, even if they make glaring exception for the crime-type they choose to participate in). Occupied house burglars, without exception, have no regard for anything. They will do anything, at will/impulse, at any given time.Based on what I learned and saw, if there was one type of crime that portends of "much worse things to come", it's that. If it were up to me, that would be a One Strike, You're Out offense, like murder (if it were really up to me, I'd stand them all before a firing squad)

[digitalmonkey 929]

No, the objectively correct answer is Strongly Agree, there are some criminals who cannot be rehabilitated. Not "Yes, but with exceptions" or "Yes, maybe" or "kinda".The answer is absolutely yes, there is a class of people who are permanently damaged, completely anti-social, irreparable garbage. They usually commit crimes and will continue to do so for the rest of their lives, until they finally do something so heinous that they get locked up forever/put to death, or are killed in the process.You don't encounter this sort of person very often in daily life, but I lived with a large group of them for a period of time and can report back with the sort of credibility strictly reserved for those with with intimate, first hand knowledge of an issue that yes, indeed, these people not only exist, but are more common than you probably think and at any given time, they would rape and murder your wife, daughter or you, even if they haven't done anything quite that grave, just yet.And here's a little protip: the most anti-social, most dangerous, most disconnected, most "apt to do something awful for seemingly no reason" types I ever encountered were "occupied house burglars". Not rapists, not aggravated-assaulters, not drug dealers, pedophiles or car thieves... Show me someone who burglarizes a house with the occupant inside, I'll show you someone who has absolute no regard whatsoever for social mores unlike any other type of criminal, will eventually do something heinous and probably, already has.Other criminals have usually just compartmentalized the justification from their crime type away from an otherwise "normal" social construct (to varying degrees- some are more or less well socialized than others, but most have basic regard for the majority of social conventions, even if they make glaring exception for the crime-type they choose to participate in). Occupied house burglars, without exception, have no regard for anything. They will do anything, at will/impulse, at any given time.Based on what I learned and saw, if there was one type of crime that portends of "much worse things to come", it's that. If it were up to me, that would be a One Strike, You're Out offense, like murder (if it were really up to me, I'd stand them all before a firing squad)

Castle Doctrine = One Strike

[BigDMcGee 3,353]

Malcom X was an occupied house burglar.

[speedz99 145]

This question alone would be all I need to know about a person's political leanings.No liberal can ever admit that there are people in this world who are actually evil and killing them would be a plus for society.

You love speaking for liberals. I'm a liberal. I freely admit that there are people like that in this world. I just don't trust our justice system to be able to find those people without accidentally classifying other (innocent) people that way as well, which has happened over and over again. That's why I'm against the death penalty...not because I don't think some people should be killed, because we just suck at it.

You don't encounter this sort of person very often in daily life, but I lived with a large group of them for a period of time and can report back with the sort of credibility strictly reserved for those with with intimate, first hand knowledge of an issue that yes, indeed, these people not only exist, but are more common than you probably think and at any given time, they would rape and murder your wife, daughter or you, even if they haven't done anything quite that grave, just yet.And here's a little protip: the most anti-social, most dangerous, most disconnected, most "apt to do something awful for seemingly no reason" types I ever encountered were "occupied house burglars". Not rapists, not aggravated-assaulters, not drug dealers, pedophiles or car thieves... Show me someone who burglarizes a house with the occupant inside, I'll show you someone who has absolute no regard whatsoever for social mores unlike any other type of criminal, will eventually do something heinous and probably, already has.Other criminals have usually just compartmentalized the justification from their crime type away from an otherwise "normal" social construct (to varying degrees- some are more or less well socialized than others, but most have basic regard for the majority of social conventions, even if they make glaring exception for the crime-type they choose to participate in). Occupied house burglars, without exception, have no regard for anything. They will do anything, at will/impulse, at any given time.Based on what I learned and saw, if there was one type of crime that portends of "much worse things to come", it's that. If it were up to me, that would be a One Strike, You're Out offense, like murder (if it were really up to me, I'd stand them all before a firing squad)

This is all scary.

[brvheart 1,755]

You love speaking for liberals. I'm a liberal. I freely admit that there are people like that in this world. I just don't trust our justice system to be able to find those people without accidentally classifying other (innocent) people that way as well, which has happened over and over again. That's why I'm against the death penalty...not because I don't think some people should be killed, because we just suck at it.

I'm not a liberal, and this is also my position.

[brvheart 1,755]

No, the objectively correct answer is Strongly Agree, there are some criminals who cannot be rehabilitated. Not "Yes, but with exceptions" or "Yes, maybe" or "kinda".The answer is absolutely yes, there is a class of people who are permanently damaged, completely anti-social, irreparable garbage. They usually commit crimes and will continue to do so for the rest of their lives, until they finally do something so heinous that they get locked up forever/put to death, or are killed in the process.You don't encounter this sort of person very often in daily life, but I lived with a large group of them for a period of time and can report back with the sort of credibility strictly reserved for those with with intimate, first hand knowledge of an issue that yes, indeed, these people not only exist, but are more common than you probably think and at any given time, they would rape and murder your wife, daughter or you, even if they haven't done anything quite that grave, just yet.And here's a little protip: the most anti-social, most dangerous, most disconnected, most "apt to do something awful for seemingly no reason" types I ever encountered were "occupied house burglars". Not rapists, not aggravated-assaulters, not drug dealers, pedophiles or car thieves... Show me someone who burglarizes a house with the occupant inside, I'll show you someone who has absolute no regard whatsoever for social mores unlike any other type of criminal, will eventually do something heinous and probably, already has.Other criminals have usually just compartmentalized the justification from their crime type away from an otherwise "normal" social construct (to varying degrees- some are more or less well socialized than others, but most have basic regard for the majority of social conventions, even if they make glaring exception for the crime-type they choose to participate in). Occupied house burglars, without exception, have no regard for anything. They will do anything, at will/impulse, at any given time.Based on what I learned and saw, if there was one type of crime that portends of "much worse things to come", it's that. If it were up to me, that would be a One Strike, You're Out offense, like murder (if it were really up to me, I'd stand them all before a firing squad)

Like the Night Stalker. Almost all of his kills were occupied home invasions.

[digitalmonkey 929]

I think we should have the death penalty and have it set up as pay-per-view events.

[BigDMcGee 3,353]

Like the Night Stalker. Almost all of his kills were occupied home invasions.

Ted Bundy's coolest assault was a sorority invasion.

[brvheart 1,755]

Ted Bundy's coolest assault was a sorority invasion.

yeah... um, what?

[BigDMcGee 3,353]

yeah... um, what?

Well, here's what I mean by " cool", not that it should be admired or envied or respected or anything like that, just that it was the most remarkable. Because here's what he did.He got caught for murder. Got arrested. He escaped. Got caught again, and was in colorado. From a colorado jail, he escaped AGAIN. only this time he didn't get caught, but caught a train to chicago, and then to florida. He should have been hiding out, since he was, you know, the most wanted man in american. But his blood lust was so great, that he snuck into a sorority, with a log, and wacked sleeping sororities girls in the head while they were asleep. I don't believe any of the girls he stuck were killed, but I could be wrong. Eventually some of the girls woke up, ad he bolted back into the night, and chalked up a couple more bodies before he was finally caught. I'm not sure that " cool" is the right word to describe it, and I'm not sure the right word has been invented. But it was remarkable. It's the Wilt 100 point game of serial killer crimes, bundy was in the zone. He wanted it more than other serial killers, there was fire in his eyes.

[AmScray 355]

I think we should have the death penalty and have it set up as pay-per-view events.

The biggest mistake our founders made (aside from allowing slavery to exist in the colonies and contaminating our future demography) was prohibiting "cruel and unusual punishment" as a blanket edict, without making exception for the death penalty. When we put people to death, it should be as cruelly as possible. Killing someone is pretty much the ugliest and worst thing we can do. The idea that how we go about it gives us some latitude in terms of "moral authority" is a ****ing lie we tell ourselves. If anything, by sterilizing the process, we remove one of the most critical deterrent factors present in the death penalty. There is a place towards the furthest boundaries of the human mind where it accepts death, so long as its quick and relatively painless. When a man arrives at this point, he is the most dangerous man on earth. Its rare for someone to know this place, but it happens on occasion and once someone's goes there, there's no coming back. The only thing that can possibly dissuade this person from doing something horrible is the certainty that their demise will be a miserable affair.We have the entire middle ages to learn from. You murder a kid?Yes, you die, but not quickly... We're going to slowly boil you... not to death but to the threshold of unconsciousness. Then, repeat the process every day until your body gives out either from the infected burns, or from starvation, since you won't be fed at any point during this time. Treason?Enjoy your last few hours in the chamber of venomous snakes. Terrorism? A bound and blindfolded in a coffin full of starved rats sounds like a plan to me.Or, just simplify the process and rule that any class of offense results in being doused in gasoline and immolated.

[vbnautilus 48]

We have the entire middle ages to learn from.

Ah, the good ol' days.