Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT Strips 3831-3835 (17-21 September, 2018)
cybersmurf:
--- Quote from: BenRG on 19 Sep 2018, 03:52 ---
--- Quote from: Meander on 19 Sep 2018, 02:38 ---I love how May is constantly helping the other characters in spite of herself, and without trying.
--- End quote ---
Or, indeed, wanting to!
--- End quote ---
Every now and then sje actually wants to. Probably Dale only, since they live together, or at least to pay back giving her a chance.
--- Quote from: BenRG on 18 Sep 2018, 23:25 ---I think that May is more like Pintsize than she realises, given her talent to find just the right phrase to needle someone into action. The strange thing with her is that it appears to be entirely unconscious and maybe even unwelcome (to the point where, in today's panel 6, she could be saying: "No! It's happening again! Again!").
--- End quote ---
I was thinking something something similar. Quite often she wants to be as crude as Pintsize but can't pull it off the same way due to her humanoid chassis (kind of moral-bound by Form?).
Sometimes her way of interacting stings more than the message she delivers, which probably makes people accept hard truths from her easier than from other people (since they've been stung by May as a person, the sting of the message loses its power).
pallanox:
I see a lot of parallels with may and Pintsize in terms of personality. They are rough around the edges but mean well. I think Pintsize will help may get over her issues with the law.
Or I could be wrong, and may steals a jetplane. Anything is possible
Pennepasta:
--- Quote from: Tova on 19 Sep 2018, 03:43 ---
--- Quote from: Pennepasta on 19 Sep 2018, 02:43 ---
--- Quote from: Tova on 18 Sep 2018, 15:57 ---Do you believe that some are truly irredeemable?
--- End quote ---
Does that matter? You punish people for what they have done, not what they will do, with planning and intent obviously covered. You punish for the crime, give leniency if warranted, and then the crime is paid for. Prior convictions et al should be factored in in sentencing, but other than that, they should be wiped clean.
--- End quote ---
I'm afraid that I must beg to differ. Risk of recidivism is very much, AFAIK, a part of the sentencing decision.
--- End quote ---
Hmm, maybe I wasn't clear, though I did ramble off into other directions than you were based in. I did kind of ramble there. I do think that prior crimes, attitude towards what they've done etc. (so, basically, what they've done previously to indicate risk of recidivism) should be taken into account when sentencing - hence the "Prior convictions et al should be factored in at sentencing" part of my post. Basically, I do agree with the concept of "spent" convictions that the UK uses, though I don't really agree with the time limits on it (it's basically an extra, post-jail length of time in which you can still be turned down for non-DBS requiring jobs because of it, and doesn't apply to sentences over 4Y, or jobs requiring a background check from government). If someone's done a crime and served their punishment, then society - outside of law enforcement - should view them as clean, IMO. If they reoffend, then there's grounds to look at spent convictions.
Irredeemable or not, punish people for what they have done, including their attitudes towards that, and keep punishments for the court to mete out fairly, not society at large, who will all have differing viewpoints. Is this best? I don't know. Probably depends on how much people trust the system against how much people trust society at large, and what people view the point of the punishment is. How much is it punitive? How much is it to reduce recidivism and to rehabilitate? And, of course, how fair is the sentencing? All three are questions that different people will put different answers to.
shanejayell:
On one hand, yay Roko.
On the other, I expect May to run out after her going, "WTF! Don't listen to ME!" or something...
oddtail:
ARGH.
OK, your opinion on the police may vary, but I think we all can agree that there aren't nearly enough good cops working, and there needs to be as many of them as possible to counterbalance the bad ones. And I doubt it's THAT different in QC-verse, technological semi-utopia or not.
If you're worried if you're doing your job right, whether you're making a positive difference, ESPECIALLY if your job is to serve and protect or whatever, that doesn't mean YOU should quit your job, it means that everyone who does NOT ask those questions needs to quit immediately.
What I'm saying is, Roko has more of a business being a cop now that we know that she DOES have a conscience that's biting her and making her worry.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version