4 ms·

> Who is a scumbag? There are marginal cases for sure, but let's not pretend that true scumbags don't exist just because the demarcation line is subjective; th

> Who is a scumbag? There are marginal cases for sure, but let's not pretend that true scumbags don't exist just because the demarcation line is subjective; that's like pretending there's no such thing as a ripe banana because the green fades gradually into yellow with no clear line between them. Look beyond the marginal cases and it becomes clear that the difference really does exist. There are people in this country with numerous DUIs and domestic violence convictions, obviously such people are scumbags.

encryptluks2 4y ago
Speaking of domestic violence, want to post some statistics on the amount of cops that are domestic abusers? Or the ones caught drunk behind the wheel and get let off.
- vorpalhex 4y ago
  Why not post the amount of cats that are orange or scarecrows in overalls? What does the rate of cops being DV cases have to do with this comment?
  - soperj 4y ago
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- at_a_remove 4y ago
  What a derail! And one that in no way remedies the stated problem.
ameister14 4y ago
I think people with numerous DUIs are just as likely to have a serious disease as have some moral failing resulting in them being a 'scumbag.' To me, choice is a major differentiator rather than 'obviously this person has a history of x actions' in the abstract.
- daenz 4y ago
  Are you making the case that a person with numerous DUIs doesn't have a choice in the decision to drive drunk, and therefore isn't a scumbag?
  - ameister14 4y ago
    Pretty much, yeah. I'm acknowledging that it is possible the person with numerous DUIs is an alcoholic and that, once drunk, the intent necessary for a knowing crime is no longer really there. The logic of 'chose to get drunk so chose the consequences' doesn't work if the person has a disease causing them to continuously drink.
    - daenz 4y ago
      Do you think being an alcoholic is a valid defense if you murder someone while drunk?
      - ameister14 4y ago
        Unlikely - it's definitely something you can raise in an argument about intent to get drunk and that lack of intent impacting the nature of mens rea, so it might be a mitigating factor, but either way it isn't a complete defense so you're kinda starting at negligent homicide. The difference, of course, is I'm not actually talking about what you did, I'm talking about what makes you a scumbag. I don't think people can really be unintentional scumbags - intent is required.
    - devmor 4y ago
      Recognizing the root cause doesn't remove choice or blame. If we follow your logic consistently, then none of us are ultimately responsible for anything we do because of determinism. Things like that should only really be a factor in choosing sentencing and rehabilitation.
      - ameister14 4y ago

encryptluks2 4y ago

Speaking of domestic violence, want to post some statistics on the amount of cops that are domestic abusers? Or the ones caught drunk behind the wheel and get let off.

vorpalhex 4y ago
Why not post the amount of cats that are orange or scarecrows in overalls? What does the rate of cops being DV cases have to do with this comment?
- soperj 4y ago
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
at_a_remove 4y ago
What a derail! And one that in no way remedies the stated problem.

ameister14 4y ago

I think people with numerous DUIs are just as likely to have a serious disease as have some moral failing resulting in them being a 'scumbag.' To me, choice is a major differentiator rather than 'obviously this person has a history of x actions' in the abstract.

daenz 4y ago
Are you making the case that a person with numerous DUIs doesn't have a choice in the decision to drive drunk, and therefore isn't a scumbag?
- ameister14 4y ago
  Pretty much, yeah. I'm acknowledging that it is possible the person with numerous DUIs is an alcoholic and that, once drunk, the intent necessary for a knowing crime is no longer really there. The logic of 'chose to get drunk so chose the consequences' doesn't work if the person has a disease causing them to continuously drink.
  - daenz 4y ago
    Do you think being an alcoholic is a valid defense if you murder someone while drunk?
    - ameister14 4y ago
      Unlikely - it's definitely something you can raise in an argument about intent to get drunk and that lack of intent impacting the nature of mens rea, so it might be a mitigating factor, but either way it isn't a complete defense so you're kinda starting at negligent homicide. The difference, of course, is I'm not actually talking about what you did, I'm talking about what makes you a scumbag. I don't think people can really be unintentional scumbags - intent is required.
  - devmor 4y ago
    Recognizing the root cause doesn't remove choice or blame. If we follow your logic consistently, then none of us are ultimately responsible for anything we do because of determinism. Things like that should only really be a factor in choosing sentencing and rehabilitation.
    - ameister14 4y ago