More proof that the people are getting more retarded
-
I'll let the news speak for itself http://www.tomsguide.com/us/dungeons-and-dragons-board-games-d-and-d,news-9895.html
If this is not retarded then I have lost touch with reality and half the people here are career criminal
-
Reminds me of the days back in middle school and high school for me where pogs and other trading games were declared "illegal gambling" at my school and banned.
How the hell could one have been ridiculed and beaten up at school by bullies for even mentioning D&D, but survive playing it in a prison full of real thugs?
-
@Bruce Muraski, disruptive group coordinator for the Waupun Correctional Institute in Wisconsin said:
During D&D games, one player is denoted the 'Dungeon Master.' The Dungeon Master is tasked with giving directions to other players, which Muraski testified mimics the organization of a gang.
I'm not sure Bruce has fully grasped the concept of a dungeon master here.
-
It's for their own good. Now they will be less obvious targets for butt-rape.
-
i don't even
-
I also assume that most people that play this board game are not evil masterminds nor particularly violent criminal except for the occasional nerd that snaps and gun down their coworkers or classmates or the one that is caught trying to actually see the magical dragon. Now that is their only path, there is a reason why prisons tend to make better criminals instead of better citizens.
-
I'm ok with removing luxuries from prisoners, regardless of the justification.
-
-
@serguey123 said:
@blakeyrat said:
I'm ok with removing luxuries from prisoners, regardless of the justification.
Why?
It's not really supposed to be pleasant.
-
@serguey123 said:
@blakeyrat said:
I'm ok with removing luxuries from prisoners, regardless of the justification.
Why?
Speaking for myself, I don't know what blakeyrat reasons are.
Because they are in prison and they should just have the necessary stuff : bed,food, bathroom access. Why do they need cable, gym and all that. Prison is a punishement after all.
Of course the judgement reference in the article is still stupid.
-
@TheMugs said:
@serguey123 said:
Speaking for myself, I don't know what blakeyrat reasons are. Because they are in prison and they should just have the necessary stuff : bed,food, bathroom access. Why do they need cable, gym and all that. Prison is a punishement after all. Of course the judgement reference in the article is still stupid.@blakeyrat said:
I'm ok with removing luxuries from prisoners, regardless of the justification.
Why?
Their are two sides to the coin. Prisons versus Penitentiaries. Prisons are for punishment, Penitentiaries for "reform". D&D could be used as a "reform" tool, I suppose (huge stretch). I don't know. But if they are allowed to play ANY games, chess, checkers, etc. then D&D should be allowed. But it also depends on whether you view the system as primarily a punishment or reform tool. I don't know, imho it depends on the offender and the crime. A case of true involuntary manslaughter can lead to a sentence of 12 - 22 months or more (California can go up to 48 months, New York up to 15 years.) It all depends on the circumstances.
-
@blakeyrat said:
It's not really supposed to be pleasant.
You do get that we are talking about D&D, untold suffering
@TheMugs said:
Why do they need cable, gym and all that.
Because they will die otherwise or do something worse, when the human mind is unoccupied it either die or goes into overdrive. Distraction is key.
@TheMugs said:
Prison is a punishement after all.
It is not supposed to be one, is supposed to integrate criminals into society as law abiding citizens and fails miserably at that
@TheMugs said:
Of course the judgement reference in the article is still stupid.
That was my main point
-
@serguey123 said:
To provoke some "interesting dialogue"?@blakeyrat said:
I'm ok with removing luxuries from prisoners, regardless of the justification.
Why?
-
@DaveK said:
Well, THAT would be a first in here …@serguey123 said:
To provoke some "interesting dialogue"?@blakeyrat said:
I'm ok with removing luxuries from prisoners, regardless of the justification.
Why?
(sorry, but that was just too easy a target: couldn't help myself!)
-
@blakeyrat said:
@serguey123 said:
Just what we need: take members of society who don't follow the rules and make them despise society itself. Good plan.
It's not really supposed to be pleasant.@blakeyrat said:
I'm ok with removing luxuries from prisoners, regardless of the justification.
Why?
Punishment based sentencing only exists to make victims feel better, it makes society as a whole worse. Americans have a HUGE revenge fetish and it shows in our recidivism rate.
-
Well, as long as only D&D is prohibited, they've got hundreds of other RPG systems to choose from. They should try Shadowrun :)
-
@Anonymouse said:
Well, as long as only D&D is prohibited, they've got hundreds of other RPG systems to choose from. They should try Shadowrun :)
Right, cause the one about being criminals will be less objectionable than the one about saving the villiage from the dragon.
-
I'd rather let 1000 innocent people stay in jail than let 1 guilty person go free.
That's all I have to say about that.
I'm a billionaire by the way.
-
@Yaos said:
I'd rather let 1000 innocent people stay in jail than let 1 guilty person go free. That's all I have to say about that. I'm a billionaire by the way.
Pay more taxes then, so that we can feed them
-
Hey, wait a minute, doesn't a prison warden give instructions to others? Well, that obviously promotes gangs, so the warden has to go.
On a more serious note, the court ruling seems to me to also apply to group therapy, class training and other activities. I wonder if any prisoner is going to use this as a way to get out of court-appointed therapy. "Sorry, your honour, I can't go to the therapy because there is a person tasked with giving instruction to others (the therapist/doctor/whatever) and that clearly mimics the organization of a gang." I'm sure some lawyer somewhere would take that case.
As for the luxuries in prison debate, it comes down to whether prisons are supposed to play a rehabilitative role as well as a punitive role. If so, then luxuries (or at least the opportunityies to earn luxuries) are not optional, they are required.
-
@havokk said:
As for the luxuries in prison debate, it comes down to whether prisons are supposed to play a rehabilitative role as well as a punitive role. If so, then luxuries (or at least the opportunityies to earn luxuries) are not optional, they are required.
I think that depends if you think luxuries are rehabilitative or not. Personally, I would argue that a better model would be to provide constructive activities, so they can find a "traditional" place in society. For instance, have them work farms or build their own furniture or something - basically show them that it's possible to have an enjoyable life while putting in reasonable amounts of work, rather than having to resort to crime. It's probably possible to make a case that the folks in prison are still stealing from society at large because they are taking society's resources in exchange for inactivity*. I would say a better model would be to force the convicted to contribute back to society. Simply isolating them does not strike me as a reasonable solution. (Now, it's hard to make generalizations because there is a wide range of criminal behavior - stealing to drug posession to violence, due to many reasons: mental ability, illness, economics, culture.)
*"Hey man, that's right, keep paying me and giving me a place to live so I won't beat you up or steal your stuff anyway."
The mind boggles....
