Messages

[> Try the elevator button]

-----

> Try the elevator button

You press the button next to the elevator. The button makes an understated click but nothing else seems to happen. It seems your estimate on the "no power" scenario was correct. You shrug and return to the hallway.



> Take a peek behind door number A3

You walk to door A3 and attempt to open it. The handle appears to be locked in place and will not move.
Below the handle there is a small keypad, which seems to still have some power in it, or at least the green button emits a light glow. You press the green button just for the hell of it, and get a small beeping noise from the door, clearly stating that you need the correct passcode to get through.

As you glance at the other doors, you make note of the names on the doors. You also make note of the names on the doors.

The names on the doors are:

A1 - Stephenson
A2 - Paterson / Godwin
A3 - Stuewe

B1 - Brotherton
B2 - Newell / Newell
B3 - Haun / Farley
B4 - Miller / Klugman

I want the last word too!

[> Take pool cue]

-----

> Take pool cue

You grab a pool que, perhaps pondering to use it as a weapon of sorts?
It is too big to put in your pocket (hey, you're no pirate) and it won't fit in your holster, so you are forced to hold it in your hands.



> Read whiteboard

The whiteboard has some sort of table:

Stephenson / Klugman	Newell G. / Brotherton
Miller / Farley	Godwin / Newell C.
DOME	SECURITY

Next to the table is a hand drawn map of some sort.

[> slowly walk to open door and take caution and look inside]

-----

> slowly walk to open door and take caution and look inside

You begin to sneak towards the open door...



Slooooowly...



Slooooowly...



Slooooowly...



Slooooowly...



You enter the door. It appears to be some sort of break room. There are two small sofas, a large screen TV, some shelves for what seem to be movie disks and a pool table. There is also a whiteboard with some drawings on it, and a large metal door which seems to be an elevator door.

Oh, I apologize. I look forward to the day when WHAM and his perfect, incorruptible übermensch finally stamp out all those sub-human miscreants through the elimination of that pesky little thing called freedom.

Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein WHAM!
Heil! Heil! Heil!

Or it *could* be far less.
My observation so far is this: the current system is inadequate and does not produce wanted results, thus, a different system should be tried. In my opinion, a more radical system.

It coul go well, it could go bad. There is no way to tell and unless humanity one day tries to change, we will never find out.

Khris: The point you make has been discussed before, and just like before, it boils down to this:

Is it truly such a bad thing that some innocents die by mistrial if the fact that we also get rid of thousands upon thousands of legit hard-line criminals who would have potentially repeated their offense upon release, killing more innocents, or destroying lives in other indirect ways.

And in cases where the prison sentence is a life sentence or otherwise very long sentence, how is death a worse option that the prolonged imprisonment? If you've spent decades in prison, there is hardly any chance for such a person to redeem a functioning life afterwards, and most of those people released after long prison sentences live the rest of their lives in misery. However, during their imprisonement, they are a massive drain on taxpayer money, which could otherwise be put to... I don't know... How about more resources put into making sure we accuse the right person instead of the current system where the law enforcement is quite overstretched in pretty much all countries, and the money and resources that could go into this is used to keep inmates clothed, fed, housed and healthy.

As I've said before: we are but humans, we cannot really create the perfect system for this, but would it not be better to distribute our resources a bit differently when it comes to handling crime? Instead of bleeding taxpayer money to maintain prisons, we get rid of the prisoners more quickly, release the resources and create a better justice system with that money instead.

And again, as mentioned before, when it comes to the government / police misusing its power, there already exists internal investigation departments to ensure such wrongdoing is weeded out. This is another area that could be reinforced with the money released from the prison system overhaul, to again ensure a more just legal process.

Ang once more: how is it worse if a government misuses its power to kill opposition compared to imprisoning the opposition for life / prolonged time? How different is the end result for such a government?

Reasoning: we have been trying to go BACK the way WE CAME into the forest. But if we think deeper, what got us to drive into the forest in the first place? Perhaps something is drawing is in a certain direction, to which we headed, in trance, until our car crashed and we were forced to stop. What if we simply go with the flow? Let the forest lead us forward, towards where we were apparently driving in the first place?

Something in there is calling to us, forcing us to approach, never allowing us to leave.

> Step out of the car
> Stretch
> Begin to walk forwards, to where the nose of the car is pointing
  > Keep eyes open for signs of berries, roots or water
  > Listen for the sounds of flowing water

I think the experiment Khris talks about is the same one mentioned earlier in the thread. My viewpoint still stands though, you cannot compare the results of these tests to the system I propose, as they are inherently different.

And how is the Alford Plea a point against capital punishment?
A man is accused or a crime, he "fears capital punishment" (likely for good reason, such as... oh, I don't know, being guily?) and chooses a life in prison instead.

So, because he was given this option, he became a lifelong straing on the limited resources of the prison system and a drain on taxpayer money. Result: society loses, convicted criminal suffers lifelong sentence in the prison system, which I think Caling himself previously described as "one so violent that it is unlikely that those who get out of there would commit a crime once more" (I might be thinking of the wrong person, and I'm too lazy to dig up the post).

By the way, if someone did something to me I would not want them to be killed on my behalf.

Good for you. I'd want him dead for harming you, so he cannot harm anyone else. Say, you might not want him dead for harming you, but how about if, after harming you he went on and raped your daughter/wife/girlfriend/mother and "harmed" your family and friends.

Oh well, the main thing is that NOBODY WAS KILLED, eh?

@ Khris: Nowhere in the world is there a system with harsh enough punishments, thus the research is invalid. They are researching based on existing data, whereas I am promoting the activation of a thus-far fictional system of which there is no data to research or correlate.

If you do research to see if people act differently based on the threat of punisment where the levels of punishment are, what, "10 years in jail" versus "20 years in jail". In either of these cases, where long prison sentences are handed out, the result to the person is the same: loss of social life, job and lessened quality of life. It does NOT matter how LONG the prison sentence is. But when you make them decide on actually living or dying, I believe the results would differ greatly. However, to research this is impossible due to the ridiculous rules known as "human rights" and the entitlement of even the worst scum of humanity to them.

@ TomatosInTheHead: All crime should not be viewed solely from the perspective of the victim, this is true. However, a human being should not have the right to destroy another human being's life, and if human A shows the ability to do so, what is there to stop them from repeating the offense? Human A of this example could, in his lifetime, destroy dozens or hundreds of lives directly and indirectly, but if the eliminated human A after the first offense, would there not be many lives saved with a minimal cost when compared to the alternative?

What I am saying is: no we should not think like the victim does, but should instead pre-emptively respond to any potential for future victims decisively and effectively in order to protect our society as a whole.

One of the frames is in wrong order and the animation skips backwards.
The knees also need a "little" work.

They may not have suffered as much as their victims, but to me their suffering seems irrelevant. The impulse to inflict pain is one I try to resist, and I think a society should resist.

The question is not 'were they punished harshly enough'. It's 'how do we prevent these crimes being committed in the future?'

And no amount of nut-shooting will achieve that.

Yeah, the nut shooting is just a symbolic gesture. It's the one bullet to the head that ensures these people do not become repeat offenders.

Some translated quotes from the article I linked to (it's now 7200 people, and still 95%). I've listed a short description of the crime, followed by the punishment the person got in real life and then my belief on what the just punishment would be.

"Man intentionally lit night-guest on fire for loud snoring. Victim suffered extensive burns, spent 7 weeks in hospital and required several skin transplants."
Real life sentence:  After a long trial, 360 â,¬ of fines, no prison time (hey, the accused was poor!)
WHAM's sentence: Hard labour for 5 years, then released into society with supervision (electronic collar)

"Eight months old baby's skull was fractured when man assaulted the mother"
Real life sentence: 8 months on conditional discharge (basically 8 month supervision but no time in actual prison), fines
WHAM's sentence: Hard labour for 5 years, then released into society with supervision (electronic collar)

"Police officer raped a 16 year old girl in an alley in the middle of the night"
Real life sentence:  2 years and 6 months in prison, lost his job
WHAM's sentence: Shot in the nuts, then the head

"Multiple rapes, torture, assaults and threats on multiple victims"
Real life sentence: 1 year and 8 months in prison + 40 hours of community service
WHAM's sentence: Shot in the nuts, then the head

Now do tell me you actually think these people got what they deserved? That these people did not deserve harsher punishments? Imagine yourself as the victim in any of these cases, and tell me with a straight face that the above mentioned punishments are adequate and justified, and just try to look in a mirror after that.

Fun facts from a Finnish daily newspaper:
http://www.iltalehti.fi/uutiset/2011090114299305_uu.shtml

There is a poll on that page:
"Kitkevätkö kovemmat rangaistukset rikollisuutta?" = "Would tougher punishments help weed out crime?"

Answers at the moment of posting (with almost 4000 responses): 95% say "yes"

The don't talk about shooting criminals, but the message is clear: tougher response to crime is wanted by the majority of those who responded.

Sorry for the delay in new turn, I'm having crunch time with getting my He Watches demo into working order at the moment, will resume updates by saturday.

Update on demo schedule: My testers have found quite a few issues with the demo, and I've gone through a "slight" user interface overhaul, but today I'm hoping to get the next version of the demo out to the testers.

Will keep you people posted on the status!

7 days a sceptic - The game which inspired me to learn how to use AGS

[> Proceed through the said door]

-----

> Proceed through the said door

Yous draw a deep breath and step through the door.

You find yourself in a spacious hall with 8 doors in addition to the double doors you just arrived through. One of the doors appears to be open.

I demand you add the "candymancer" scarf, which turns you into an old man, who has the special ability to turn into a brown bear!