Teen sentenced to 90 years

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

That's been my arg for years - more injustice in punishing an innocent person than in letting a guilty one go free.

1 innocent vs 1 guilty, great, you guys have a 50% risk factor in alpha and beta risk for justice.

My dog is sophisticated enough to make that assessment

or, you guys are figuratively arguing that you'd let ALL the guilty go free to ensure not a single innocent goes to jail

at which point, why have any justice

the real (tough) question, is "how many" guilty are you willing to set free in order to protect one innocent man from jail

all processes have error - what is your error tolerance

absolutists need not apply, just stay in that fantasy world

and, of course, if you are that innocent person, it certainly does stink. are you strong enough to not let your empathy/emotion guide your assessment

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Butters 0]

Quote

the real (tough) question, is "how many" guilty are you willing to set free in order to protect one innocent man from jail

Realize that the cost of setting a guilty person free is that they have no rehabilitation or punishment and may commit another crime harming another innocent person (so an innocent person will suffer if found guilty or may suffer if a guilty person is found innocent).

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[Skyrad 0]

Good riddence. Its a pity we don't treat criminals like that here in the UK.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

Until this year I believe, it was still a hangable offence to rustle cattle in certain states in the USA. There have also been many rape cases that ended in capital punishment.

Really?

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Exactly, even if we kill Bundy (we did) for his crimes, we still teach that killing as a reaction/evenge is a good thing. Little Johnny grows up with that.

Ah, the argument of false choices. An incomplete set of options based on guile or ignorance of the other choices.

Little Johnny can grow up knowing that some people are too damaged to ever be able to function in society.
That is what everyone else learned about Bundy.

After murdering countless women in Wash State and Utah, he came to Florida. He murdered a 12yo Lake City girl and then went through the sorority house bludgeoning (let's register large sticks ) young women to death. In some cases, biting flesh off.

There is a point where society decides that it has to defend itself from monsters. Bundy was a monster.

Quote

Where do ya think the OK city Murray building bomber McVey got his ideas about collateral damage and revenge?

McVey believed (1) that he could stop the US govt from functioning by blowing up a building (2) that the people in that building were somehow in charge of it all.

McVey was crazier than bat shit. That is where his ideas came from.

[kallend 2,108]

Quote

absolutists need not apply, just stay in that fantasy world

Death is pretty absolute. I see that Florida just bungled another execution cbs5.com/deathrow/local_story_349172601.html

and California's current death machinery has been declared unconstitutional by a Federal judge.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Death is pretty absolute. I see that Florida just bungled another execution cbs5.com/deathrow/local_story_349172601.html

and California's current death machinery has been declared unconstitutional by a Federal judge.

From the article:

the governor said he wants to ensure the process does constitute cruel and unusual punishment, as some death penalty foes argued bitterly after Wednesday's execution.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Butters 0]

Quote

the governor said he wants to ensure the process does constitute cruel and unusual punishment, as some death penalty foes argued bitterly after Wednesday's execution.

I can only hope that he forgot to add not. Cruel and unusual punishment is not for the innocent or the guilty.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Only execute the people found guilty when there exists overwhelming evidence that is not disputable and leaves no doubt.

Um, that's the standard for conviction there. Courts usually get it right, but sometimes get it wrong. I personally would rather see a guilty man go free than an innocent person executed.

That's been my arg for years - more injustice in punishing an innocent person than in letting a guilty one go free.

My point to the thread wasn't to try and determine a fool proof method for executing those found guilty of some crimes. (I do realize that there are many complications with what I suggested and with almost any other alternative.) It was to point out that we use finite resources on individuals who will spend the majority of their lives in a prison cell.

Quote

My point to the thread wasn't to try and determine a fool proof method for executing those found guilty of some crimes. (I do realize that there are many complications with what I suggested and with almost any other alternative.) It was to point out that we use finite resources on individuals who will spend the majority of their lives in a prison cell.

So even if they are innocent, the fact that they are spending teh rest of their life as an innocent convict doesn't bother you? Some of the innocent conservatives who were wrongly convicted change their opinions of this, but no one can hear them. Your focus is on teh fact that they ar convicted, hence a drain on tax dollars, hence they should be eliminted? This is very Utilitarian..... BTW, Utilitarianism is from the ruskies, comrad.

Quote

I do realize that there are many complications with what I suggested and with almost any other alternative.

Yes, such as exterminating several innocent people. No biggy tho, the neo-cons can call it population control with a spin of politics driving it of course.

Quote

we use finite resources

By looking at YOUR admin I have a hard time calling ANY expenditures finite...... check the debt lately?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The societal cost of killing people for lesser crimes is far more than the "societal cost" of keeping them imprisoned.

Hell, good arguments exist for the position that the societal cost of killing people at all for any crime is higher that the "societal cost" of prison.

Quote

Hell, good arguments exist for the position that the societal cost of killing people at all for any crime is higher that the "societal cost" of prison.

Exactly, even if we kill Bundy (we did) for his crimes, we still teach that killing as a reaction/evenge is a good thing. Little Johnny grows up with that. Where do ya think the OK city Murray building bomber McVey got his ideas about collateral damage and revenge?

OK then you let Ted bundy or similar date your sister.

The neo-con kneejerk reaaction is either execute them or set them free? Let's stay within the middle. We can jail them and ket them date each other.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

That's been my arg for years - more injustice in punishing an innocent person than in letting a guilty one go free.

1 innocent vs 1 guilty, great, you guys have a 50% risk factor in alpha and beta risk for justice.

My dog is sophisticated enough to make that assessment

or, you guys are figuratively arguing that you'd let ALL the guilty go free to ensure not a single innocent goes to jail

at which point, why have any justice

the real (tough) question, is "how many" guilty are you willing to set free in order to protect one innocent man from jail

all processes have error - what is your error tolerance

absolutists need not apply, just stay in that fantasy world

and, of course, if you are that innocent person, it certainly does stink. are you strong enough to not let your empathy/emotion guide your assessment

Quote

1 innocent vs 1 guilty, great, you guys have a 50% risk factor in alpha and beta risk for justice.

It's simply an abstract way of explaining and quantifying what injustice means via use of comparison. It's not a shot-in-the-dark as you allude.

Quote

My dog is sophisticated enough to make that assessment

Then go have another conversation with him.

Quote

or, you guys are figuratively arguing that you'd let ALL the guilty go free to ensure not a single innocent goes to jail

Nice - occupy the ends so moderation has no chance. How about leaning a bit more toward exoneration of the innocent rather than pegging out toward conviction/execution?

Quote

at which point, why have any justice

We have little now.

Quote

the real (tough) question, is "how many" guilty are you willing to set free in order to protect one innocent man from jail

Several. Exoneration of the innocent ensures the state isn't a kidnapper or murderer, which is far more important than many other things.

Quote

all processes have error - what is your error tolerance

ZERO, what is your negligible tollerance for executing innocent people; 1 per year? How about your tollerance for theives murdering innocent people; zero? SO then your point is that the state can murder, but others may not.

Quote

absolutists need not apply, just stay in that fantasy world

Is that, "Note to self?"

Quote

and, of course, if you are that innocent person, it certainly does stink. are you strong enough to not let your empathy/emotion guide your assessment

Empathy is a strength, rather than the ability to suppress it, as you suggest, which is a weakness.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

the real (tough) question, is "how many" guilty are you willing to set free in order to protect one innocent man from jail

Realize that the cost of setting a guilty person free is that they have no rehabilitation or punishment and may commit another crime harming another innocent person (so an innocent person will suffer if found guilty or may suffer if a guilty person is found innocent).

Can you defend yourself from a criminla SOB or a runaway gov? I'll choose the former.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Good riddence. Its a pity we don't treat criminals like that here in the UK.

Is it worth the cost of killing innocent people? Most countries have decided it's not.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Until this year I believe, it was still a hangable offence to rustle cattle in certain states in the USA. There have also been many rape cases that ended in capital punishment.

Really?

There have been many people executed in the US for rape in the 50's and back. We executed minors, 16 & 17, until a year ago.

Did you hear about the recent post mortem exoneration for a black woman who had a trail by an all white male jury, by a white judge for killing a white man? It lasted 1 day and she was then shortly executed. Think about it before you wish our Naziism on your country.

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

absolutists need not apply, just stay in that fantasy world

Death is pretty absolute. I see that Florida just bungled another execution cbs5.com/deathrow/local_story_349172601.html

and California's current death machinery has been declared unconstitutional by a Federal judge.

And your point is?

The issue with those rulings is the pain inflicted at death not the death penalty itself which is not at issue in any of these decisions.

I suspect painless deaths are in the minority for the rest of us. Whatever happened to hanging and firing squads? I'd love to see a judge outlaw something that was common practice when his document of reference was scribed, then again it wouldn't break new ground and I wouldn't really love it.

It's pretty sad that the attempt to make the death penalty appear as humane as possible has led to additional suffering for the recipients but there's a lot of blame to spread around here. The history of the U.S. death penalty encompasses imaginative torture devices like the electric chair & cyanide gas!!!!! It really highlights the phony culture that pervades US politics IMHO.

[kallend 2,108]

Quote

Quote

Quote

absolutists need not apply, just stay in that fantasy world

Death is pretty absolute. I see that Florida just bungled another execution cbs5.com/deathrow/local_story_349172601.html

and California's current death machinery has been declared unconstitutional by a Federal judge.

And your point is?

The issue with those rulings is the pain inflicted at death not the death penalty itself which is not at issue in any of these decisions.

I suspect painless deaths are in the minority for the rest of us. Whatever happened to hanging and firing squads? I'd love to see a judge outlaw something that was common practice when his document of reference was scribed, then again it wouldn't break new ground and I wouldn't really love it.

It's pretty sad that the attempt to make the death penalty appear as humane as possible has led to additional suffering for the recipients but there's a lot of blame to spread around here. The history of the U.S. death penalty encompasses imaginative torture devices like the electric chair & cyanide gas!!!!! It really highlights the phony culture that pervades US politics IMHO.

I though it obvious but I'll explain for you.

1. If absolutists need not apply but should stay in their fantasy world (rehmwa), then that clearly includes death penalty supporters.

2. Try as hard as they may, the official purveyors of death in the most technologically advanced nation are still unable to do it right despite years of trying. I suggest this means it really cannot be done right.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

absolutists need not apply, just stay in that fantasy world

Death is pretty absolute. I see that Florida just bungled another execution cbs5.com/deathrow/local_story_349172601.html

and California's current death machinery has been declared unconstitutional by a Federal judge.

And your point is?

The issue with those rulings is the pain inflicted at death not the death penalty itself which is not at issue in any of these decisions.

I suspect painless deaths are in the minority for the rest of us. Whatever happened to hanging and firing squads? I'd love to see a judge outlaw something that was common practice when his document of reference was scribed, then again it wouldn't break new ground and I wouldn't really love it.

It's pretty sad that the attempt to make the death penalty appear as humane as possible has led to additional suffering for the recipients but there's a lot of blame to spread around here. The history of the U.S. death penalty encompasses imaginative torture devices like the electric chair & cyanide gas!!!!! It really highlights the phony culture that pervades US politics IMHO.

I though it obvious but I'll explain for you.

1. If absolutists need not apply but should stay in their fantasy world (rehmwa), then that clearly includes death penalty supporters.

2. Try as hard as they may, the official purveyors of death in the most technologically advanced nation are still unable to do it right despite years of trying. I suggest this means it really cannot be done right.

The concept of "doing it right" is a moving target, it will continue to move because the objections raised are not the core objection, they are the tools used to try to push another agenda. The idea that an execution must not only by painless & reliable but look pretty is utterly ludicrous. These are not issues most people worry about, it is a veneer of political bullshit which gets us back the the culture of phoney politics, a game you enjoy playing when it suits your agenda.

[kallend 2,108]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

absolutists need not apply, just stay in that fantasy world

Death is pretty absolute. I see that Florida just bungled another execution cbs5.com/deathrow/local_story_349172601.html

and California's current death machinery has been declared unconstitutional by a Federal judge.

And your point is?

The issue with those rulings is the pain inflicted at death not the death penalty itself which is not at issue in any of these decisions.

I suspect painless deaths are in the minority for the rest of us. Whatever happened to hanging and firing squads? I'd love to see a judge outlaw something that was common practice when his document of reference was scribed, then again it wouldn't break new ground and I wouldn't really love it.

It's pretty sad that the attempt to make the death penalty appear as humane as possible has led to additional suffering for the recipients but there's a lot of blame to spread around here. The history of the U.S. death penalty encompasses imaginative torture devices like the electric chair & cyanide gas!!!!! It really highlights the phony culture that pervades US politics IMHO.

I though it obvious but I'll explain for you.

1. If absolutists need not apply but should stay in their fantasy world (rehmwa), then that clearly includes death penalty supporters.

2. Try as hard as they may, the official purveyors of death in the most technologically advanced nation are still unable to do it right despite years of trying. I suggest this means it really cannot be done right.

The concept of "doing it right" is a moving target, it will continue to move because the objections raised are not the core objection, they are the tools used to try to push another agenda. The idea that an execution must not only by painless & reliable but look pretty is utterly ludicrous. These are not issues most people worry about, it is a veneer of political bullshit which gets us back the the culture of phoney politics, a game you enjoy playing when it suits your agenda.

The decisions to stop executions because they couldn't do it right were made by Gov. Bush in Florida and a Federal judge in CA. My "agenda" had nothing to do with it.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Butters 0]

Quote

The decisions to stop executions because they couldn't do it right were made by Gov. Bush in Florida and a Federal judge in CA. My "agenda" had nothing to do with it.

How do you do an execution wrong ... so long as the person dies you have done it right.

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[Skyrad 0]

Fair point, well made.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[dorbie 0]

Quote

The decisions to stop executions because they couldn't do it right were made by Gov. Bush in Florida and a Federal judge in CA. My "agenda" had nothing to do with it.

More veneer and an absloutely feeble attempt at evasion. He's a politician, the systematic opposition to the death penalty by any means is tied to the anti death penalty agenda. This is clearer in the recent California decision also mentioned in this thread. The affected squeamishness of politicians and other phonies is a sight to behold.

[kallend 2,108]

Quote

Quote

The decisions to stop executions because they couldn't do it right were made by Gov. Bush in Florida and a Federal judge in CA. My "agenda" had nothing to do with it.

How do you do an execution wrong ... so long as the person dies you have done it right.

Apparently the Governor of Florida and a Federal judge in CA do not agree with you. In fact, your exact attitude was explicitly mentioned by the judge in his ruling as one reason it was NOT done 'right'.

I guess you'd be happy with burning at the stake, or burying in an anthill.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

The decisions to stop executions because they couldn't do it right were made by Gov. Bush in Florida and a Federal judge in CA. My "agenda" had nothing to do with it.

How do you do an execution wrong ... so long as the person dies you have done it right.

If we murder the condemned in cold blood in torturous fashion, we are no better than the condemned.

It appears you have no problem toruring condemned prisoners, but even the most unethical of the country, Jeb Bush, conservative federal judges seem to have problems with it or at least they act that way.

I think what you fail to understand is that virtually all of the civilized world denounces ANY kind of capital punishment, so for us to do it at all is aggregious, let alone to torture them for 1/2 hour.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Fair point, well made.

It's agreed then, torture is ok.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The decisions to stop executions because they couldn't do it right were made by Gov. Bush in Florida and a Federal judge in CA. My "agenda" had nothing to do with it.

How do you do an execution wrong ... so long as the person dies you have done it right.

Apparently the Governor of Florida and a Federal judge in CA do not agree with you. In fact, your exact attitude was explicitly mentioned by the judge in his ruling as one reason it was NOT done 'right'.

I guess you'd be happy with burning at the stake, or burying in an anthill.

And then the people would start looking at criminals as better people than the gov..... which is what the gov fears so they pretend to care about halting torture.