Why NOT death penalty?

[airdvr 210]

Quote

>We'll put you down as one who supports the death penalty. Thanks for clarifying.

Actually I don't, for two reasons:

1) Economics. Life in prison is cheaper.

2) Accuracy. Our system is not accurate enough (IMO) to execute people, and to make it more accurate would make it even more expensive.

Agreed. I would also suggest that we end the allowance for repeated appeals that clog the court system.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[normiss 851]

That is supposed to be part of the accuracy check of the system.
When making that sort of a decision that involves the taking of a human life, then we should exhaust ALL possible options to verify the case is correct.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I fear

as the thread goes on

"death penalty is revenge"
"makes hannibals of us all"
"put them all in the same cell"

It's not even a page and the emotional arguments are starting to poke their noses out.

Davjohns - it's really a matter of perspective. You can try to have the practical and cost vs potential future threat debate, but the problem is that once a person has decided it's a visceral discussion rather than logical, then it's turns from a debate to an argument which then becomes a battle to 'win' the argument. In other words, no one invested in the emotional argument can acknowledge that other people might just have a true practical position to discuss. You'll get a small show of attempts (a couple of them will be honest) the rest are for show before the same old thread just appears and takes control. If you push it too far, then the name calling will commence.

Easier to just skip right to it. You're a mean person that takes joy in torturing small puppies and pulling the wings off of bugs. you must like guns and think people with curly hair are a lower form of species.

...
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

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Quote

My own philosophical reason for always having opposed the death penalty - aside from the risk of error - is that by taking the life of the killer, society debases itself by bringing itself down to his level. Society should be better than the killers.* Or even the killlers.

Why should we abolish the death penalty whe we we are in such an exclusive club:

•Afghanistan
•Antigua and Barbuda
•Bahamas
•Bahrain
•Bangladesh
•Barbados
•Belarus
•Belize
•Botswana
•Chad
•China (People's Republic)
•Comoros
•Congo (Democratic Republic)
•Cuba
•Dominica
•Egypt
•Equatorial Guinea
•Ethiopia
•Guinea
•Guyana
•India
•Indonesia
•Iran
•Iraq
•Jamaica
•Japan
•Jordan
•Kuwait
•Lebanon
•Lesotho
•Libya
•Malaysia
•Mongolia
•Nigeria
•North Korea
•Oman
•Pakistan
•Palestinian Authority
•Qatar
•St. Kitts and Nevis
•St. Lucia
•St. Vincent and the Grenadines
•Saudi Arabia
•Sierra Leone
•Singapore
•Somalia
•Sudan
•Syria
•Taiwan
•Thailand
•Trinidad and Tobago
•Uganda
•United Arab Emirates
•United States
•Vietnam
•Yemen
•Zimbabwe

• Quote

[Gravitymaster 0]

And as usual, you take no position and prefer to simply sit back and take jabs at those who do.

Let's hear your 'logical" reasoning for a change.

[rehmwa 2]

what we need is suspended animation - then we can freeze them and store them like cord wood - no food, no board, just storage fees until an equivalent lifetime period is served - then they can be ground up for plant fertilizer

then if it turns out they truly were given a false verdict prior to that date, re-animate them and they can rejoin society at the same age as they were when frozen

...
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

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

And as usual, you take no position and prefer to simply sit back and take jabs at those who do.

Let's hear your 'logical" reasoning for a change.

not so much, just this thread isn't going any place new,

as usual

...
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

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

1. "death penalty is revenge"
2. "makes hannibals of us all"
3. "put them all in the same cell"

It's not even a page and the emotional arguments are starting to poke their noses out.

I'd say that only #3 is an emotional argument. #s 1 & 2 are better described as ethical arguments.

Quote

just this thread isn't going any place new,

There may not be much more depths to plumb, but it's been a pretty well-discussed thread on all sides.

[billvon 3,070]

>what we need is suspended animation - then we can freeze them and
>store them like cord wood - no food, no board, just storage fees until an
>equivalent lifetime period is served

Yeah, but then you freeze Sylvester Stallone and Wesley Snipes and all hell breaks loose. If science fiction teaches us anything, it's that the prisoner-sicles always get thawed out at the wrong time and wreak havoc.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

I believe in holding people responsible for their actions and the outcome of those actions.

I also believe it takes a village to raise a family.

Hence when people commit heinous crimes, family, friends and the community should get punished as well.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

I believe in holding people responsible for their actions and the outcome of those actions.

I also believe it takes a village to raise a family.

Hence when people commit heinous crimes, family, friends and the community should get punished as well.

Hm. To how many degrees of separation?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Quote

I believe in holding people responsible for their actions and the outcome of those actions.

I also believe it takes a village to raise a family.

Hence when people commit heinous crimes, family, friends and the community should get punished as well.

Hm. To how many degrees of separation?

All degrees alive at the time of the crime.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I believe in holding people responsible for their actions and the outcome of those actions.

I also believe it takes a village to raise a family.

Hence when people commit heinous crimes, family, friends and the community should get punished as well.

Hm. To how many degrees of separation?

All degrees alive at the time of the crime.

Canada's still alive. And they're the US's friend. So how should we punish Canada?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I believe in holding people responsible for their actions and the outcome of those actions.

I also believe it takes a village to raise a family.

Hence when people commit heinous crimes, family, friends and the community should get punished as well.

now this is a new form of judgmentalism we haven't seen - should be fun to stretch it out

So the adoptee has abandonment issues and goes on a killing spree at the age of 35 - .... so we find the birth mother and put her in jail too?

the adopted parents too for not alleviating that stress?

Edit: in all cases, freeze them all dammit. freeze them all. Especially Sandra Bullock

...
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

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Canada's still alive. And they're the US's friend. So how should we punish Canada?

The same way the US deals with all issues. Nuke it

[normiss 851]

Jail?

This is about killin'!

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

now this is a new form of judgmentalism we haven't seen - should be fun to stretch it out

So the adoptee has abandonment issues and goes on a killing spree at the age of 35 - .... so we find the birth mother and put her in jail too?

Nope, but as a society you have failed. The village has failed.

Here are some questions to consider:

How many people convicted of heinous crimes have serious psychological issues?

Does "The Village" and the family not have a responsibility to help those dealing with severe psychological diseases?

[davjohns 1]

Quote

I fear a government that kills it's own population.
Apparently not all of us do.

I never taught my kids to not hit by punching them, to not bite by biting them, teaching people to not kill by killing them won't work.
If it did, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

I do not want my government killing people in my name.
I don't think it's the right thing to do to kill people.

Life without parole does exist.
It's all we need.

OK. Apparently the practical problem is only going to be addressed with philosophical answers.

I think you are saying here that you would suggest these two be sentenced to life without parole and accept the risk that they might still get out. Is that a fair assessment of your response? I really don't want to twist anyone's words.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[davjohns 1]

Quote

Quote

>We'll put you down as one who supports the death penalty. Thanks for clarifying.

Actually I don't, for two reasons:

1) Economics. Life in prison is cheaper.

2) Accuracy. Our system is not accurate enough (IMO) to execute people, and to make it more accurate would make it even more expensive.

Agreed. I would also suggest that we end the allowance for repeated appeals that clog the court system.

Not trying to quibble...your answer perplexes me.

You are ok with placing prisoners in a situation with the intent that other prisoners kill them. That would at least jibe with your response (#1) that it is a question of economics. The obvious question is 'how much is it worth to do what is needed?'. Also, your second comment (#2) fails to address the question. In a case such as the one presented, is it justified? When doubt can hardly be an issue, what do we do? Also, if the system is so falible, how do you justify placing prisoners with other prisoners with the expectation they will kill each other? It's merely execution by proxy. I'm not sure I can reconcile your answer in a coherent philosophy. And I surely can't apply that philosophy to the instant case.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Does "The Village" and the family not have a responsibility to help those dealing with severe psychological diseases?

tough one - I'd say up to a point, but when the individual crosses a line, then the primary responsibility overwhelmingly turns to protecting those citizens that haven't done anything wrong.

The actions of that individual will always trump over the rationalizations he can present. At least in a society that's intended to lift up the individual rather than oppress them for the sake of the commune


Of each of your people convicted of heinous crimes with serious psych issues - how many people are out there that had very similar upbringings that chose NOT to commit the same heinous crimes?

I doubt the "village" concept is super valid (I don't like the idea of people butting into the upbringing of someone else's kids), but that's just an opinion. Actually, I just can't stand the idea of the "village" and what it would ultimately represent

...
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

[DanG 1]

Quote

Hm. To how many degrees of separation?

Let's just punish Kevin Bacon for everything. Problem solved.

- Dan G

[davjohns 1]

Quote

I don't quite understand how you could think someone confined to a high security prison in a remote area of Alaska could pose a danger to society. Please explain.

Um...I have to presume we will cycle guards to and from this facility. Supplies will probably have to be delivered. We are unlikely to forbid visitors. There are a host of logistical and legal issues that will make it unlikely that escape can not be had.

Then, there's my overarching concern about pardon, commutation of sentence, parole, etc. that happen routinely and negate the entire intent of the original sentence.

I know it may be a fairly isolated case, but Manson was given the death sentence and now comes up for parole regularly.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[davjohns 1]

Quote

Quote

I fear

as the thread goes on

"death penalty is revenge"
"makes hannibals of us all"
"put them all in the same cell"

It's not even a page and the emotional arguments are starting to poke their noses out.

Davjohns - it's really a matter of perspective. You can try to have the practical and cost vs potential future threat debate, but the problem is that once a person has decided it's a visceral discussion rather than logical, then it's turns from a debate to an argument which then becomes a battle to 'win' the argument. In other words, no one invested in the emotional argument can acknowledge that other people might just have a true practical position to discuss. You'll get a small show of attempts (a couple of them will be honest) the rest are for show before the same old thread just appears and takes control. If you push it too far, then the name calling will commence.

Easier to just skip right to it. You're a mean person that takes joy in torturing small puppies and pulling the wings off of bugs. you must like guns and think people with curly hair are a lower form of species.

This truly made me laugh.

And there is some real truth to it. I can't see that anyone has addressed my question with anything but abstract ideas and emotional responses. I have the same emotional responses. I do not hunt becauase I don't like the feeling after killing something. I've been there. Logically, however...situations like this one have only one reasonable result in the real world. My opinion. Nobody herein has given me a rational argument to the contrary.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[davjohns 1]

I think when assessing individuals, the company they keep is an indicator of the individual. In assessing legal realities, however, you've gone far afield. Even if I were to allow the analogy, it could only be an indicator and hardly a sound argument. Sorry.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[davjohns 1]

Quote

Quote

now this is a new form of judgmentalism we haven't seen - should be fun to stretch it out

So the adoptee has abandonment issues and goes on a killing spree at the age of 35 - .... so we find the birth mother and put her in jail too?

Nope, but as a society you have failed. The village has failed.

Here are some questions to consider:

How many people convicted of heinous crimes have serious psychological issues?

Does "The Village" and the family not have a responsibility to help those dealing with severe psychological diseases?

I touched on this earlier. I agree that when we are forced to destroy one of our number, we should practice some introspection to determine where society might have contributed and could do better. I don't think the degree of culpability warrants punishment so much as corrective action...depending on the degree of culpability of other parties...which could include other criminal acts.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.