RE: another wrongful execution

RE: another wrongful execution (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

FullCircle -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/19/2012 1:18:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stellauk Furthermore it's all arbitrary. I mean, who gets to decide which crimes are heinous and which aren't? Public decency? Public opinion? I don't mind having a go. Murder => Yes Jaywalking => No Jaywalking with intent => Yes When I hear of the crimes being committed thesedays and the unrepentant nature of some individual criminals (who have admitted to what they have done) I tend to think: "There is no point in you being alive, there will never be any good to come out of you being alive. Why are you alive when others not guilty have died." Then I think it's not for me to decide that so instead let us just deport them since there are plenty of people that would kill to live in a democracy. Also to some death would be easier than life. There is the chance that one day they'll see what they did differently but no chance if they are dead.

vincentML -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/19/2012 1:19:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic If true, then what an awful tragedy, and miscarriage of justice. Even if it is accurate though, it won't change my thoughts on the death penalty - some crimes demand it. "some crimes demand it" shields the State and the people from responsibility for the act of systematically and judiciously killing another human. It becomes a no brainer. In some cultures daughters are killed if they bring 'shame' on their families. Their crimes demand it. In other cultures a rape victim may be flogged. Her crime demands it. "some crimes demand it" seems a cop out, Rich. vincent

Moonhead -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/19/2012 1:33:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FullCircle quote: ORIGINAL: stellauk Furthermore it's all arbitrary. I mean, who gets to decide which crimes are heinous and which aren't? Public decency? Public opinion? I don't mind having a go. Murder => Yes Jaywalking => No Jaywalking with intent => Yes When I hear of the crimes being committed thesedays and the unrepentant nature of some individual criminals (who have admitted to what they have done) I tend to think: "There is no point in you being alive, there will never be any good to come out of you being alive. Why are you alive when others not guilty have died." Then I think it's not for me to decide that so instead let us just deport them since there are plenty of people that would kill to live in a democracy. Also to some death would be easier than life. There is the chance that one day they'll see what they did differently but no chance if they are dead. quote: ORIGINAL: Gandalf Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.

thompsonx -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/19/2012 2:17:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: Even one wrongful execution is reason enough for the death penalty to be outlawed. No it's not. Life is full of risks. By that moronic logic you should not have brakes on your car.

thompsonx -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/19/2012 2:20:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksolder2 ditto, Would that make you a ditto head or a sock puppet?

TheHeretic -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/19/2012 7:25:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML "some crimes demand it" seems a cop out, Rich. And what seems a cop out to me Vincent, is letting people like the Norway killer, or Timothy McVeigh, or Nidal Hassan, or pick your fucking serial killing sexual predator, keep drawing breath, and calling it the right thing to do.

tweakabelle -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 4:18:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML "some crimes demand it" seems a cop out, Rich. And what seems a cop out to me Vincent, is letting people like the Norway killer, or Timothy McVeigh, or Nidal Hassan, or pick your fucking serial killing sexual predator, keep drawing breath, and calling it the right thing to do. It seems to me that the cop out is in the pretense that this perspective is determined by the heinous nature of the crime and not the individual's desire for revenge over riding their better judgement. quote: TheHeretic If true, then what an awful tragedy, and miscarriage of justice. Even if it is accurate though, it won't change my thoughts on the death penalty - some crimes demand it. To me, this quote indicates that, for the speaker, the punishment has become more important than the crime or even justice itself. In the process, a fundamental principle of the justice system - it's preferable for ten guilty people to walk free than one innocent person be convicted - is lost. The moral framework that permits advocating retention of the death penalty despite the certain knowledge that innocent people will be killed is completely alien to me. Such deaths are not something I wish to have on my conscience or be accountable for.

vincentML -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 6:12:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML "some crimes demand it" seems a cop out, Rich. And what seems a cop out to me Vincent, is letting people like the Norway killer, or Timothy McVeigh, or Nidal Hassan, or pick your fucking serial killing sexual predator, keep drawing breath, and calling it the right thing to do. It is a moral imperative for Believers and Non-Believers alike: the taking of a human life is inexcusable. The taking of human life by the State is even more intolerable despite the repugnance of "heinous crimes" and the 'comfort' of due process, because it is done ceremoniously and anonymously. When you examine it closely it seems a cowardly act in the name of the collective. In the cases you mention retribution is shallow. It is not an 'eye for an eye.' It is one eye for one hundred eyes. You can't kill a serial killer serially. For the State to have the authority to kill a citizen is not only immoral but goes beyond the social compact we make for self protection. Once the 'outlaw' is incarcerated the duty of the State to protect its citizens is completed. Just some fundamental if unconnected thoughts. vincent

PeonForHer -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 6:22:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It seems to me that the cop out is in the pretense that this perspective is determined by the heinous nature of the crime and not the individual's desire for revenge over riding their better judgement. I guess, for me, the biggest cop out is in never coolly and rationally working out what is best for the community as a whole. Execution will 'deter others from doing similar crimes' and that is that. It's 'obvious', it's 'common sense'.

searching4mysir -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 6:46:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML "some crimes demand it" seems a cop out, Rich. And what seems a cop out to me Vincent, is letting people like the Norway killer, or Timothy McVeigh, or Nidal Hassan, or pick your fucking serial killing sexual predator, keep drawing breath, and calling it the right thing to do. It is a moral imperative for Believers and Non-Believers alike: the taking of a human life is inexcusable. The taking of human life by the State is even more intolerable despite the repugnance of "heinous crimes" and the 'comfort' of due process, because it is done ceremoniously and anonymously. When you examine it closely it seems a cowardly act in the name of the collective. In the cases you mention retribution is shallow. It is not an 'eye for an eye.' It is one eye for one hundred eyes. You can't kill a serial killer serially. For the State to have the authority to kill a citizen is not only immoral but goes beyond the social compact we make for self protection. Once the 'outlaw' is incarcerated the duty of the State to protect its citizens is completed. Just some fundamental if unconnected thoughts. vincent Not necessarily. Once in prison (other prisoners), one can still be a citizen. If one works in a prison, one can be a citizen. And just because someone is incarcerated doesn't mean they can't conspire to have someone else do their dirty work on the "outside". I'm not saying that the death penalty is a good thing (it never is), however for those people for whom incarceration is NOT enough to prevent harm to society, then the death penalty is actually a very pro-life thing as it is a matter of defense of the citizenry. As it is currently practiced in the US, it is more often than not unjust. If someone hasn't harmed society in 10 years of incarceration (by the time they get through the appeals of the death penalty cases and actually execute someone it is usually about a decade after their original sentence), the likelihood of it happening during the rest of his life is very small so incarceration IS enough to protect society.

DomKen -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 6:48:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It seems to me that the cop out is in the pretense that this perspective is determined by the heinous nature of the crime and not the individual's desire for revenge over riding their better judgement. I guess, for me, the biggest cop out is in never coolly and rationally working out what is best for the community as a whole. Execution will 'deter others from doing similar crimes' and that is that. It's 'obvious', it's 'common sense'. It isn't true. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-about-deterrence-and-death-penalty

defiantbadgirl -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 7:55:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stellauk In the case of a homicide what does it matter anyway? Someone is still dead and the relatives and loved ones are going to be grieving that loss to the end of their life. There is always serious impact. Sticking someone on Death Row isn't solving anything, but only compounding the problem because now instead of one grieving family you now have two and none of these people have committed any crimes. That's a very good point. When someone is executed, innocent people always suffer. Even when convicts are guilty, the families of those convicts are innocent. The convict is already behind bars and no danger to society. What's the point of making more innocent people grieve?

PeonForHer -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 9:59:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen It isn't true. I know. [;)]

vincentML -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 10:43:47 AM)
quote: Not necessarily. Once in prison (other prisoners), one can still be a citizen. If one works in a prison, one can be a citizen. And just because someone is incarcerated doesn't mean they can't conspire to have someone else do their dirty work on the "outside". There are different degrees of incarceration. I don't see how one continues to be a citizen while in maximum security 23 hours with one hour to exercise and shower in solitude. Haven't heard much from the unibomber lately, have we? My comments were particularly in response to Rich's waving the bloody flag of "heinous" crimes by serial killers, who infamously have been loners, so I don't see where conspiring with others on the outside is an issue. The argument that only the death penalty provides future security for society is not justified by the heinous nature of the crimes. The issue is retribution, plain and simple. But, it is done by proxy for society by the authorities, hidden away. If we really wish to violate the moral imperative and execute killers for their crimes and exact justified retribution I suggest a more proper system would be to let the victims families stone the one who killed their loved ones. Then we would witness the taking of a life for a life directly. The current method is too sanitized. The very fact that it is sanitized and carried out in secret speaks volumes about the shame we feel. If retribution is what we want, let's do it right out in the open and let the surviving victims get 'closure.' [8\|]

Aswad -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 4:00:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub DNA, for one. An acquaintance was part of a study that got shelved because it showed a huge discrepancy between operators at the forensic lab when it came to the accuracy of DNA tests (around here, the gov't can essentially shut down studies they don't like the outcome of, and DNA is a bit of a hot potato since we have a national registry of the DNA profiles of citizens that have at some point or another been a person of interest in any police matter, or living in the general area of a crime that didn't get solved). Conclusion was that DNA is about as accurate as fingerprints on a judicial scale. Not that this is conclusive without extensively reproducing the findings, but it does sow reasonable doubt about DNA as evidence in my view. IWYW, - Aswad.

Aswad -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 7:15:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic And what seems a cop out to me Vincent, is letting people like the Norway killer, or Timothy McVeigh, or Nidal Hassan, or pick your fucking serial killing sexual predator, keep drawing breath, and calling it the right thing to do. A voice from Norway here... A majority of the bereaved after Anders Behring Breivik's massacre that you reference above, do not want him to be executed. Some do, but recognize the fact that we don't have capital punishment here anymore. Except for one parent from Iraq, there's been a strong attitude that he should be treated according to the existing legal system, like any other criminal. He will probably be studied in a psychiatric maximum security facility for the rest of his life, although he may also be jailed. Due to the risk to society from letting him out after the maximum sentence, he will be put into lifelong permanent custody if he is jailed. A main concern of many people here, is learning what caused this to happen, and to address those causative factors. This has been a very effective strategy for the most part, accounting for the order of magnitude lower crime rate here. ABB himself, however, does support the death penalty, and has argued it should be applied to him. Because he does think "some crimes demand it". Among those crimes, the one you would support is killing children, which he did. Some you probably wouldn't support, for which he "executed" those children, include: being a socialist, perpetuating socialism, facilitating immigration, and so on. Like states and individuals that call for the death penalty, he was outraged at those things that offended him (just as you are outraged at things that offend you) and worried about what he saw as a real and credible and immediate risk to society. And so he went for his idea of vigilante justice together with the whole political terrorism thing. Personally, I don't mind honoring his request. I'm willing to choke him to death while looking him in the eyes. Because he's clearly not psychotic, and has had ample time to rethink his request. So, if I can walk, I'm more than happy to do that, seeing as he has consented to it and even requested it. But I will not permit the State of Norway to kill its own citizens. That's not an authority I will confer on my state under any circumstance. Anyway, if someone actually needs killing, then someone will indeed do it, even if that means being charged with murder. As far as I'm concerned, he doesn't *need* killing. So I'm not going to make an attempt at doing so. Whether he deserves it or not, is for someone else to decide, as I don't care. IWYW, - Aswad.

TheHeretic -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 8:20:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML It is a moral imperative for Believers and Non-Believers alike: the taking of a human life is inexcusable. The taking of human life by the State is even more intolerable despite the repugnance of "heinous crimes" and the 'comfort' of due process, because it is done ceremoniously and anonymously. When you examine it closely it seems a cowardly act in the name of the collective. In the cases you mention retribution is shallow. It is not an 'eye for an eye.' It is one eye for one hundred eyes. You can't kill a serial killer serially. For the State to have the authority to kill a citizen is not only immoral but goes beyond the social compact we make for self protection. Once the 'outlaw' is incarcerated the duty of the State to protect its citizens is completed. Just some fundamental if unconnected thoughts. The taking of human life is a serious thing, Vincent, but it is not inexcuseable, by any stretch, and there are situations where it is the reasonable, and clearly correct, thing to do. You say, "retribution." Tweak says, "revenge." She offers only her own selfish emotions for her argument, and finds, "completely alien," a mind that sees more considerations in play than she has feelings about. You wish to invoke the power of the social compact, and mischaracterize it as a duty to protect citizens, rather than to maintain the social fabric, but only after you mock it, by dismissing the transformative power of the ritual. Yes, the death penalty is subject to abuse, whether in the hands of tyrants, or merely the petty and foolish. So we must guard against it. We must guard against tragedies such as the one claimed in this thread. Anyone being wrongly convicted is a problem, not just the random ones that go to death row. The whole idea of justice, is that it measured out to the right person. You believe it is wrong for society to impose the ultimate sanction. Fine. We disagree. I do not believe that tucking killers and violent predators away, out of sight - out of mind, is adequate. I believe they are not fit to use the air, and should be deprived of that right. The argument of this threads seems to me to be that we must make the perfect the enemy of the just. I don't buy it.

Aswad -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 10:07:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic The taking of human life is a serious thing, Vincent, but it is not inexcuseable, by any stretch, and there are situations where it is the reasonable, and clearly correct, thing to do. For an individual, certainly. For a nation state to take the life of its constituent citizens, however, is a role reversal and a breach of loyalty and solidarity. And regardless of how well one safeguards the process of investigation and judicial proceedings, all nation states with that power and that role will inevitably kill an innocent citizen. One of those people that are its sole reason for existing. (For which the nation state should, by its own line of reasoning, pay the ultimate price as a matter of justice.) quote: I believe they are not fit to use the air, and should be deprived of that right. I believe a great number of humans are not fit to use the air, few of them criminal, but that it's not my place to deprive them of that right as a general rule, and not the place of their supposed protectors (judicial systems) to do so, either. I also believe that if one is justified in killing, then the law cannot be a concern. For it to be illegal to kill someone for their actions shouldn't change how often it happens. Or else the reasons for killing them just aren't good enough. Few people ever intentionally murder without believing the killing to be justified. The criterion that law not make a difference is a good metric for seperating the wheat from the chaff as far as "necessary and justified" goes. Self defense meets this criterion. Capital punishment does not. Murder sometimes does. And the law can gainfully prosecute murder, of course. But you're also neglecting the fact that suffering isn't confined to the one that is being executed. The vast majority of murderers do indeed have loved ones, and is usually loved by others. Their suffering is not inflicted by the one being executed, except if the one being executed chooses death over prison, but rather it is inflicted by those that carry out the execution, on other innocent citizens. Which is part of why, in my view, it is not adequate to reject the right to draw a breath. Why it must be an act that is both justified and necessary, for which it is an acceptable sacrifice to be charged with murder oneself in order to carry out the act. Rendering it redundant to have the state do it. Otherwise, we just end up with a quesiton of majority opinion deciding what people get killed for. Which, in some majorities, may well include being gay, getting raped or having an abortion. How long before the "religious right" makes abortion a capital crime in the USA? IWYW, - Aswad.

tweakabelle -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 10:32:50 PM)
This is what I posted: quote: To me, this quote indicates that, for the speaker, the punishment has become more important than the crime or even justice itself. In the process, a fundamental principle of the justice system - it's preferable for ten guilty people to walk free than one innocent person be convicted - is lost. The moral framework that permits advocating retention of the death penalty despite the certain knowledge that innocent people will be killed is completely alien to me. Such deaths are not something I wish to have on my conscience or be accountable for. This is TheHeretic's understanding of my words: quote: Tweak says, "revenge." She offers only her own selfish emotions for her argument, and finds, "completely alien," a mind that sees more considerations in play than she has feelings about. How he gets "selfish emotions" out of "moral framework" we might leave to him to explain. I suppose I ought to be grateful that he has confirmed my initial point - that advocates of the death penalty are unable to distinguish between emotional responses and a considered moral and legal framework in which to respond to nasty crimes. The crime says something about the criminal. How society responds to it says something about society. The moral and legal framework that governs that response must not include the certainty that at some point, an innocent person will be put to death by the State. Such a response would negate the possibility of a morally justifiable response.

TheHeretic -> RE: another wrongful execution (5/20/2012 10:41:06 PM)
Thanks for your thoughts and questions, Aswad. Let me pick this up when I have the time your posts deserve. Have a great... well, day, I suppose, on your end.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625