quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Bless your heart.

Good luck trolling elsewhere poppet

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Yeah. Let's go back to basics and follow the example of North Korea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Since you asked so nicely, I would be on the "con" side. My comment was in response to the various "extra special" and "let the punishment fit the crime" comments made on this thread and elsewhere. The allusion to N Korea is in connection with that nation's barking mad leader reportedly putting together increasingly bizarre methods of execution.

I don't question for a second that this mother fucker deserves to be executed. This isn't a particular moral dilemma for me. I know this next bit will really confuse some people, although I am pretty sure you're smart enough to square it; that statement of opinion doesn't, however, trump my sincerely held belief that no government should be allowed to take someone's life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


That raises some interesting points. For instance, while I don't advertise it because I don't want to be punished for it, I no longer consider the State in which I live to hold sovereignty over me. They left me behind a long time ago. So I don't not consider any law it inflicts to be of any more important to me than my own personal desire to stay outside of its scrutiny.

quote:



Having said that, if the government doesn't have the right to take someone's life, then won't eventually mob rule happen. For instance, in this case, the police could have just not stopped the shootout with him until he was no longer alive.

quote:



It is certainly, to me, better for the government to have a light hand. Which always makes me wonder why some people want more powerful government. So, how do you define the social construct where the government acts for justice, instead of the mod, but stops short of some potential of the mob?

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

Well, you're touching on the heart of the difference between social democracy (of which things like socialism and communism are a way to the left-wing subset) and libertarianism.

I think it is the job of government to stop short of the potential of the mob, that is one of the fundamental components of the contract between governments and citizens. The US constitution is crammed with amendments that actively seek to prevent the government behaving like a mob.

Social democracy adds the idea of social contract, which is based on the belief that by coming together and pooling our resources we may be able to get a better deal. It is important to make it clear that "social democracy" and "social contract" are not equal to "Socialism", however. You'll find Europeans (who - by and large opt for Social Democracy and strongly reject Socialism) are very squirrelly about their rights and freedoms, and at times you'll find them absolutely agog at the extent to which the rights and freedoms of their American friends have been eroded. That said, I can't deny that Europe is on a similar slippery slope as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

I can't disagree with your first point.

Your second is obviously much more gnarly! Alas, I have a hot date that I'm in danger of being late for!

But... I think I agree that the bill of rights should not be blended in with a social contract. Or at least that governments, acting for the people, should try very hard not to allow too much blending. There is too much blending in Europe, for sure.

But... I think I can disagree with you while being respectful of your position.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: LipstickLeuger

Not entirely sure how I feel about this. I feel it should be what the families of the victims ask for, in this case they don't want the death penalty, so it's only fair to allow them this closure. My wife is not for the death penalty ever, but I think that under certain circumstances, it is appropriate. Crimes against children, especially when caught in the act with evidence, should be death penalty for sure.

It is not my intention to keep bumping heads with you. You just bring up points worth commenting on.

In Saudi Arabia the family does get to mitigate the death penalty. Which it has degenerated into is a bidding contest for the family of the accused about how much they'll pay the family of the aggrieved.

Second, I was once told by an Iranian friend, so this is Mideast logic, "hey, you go to Macy's and buy a crock pot. You get it home and it doesn't work, you take it back to Macy's and let them deal with it. These people...send them back to God and let him deal with it."

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

Crimes against children, especially when caught in the act with evidence, should be death penalty for sure.

Then why are you undecided... he blew the limbs off a child and killed him....Placed the bomb purposely right behind the little boy...he admitted he did it...what is to decide...is this not matching your criteria?


Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: LipstickLeuger

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: LipstickLeuger

Not entirely sure how I feel about this. I feel it should be what the families of the victims ask for, in this case they don't want the death penalty, so it's only fair to allow them this closure. My wife is not for the death penalty ever, but I think that under certain circumstances, it is appropriate. Crimes against children, especially when caught in the act with evidence, should be death penalty for sure.

It is not my intention to keep bumping heads with you. You just bring up points worth commenting on.

In Saudi Arabia the family does get to mitigate the death penalty. Which it has degenerated into is a bidding contest for the family of the accused about how much they'll pay the family of the aggrieved.

Second, I was once told by an Iranian friend, so this is Mideast logic, "hey, you go to Macy's and buy a crock pot. You get it home and it doesn't work, you take it back to Macy's and let them deal with it. These people...send them back to God and let him deal with it."

I love to debate/discuss, it's when people get all nasty that I hate it. (Usually it's because they can't defend their position decently)I have no problem if people ask me about my points. I try to present my counter argument respectfully, and I would hope others would do the same. Sometimes I don't come off as well as I meant to, but I like to talk deeper on subjects and this has gotten me into frequent trouble in situations at large.

I am confused about the Saudi Arabia comment. Were you comparing or contrasting how this trial is like what happens there? I realize that they would just put someone to death there, but then again, I don't agree with many things about that country so that's no surprise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LipstickLeuger




I'm not sure we're discussing the same thing. As I recall, and I havent gone back to check. You said you wouldn't mind if the family of the slain person had the right to mitigate the death sentence. While I didn't disagree with you, I pointed out that in the only country where I know that is part of the legal system, it has degenerated into a bidding contest between the family ofbthe condemned person and the family of the person killed. I don't see it working practically here because of my observations there.

quote:


Now I get what you were saying. I was not sure at first. LOL

Yes, I really believe that the families involved should have the right to have a say, but I had no idea that Saudi Arabia was the only country to allow them to do so. We do have(at least where I live) a law that allows the victim of a crime to have a final say to the judge, directly before sentencing and they can ask for leniency or not. However, the judge does not have to follow that particular request and they don't often. I personally like that law because it helps the actual direct victim(s) of the crime to get closure and justice however they feel it needs to be served.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

That may be true...but what of the others...do they not get a say?... Do we...or the citizens of Boston not have a say when murders occur in their or our neighborhoods?

I understand the basic issue...many ask the valid question... Are we any better than the murderer him or herself in taking their life? Will of course there are only two ways to answer this question... I admittedly fall on the... they forfeit their chance at life by their actions. But I do understand the other answer and if the majority of Americans decide capital punishment is morally and Constitutionally wrong I will abide and understand their position. But until then I would gladly pull the lever or plunge the needle to end his and his like life.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: LipstickLeuger




I'm not sure we're discussing the same thing. As I recall, and I havent gone back to check. You said you wouldn't mind if the family of the slain person had the right to mitigate the death sentence. While I didn't disagree with you, I pointed out that in the only country where I know that is part of the legal system, it has degenerated into a bidding contest between the family ofbthe condemned person and the family of the person killed. I don't see it working practically here because of my observations there.

quote:


Now I get what you were saying. I was not sure at first. LOL

Yes, I really believe that the families involved should have the right to have a say, but I had no idea that Saudi Arabia was the only country to allow them to do so. We do have(at least where I live) a law that allows the victim of a crime to have a final say to the judge, directly before sentencing and they can ask for leniency or not. However, the judge does not have to follow that particular request and they don't often. I personally like that law because it helps the actual direct victim(s) of the crime to get closure and justice however they feel it needs to be served.

Before someone steps in and trounces both you and I, I did say it was the only country I new of that allowed that say. I don't think that materially changes your response. I'm just trying to cover two posteriors here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LuneRune

I haven't read through the entire thread so I don't know if this has been said yet or not, but death for this POS buys him an all expense paid ticket to martyrdom and paradise...according to his beliefs. Is that punishment? A lifetime in prison where he fades into obscurity and old age - that's punishment.