Search this Topic:
Jun 18 10 7:08 AM
Tags : None
They executed some guy by firing squad yesterday, got me wondering about this so...
Jun 18 10 6:00 PM
Ancient and Venerable One
Jun 19 10 11:21 AM
Jun 19 10 6:31 PM
Jun 20 10 10:12 PM
Jun 21 10 4:53 AM
Marge, what if you saw a sign falling toward someone? Would you shout at them to move, or maybe even charge them, tackle them, and knock them out of the way?But isn't shouting at someone mean? Isn't tackling them and knocking them down . . . assault?But then, isn't extreme action justified sometimes? Isn't it reasonable?I think justice outweighs the unpleasantness of execution. Since I don't believe in any god or heaven or magical karma realm, then I think it falls on us to mete out justice ourselves as human beings, in this life. Anything less, and we're failing to do our duty, and we're basically helping to make this hell on earth.
Jun 21 10 8:24 PM
Jun 21 10 10:14 PM
Critic with the Red Pen of Doom
But, Supreme Being aside, I also know that innocent people have been
put to death under out justice system. If even one person is falsely
convicted and put to death, that is too many. What happens 5 or 10
years after an execution when new evidence or better forensics prove
someone else actually committed the crime for which that person was
executed? "Oops" doesn't work.
Jun 21 10 10:17 PM
Jun 22 10 4:33 AM
As Marge said, there's a million stats and scenario's to justify the death penalty in anyone's opinion. However, the "oops" scenario is more and more becoming a thing of the past because of said advancement of DNA forensics as well as the advancement of of everyday technology, big brother's eyes continue to get wider and wider. On that note, I also would have no qualms about usage of satellite surveillance as evidence in any case where is may be of use ( anyone want to bet the boys at NASA looked up the longitude and latitude of Nicole Simpson's house the night she got offed?). Theological beliefs aside, I'd rather see the punishment administered during this life, it is the only way to be sure any criminal doesn't repeat his offenses, be it in the real world or jail, and yes, it would be justice for the victim's family.
Jun 22 10 5:10 AM
Jun 22 10 2:08 PM
Arguing that the death penalty is an effective deterrent is just silly, and you don't even need cherry-picked statistics that 1. ignore dozens of other confounding variables that affect murder rates and 2. attempt to measure something that is inherently unmeasurable to prove it. Deterrents need two things in the response to be effective: severity and immediacy. If a child misbehaves and knows that his punishment is to go to the corner and sit for 5 seconds, then that is a weak deterrent and he'll continue to misbehave. If he misbehaves and knows the punishment is that he will miss senior prom 12 years from now, then that is also a weak deterrent and he'll continue to misbehave. But if a fence says "Do Not Touch" and immediately after he touches it he is zapped with 10,000 volts, then odds are he won't ever touch it again. The death penality is severe, but no where near immediate.A barely compotent lawyer can easily drag the appeals process out for 10-15 years. A decent lawyer can drag it out longer than that. Those who commit murder aren't concerned with the death penalty because he 1. needs to be caught; 2. needs to be convicted; 3. needs to have the prosecutor appeal for the death penalty; 4. needs to have a judge or jury award him the death penalty; 5. needs to wait for every, single one of his appeals to be denied; and 6. needs to have not died already of natural causes before his execution date arrives. That's a lot of things that have to go against you in order for you to be executed. Hell, there was a murderer in California recently who refused to plead guilty unless the prosecution put him on death row. He knew that he'll be on there for the next 20 years easily and death row inmates have slightly better living arrangements than those in the general population -- for instance, their cells are slightly larger and they don't have to share them with another inmate, and they're allowed to bring a few personal items in with them (books and such). But deterrents =/= punishments. They are supposed to prevent a behavior from occurring, not deal with a behavior after it's been committed. One the state can control (how to punish), the other the individual can control ("hmm, I'll risk it" OR "hmm, not worth it").And prisoners are given these supervised activities (weight rooms, TVs, work detail, etc.) because when left to their own devices they will scheme of ways to get out or get even with another inmate. It's better to keep their minds on other things for as long as possible.
Jun 23 10 2:48 PM
Of course, I would shout at them and/or tackle them to get them out of the way of danger, Beast. That is helping them. Killing someone is not helping them.
Unfortunately, I do believe in God, and I think life is the most precious gift He has given us.
If someone murders another person, or commits some other heinous crime, put him in prison.
Do not lower yourself to his level by murdering him.
I believe he will get his true punishment in the afterlife.
I understand that this thinking does not work for anyone who does not believe in a Supreme Being, so I have long ago decided I need to agree to disagree with people who support the death penalty.
But, Supreme Being aside, I also know that innocent people have been put to death under out justice system. If even one person is falsely convicted and put to death, that is too many. What happens 5 or 10 years after an execution when new evidence or better forensics prove someone else actually committed the crime for which that person was executed? "Oops" doesn't work.
Jun 24 10 3:38 AM
May 3 11 12:49 PM
© 2013 Yuku. All rights reserved.