Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-20-2014, 09:33 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,695,189 times
Reputation: 10789

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Lennox 70 View Post
I think the recent controversy over the new execution drug protocol in Ohio's lethal injection is just another example of liberalism backfiring, kinda like "smart growth" forcing development even further out into other counties or states that don't have those laws. Ohio wouldn't have had to "experiment" with this new drug combo if the liberal European countries didn't ban their companies from selling death penalty products to the United States.

Now with all the concerns about suffering of the condemned (never mind that the executed killer didn't show any mercy to the pregnant woman he raped and murdered) and the cost of the death penalty, including the cost of the lethal injection drugs or operating the death chamber (don't know WHY these things cost so much) maybe we should just execute people the old fashioned way, with a simple bullet in the head.

That will be simple, cheap, and instant. Many states have a backlog of executions because of the shortage of execution drugs. I wonder why we can't produce those chemicals ourselves here in the US I yet its liberal pressure too. North Carolina has the death penalty but the medical board there refuses to allow physicians to participate in executions and state law says without a doctor they can't have a lethal injection. (I'll bet my bottom dollar this same medical board is not against banning doctors from performing partial birth abortions).

So to save money and to assuage the fears of the criminal suffering, I think its best we just use the firing squad, and the best option would be the condemned tied to a chair, the executioner presses the pistol in the back of his head and pulls the trigger. Nothing cruel or unusual about that.
You and the extremists in the Middle East where they cut heads off!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-20-2014, 09:45 AM
 
Location: Nice, France
1,349 posts, read 659,430 times
Reputation: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
But, is it established the lack of a death penalty is the cause of those low crime rates?
That is not the way to ask the question. The question is if death penalty doesn't change anything to crime rates, why have it, except for revenge ?

And I'll search for your question, as it's an interesting one. Of course, I know what I would like the answer to be but contrary to many here, I'll try and be intellectually honest and search for answers instead of assuming them.

On my gut feeling, I suspect it's that a less violent society generates less violent people. But it's just a gut feeling, let me search.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post

No, they put themselves at heir level. IF our so-called society really valued lives so much, particularly innocent lives, we wouldn't have such a rich history of sending our young off to die in meaningless wars, would we?
Another interesting debate. But does your question mean that because governments have such a huge history of sending people to death, it is acceptable 1) to do so and 2) to extend it to all of society in everyday life ?

Why not try and change the ways human life is valued instead of accepting what is immoral, not to mention inequitable ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post

As I repeat: Laws don't act as a deterrent either, should we not have them?
But laws do act as deterrent for most crimes. Just not all violent ones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
And realistically, how can the deterrent value of either be proven? How do you know why someone didn't do something?
When have I NOT driven over the 90 km/h limit on national roads, you mean? Well, everyday I don't want to pay a fine, and I don't, everyday. What would keep me from not doing this, without laws ? After all, 5 km/h over the limit ain't going to kill anyone, are they? What about 10, 20 or 100 km/h more ? I respect the law more to prevent myself from a fine than because I understand its calculation.

Just an example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post

When/where have I ever advocated the death penalty except when guilt is unquestionable?
And I asked you when was guilt unquestionable and even showed you examples of people who were proved innocent without DNA testings, others whose DNA wasn't found on the premices of the crimes, others whose DNA was purely circumstancial, yet were innocent and others who were denied that DNA test.

How do you think unquestionnable guilt should be proved and how many innocent people do you agree to sacrifice for what amounts to inefficient death penalty in terms of deterring violent crimes ?

Or, simpler said, as unquestionnable guilt can probably be proved, how do you establish that guilt to save some innocent people from your laws ? Confession+DNA? some cases are there to prove it's not enough. Other ideas ?

And what good does it pursue ?

When in doubt, abstain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Nice, France
1,349 posts, read 659,430 times
Reputation: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by my54ford View Post
As I said in an earlier post, good for the self-accepted and self-supposed land of the free, to be among such great companions as China, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan in the top executioners of the world.

Great for you I guess
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 10:00 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,282 posts, read 54,079,395 times
Reputation: 40572
Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
That is not the way to ask the question. The question is if death penalty doesn't change anything to crime rates, why have it, except for revenge ?
I don't believe deterrent value can be proven either way, it's a near impossibility to prove why everyone in a society didn't do something. As I've said, I don't see it as revenge but as a consequence. Maybe I'm just an Old Testament kinda guy in some ways.


Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
Another interesting debate. But does your question mean that because governments have such a huge history of sending people to death, it is acceptable 1) to do so and 2) to extend it to all of society in everyday life ?
No, I don't believe sending our young off to die in meaningless wars of choice is acceptable at all. I believe the fact there was more public outcry over a nipple at the SuperBowl than over an unnecessary war speaks volumes about our society.

Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
Why not try and change the ways human life is valued instead of accepting what is immoral, not to mention inequitable ?
I believe it's inequitable that someone who willfully takes another's life gets to keep their own.


Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
When have I NOT driven over the 90 km/h limit on national roads, you mean? Well, everyday I don't want to pay a fine, and I don't, everyday. What would keep me from not doing this, without laws ? After all, 5 km/h over the limit ain't going to kill anyone, are they? What about 10, 20 or 100 km/h more ? I respect the law more to prevent myself from a fine than because I understand its calculation.
By the same token, I've never killed anyone and that has nothing to do with the existence of any laws/penalties.


Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
And I asked you when was guilt unquestionable and even showed you examples of people who were proved innocent without DNA testings, others whose DNA wasn't found on the premices of the crimes, others whose DNA was purely circumstancial, yet were innocent and others who were denied that DNA test.

How do you think unquestionnable guilt should be proved and how many innocent people do you agree to sacrifice for what amounts to inefficient death penalty in terms of deterring violent crimes ?

Or, simpler said, as unquestionnable guilt can probably be proved, how do you establish that guilt to save some innocent people from your laws ? Confession+DNA? some cases are there to prove it's not enough. Other ideas ?

And what good does it pursue ?

When in doubt, abstain.
And when NOT in doubt?

What of a killer caught at the scene by eyewitnesses?

Last edited by burdell; 01-20-2014 at 10:39 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Østenfor sol og vestenfor måne
17,916 posts, read 24,211,837 times
Reputation: 39027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"as humanely and painlessly as possible.' You have to be kidding me.

Have you ever read of some of the things that have been done to innocent people? raped over and over, ortured, burnt, the extreme cruelty on children,etc.

When the criminal cares about "quickly and as human as possible', then we can talk.

like they say,'if you can't take it, don't dish it out".
So, who exactly benefits from torturing a prisoner?

What kind of employee would wake up happy about his job going to torture prisoners?

What kind of society looks at a prison as they pass by on their morning commute and says "Ah, they are torturing prisoners in there." with a satisfied smile on their faces.

You would literally have to sanction psychopathic violence to develop a system of prisoner torture.

A society that rapes and murders rapists and murderers does not hold much of a moral high ground.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 10:21 AM
 
Location: Nice, France
1,349 posts, read 659,430 times
Reputation: 887
First, let me thank you because it is interesting talking to you, even and mostly because we don't agree, but neither of us gets into insulting words as happens too often here. For that, chapeau and after all, the great winner out of a discussion is not the one who came out of it as he/she were already, but the one who learned something, no? So thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
I don't believe deterrent value can be proven either way, it's a near impossibility to prove why everyone in a society didn't do something. As I've said, I don't see it as revenge but as a consequence. Maybe I'm just an Old Testament kinda guy in some ways.
Why didn't you answer my post about stealing then ? Or the one about a less violent society generating less violent individuals ? That could also be a consequence.

Isn't that something to think about ?

Old testament in the sense of an eye for an eye ? Don't you see how sterile and devastating that could be ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post



No, I don't believe sending our young off to die in meaningless wars of choice is acceptable at all. I believe the fact there was more public outcry over a nipple at the SuperBowl than over an unnecessary war speaks volumes about our society.
I couldn't but agree with you. So why not fight that hypocrisy of war killing young people is more acceptable than human nudity ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post


I believe it's inequitable that someone who willfully takes another's life gets to keep their own.
Why not make them pay by just being alive then ?



Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post

By the same token, I've never killed anyone and that has nothing to do with the existence of any laws/penalties.
You absolutely know it's not by the same token, come on !



Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post


And when NOT in doubt?

What of a killer caught at the scene by eyewitnesses?
Again, it's not a question of not in doubt anymore in this conversation (as we've gone into rhetorical debate here) but how do you have rules that PREVENT any innocent person from being wrongfully convicted ?

As for eyewitnesses :

False Eyewitness | DiscoverMagazine.com

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/88/3/776/

The Innocence Project - Understand the Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification


Just three of the hundreds found on a simple search.

Just make your opinion on facts, not feelings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 10:31 AM
 
16,294 posts, read 28,440,250 times
Reputation: 8382
You know I really don't care that he suffered, because he caused untold suffering and fear as he was raping then killing his victim. Let's just call it karma
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 10:37 AM
 
Location: Nice, France
1,349 posts, read 659,430 times
Reputation: 887
Death penalty relies on people's sympathies or antipathies (race, religion, political, simple demeanour, not to include simply how much money you have). That's unfair.

The death penalty violates the right to life which happens to be the most basic of all human rights.

It is a waste of public money.

It doesn't deter violent crimes.

Many innocents are caught and executed in the process.

It makes you lower morally than the criminal, because you actually pretend to represent morality and fail.



"An execution is not simply death. It is just as different from the privation of life as a concentration camp is from prison. For there to be an equivalency, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is never encountered in private life"

Albert Camus
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 10:58 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,282 posts, read 54,079,395 times
Reputation: 40572
Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
First, let me thank you because it is interesting talking to you, even and mostly because we don't agree, but neither of us gets into insulting words as happens too often here. For that, chapeau and after all, the great winner out of a discussion is not the one who came out of it as he/she were already, but the one who learned something, no? So thanks!
Thank You! If we didn't have differing opinions it would be a very boring world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
Why didn't you answer my post about stealing then ? Or the one about a less violent society generating less violent individuals ? That could also be a consequence.

Isn't that something to think about ?

Old testament in the sense of an eye for an eye ? Don't you see how sterile and devastating that could be ?
Sorry, I didn't not answer on purpose, I'm going out in a bit but will try and find it later. And as for an eye for an eye, I just don't have an issue with it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
I couldn't but agree with you. So why not fight that hypocrisy of war killing young people is more acceptable than human nudity ?
Oh, I try every chance I get, it's just sometimes our political system seems averse to running candidates with a non-interventionist agenda. If you've never seen a video of President Eisenhower's farewell speech I'd highly recommend it. He warned about the undue influence of the military-industrial complex, a warning we seem to have ignored, much to the detriment of the country IMO. I believe he was absolutely correct in his warning.



Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
Why not make them pay by just being alive then ?
Why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
You absolutely know it's not by the same token, come on !
I merely meant if we're going to believe we have a civilized society there really shouldn't be a need of deterrents to certain actions, morality comes from within, not from laws/deterrents.


Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
Again, it's not a question of not in doubt anymore in this conversation (as we've gone into rhetorical debate here) but how do you have rules that PREVENT any innocent person from being wrongfully convicted ?

As for eyewitnesses :

False Eyewitness | DiscoverMagazine.com

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/88/3/776/

The Innocence Project - Understand the Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification


Just three of the hundreds found on a simple search.

Just make your opinion on facts, not feelings.
I don't have the one true answer but I believe the debate over establishing true verdicts is separate from the one on whether the death penalty is barbaric or justified for certain crimes. I'd guess the good news is having an increasing ability to prove innocence will also give us an increasing ability to establish guilt, regardless of what the punishment may be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 11:02 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,282 posts, read 54,079,395 times
Reputation: 40572
Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post

"An execution is not simply death. It is just as different from the privation of life as a concentration camp is from prison. For there to be an equivalency, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is never encountered in private life"

Albert Camus
I've read this before. Were I able to I'd have to ask Mon. Camus if his concern was with 'equivalency', WHERE is the equivalency of letting someone live who has denied that right to another? I don't believe there can truly be any 'equivalency' in the case of murder, whether the killer is executed or jailed for life the victim is still dead.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top