FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Capital Punishment (Page 1)

  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: Capital Punishment
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post 
An offshoot of Sexual Assault which was in turn an offshoot of Sexism and is it worth getting upset over?

I think we would all agree that our current system for administering to those sentenced to the death penalty in the US is rather flawed. Both cost to the taxpayer and time from conviction to execution are exorbitant.

I suggested in the origin post Sexual Assault, that anyone convicted of murder, rape, molestation or kidnapping should be put to death, after a brief time for a secondary investigation. I'd like to add to that list attempted murder and armed robbery.

Borrowing liberally from Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers I would love to see prisons abolished and all crimes punishable by either death, public whipping or a fine.

As a deterrent, the death penalty seems great to me, although some other posters disagree rather vehemently. As a way to ensure no second transgression, I don't think it's even arguable as being 100% effective (assuming that no guards were killed or prisoner escapes).

I do want to be clear about one thing. Not all cases of homicide are murder, nor should all cases of statutory rape be considered molestation.

Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ace of Spades
Member
Member # 2256

 - posted      Profile for Ace of Spades           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
I do want to be clear about one thing. Not all cases of homicide are murder, nor should all cases of statutory rape be considered molestation.

I guess you really can't always get what you want.
Posts: 431 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post 
From original discussion:

quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
To work 'unquestioningly' as the best deterrant, it has to provide a boost in deterrance which justifies its operating overhead. Otherwise, it's not the best, it's just the most exhaustively prohibitive and expensive.

By a nuanced analysis, you can show that the death penalty is a not-significant quantity of additional deterrance provided for an exorbitant increase in the costs to the system (and by extension, to taxpayers). This is both to the repeat offenders themselves (look at the rates of escape for high security lifers versus total prison populations) and to others who are supposedly dissuaded by capital punishment (since it has consistently been shown that the death penalty does not provide significant deterrance above other penal options).

Not that much of this discussion matters. You may not be cognizant of why, but the whole "I think that anyone who kills, rapes, molests or kidnaps another human being should be killed" idea will be soundly rejected as immoral — for good reasons — and wouldn't pass constitutional review, to boot. You're proposing something which is firmly (and thankfully) in the realm of fantasy.


Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I guess you really can't always get what you want.
Thank you Mick Jagger! [Razz]
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jebus202
Member
Member # 2524

 - posted      Profile for jebus202   Email jebus202         Edit/Delete Post 
Since we're borrowing punishments from books that have no relevance to the way our current society is structured or ideologically inclined, can't we just break criminals wands and send them to Azkaban?
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T_Smith
Member
Member # 3734

 - posted      Profile for T_Smith   Email T_Smith         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by jebus202:
Since we're borrowing punishments from books that have no relevance to the way our current society is structured or ideologically inclined, can't we just break criminals wands and send them to Azkaban?

I read a study about this system. From what I recall, I thought they showed it to be a less than perfect judicial system where criminals ran free and jailors were more than happy to bend to corrupt influences. Surely you do not support such a flawed system, do you?
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jebus202
Member
Member # 2524

 - posted      Profile for jebus202   Email jebus202         Edit/Delete Post 
Getting rid of island fortress prisons guarded by soul-sucking demons just because of a few breakouts really is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
But...it's not. It's not a great deterrent.

What the death penalty is is a way for politicians to look tough on crime, and that sells electability like nobody's business not only because it makes the politician saying it look badass, but because it makes the person speaking against it looking like a candyass. You're not going to find any evidence beyond the emotional, 'it makes sense' arguments that suggest the death penalty is an actual deterrent to violent crime, Stone_Wolf. I mean, it's been tried, but I think you'll find that when you start looking around a theme will start cropping up: "The reason the data is inconclusive (that's when they don't admit the rates of homicide are lower in non-death penalty states) is because the death penalty isn't applied enough."

That's the argument. "The death penalty is a deterrent, we're just not doing it enough." But in that statement, you've introduced an admission that you're (general you) just [i]guessing
it's a deterrent, because that idea seems to make sense. It doesn't, really, in part because it relies on the idea that criminals seriously include the idea that they're gonna get caught when they commit their crime.

I don't think that's a major factor in decision-making to commit most crimes. Note that's a big factor in the decision on whether or not to commit crimes, but not a factor in the crimes that actually get committed.

quote:
I think we would all agree that our current system for administering to those sentenced to the death penalty in the US is rather flawed. Both cost to the taxpayer and time from conviction to execution are exorbitant.
Well, no, the cost to the taxpayer isn't 'exorbitant' at all. We could afford many, many times more than what we're spending on the death penalty right now and to spare. Is it expensive? Sure, but we're really, really, really loaded as a country. That's not an argument to say, "Whee! Don't matter how much money we spend!" but just a pointing-out that if we're going to put this in economic terms, well, hey-lookit actual exorbitant wastes such as incarceration over treatment for non-violent drug-related offenses.

And the cost-to-taxpayer is actually pretty low on reasons why there are problems with the death penalty, from a justice perspective. There's also the problem of the disproportionate ratio in which poor people and minorities are executed.

quote:

As a deterrent, the death penalty seems great to me, although some other posters disagree rather vehemently. As a way to ensure no second transgression, I don't think it's even arguable as being 100% effective (assuming that no guards were killed or prisoner escapes).

Actually, it is: sometimes we execute the wrong people. Completely ineffective in that case. Which brings me to your pretty reprehensible answer to the problem of the wrongfully executed, "Hey, they died in a good cause." That's just...well, morally pretty indefensible. For that to be valid you'd first have to show that the cause was actually really, really good. And you haven't done that. That would be step one.

Then you'd have to try to remember that, hey, we're supposed to be at least concerned with individual rights in this country.

Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wingracer
Member
Member # 12293

 - posted      Profile for Wingracer           Edit/Delete Post 
I can't help but wonder how many innocent people would be quickly put to death under Stone Wolf's proposal.

I would have no problem with the death penalty for serious crimes if we could be 100% accurate on investigating and prosecuting those crimes. Unfortunately, we are nowhere near that.

Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sean Monahan
Member
Member # 9334

 - posted      Profile for Sean Monahan   Email Sean Monahan         Edit/Delete Post 
This reminds me of The Jigsaw Man by Larry Niven.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Destineer
Member
Member # 821

 - posted      Profile for Destineer           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Wingracer:
I can't help but wonder how many innocent people would be quickly put to death under Stone Wolf's proposal.

I would have no problem with the death penalty for serious crimes if we could be 100% accurate on investigating and prosecuting those crimes. Unfortunately, we are nowhere near that.

Yeah, no kidding.

This guy would be long dead under the proposed system (he almost died under our actual system):

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/opinion/10thompson.html

Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T_Smith
Member
Member # 3734

 - posted      Profile for T_Smith   Email T_Smith         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by jebus202:
Getting rid of island fortress prisons guarded by soul-sucking demons just because of a few breakouts really is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Perhaps we should combine the two and replace "public whipping or fine" with a stint in Azkaban. At least this way the more serious offenders are dead and can't escape. Certainly would have made sure that nasty Sirius Black wasn't running around killing more people.
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
You're not going to find any evidence beyond the emotional, 'it makes sense' arguments that suggest the death penalty is an actual deterrent to violent crime...
Evidence that suggests the death penalty is an actual deterrent to violent crime.

Regardless of statistics (even with some supporting my side, I still don't trust them, chaos theory and all, nothing is simple and straight forward and statistics rarely prove anything) we have no stats for if there was a universal enforcement.

Twelve states do not have the death penalty at all...some that do rarely use it. What if it was universal. Rape a girl, you are found guilty, three months later after another investigation, you are dead. Kill someone in a robbery, found guilty, 3 months, dead.

If it was consistent and universal, it would have impact.

Right now the average jail time for a rape is 5.5 years. Now I agree that criminals don't plan on getting caught, but it seems unrealistic to say they don't consider it.

And if they were looking down the barrel of the U.S. of A. they might think twice.
quote:
...the death penalty is is a way for politicians to look tough on crime...
I could care less dude, seriously. Politicians are (taken as a whole) evil, self serving, lying sacks of steaming donkey crap and I don't care what they say. There are two types of politicians, the ones who use their position to better their own lives and those who pave the road to hell with their good intentions (and maybe two or three that actually help, but I'm sure heroin is a great drug for two or three people). Let's just say I'm not a big fan.
quote:
...actual exorbitant wastes such as incarceration over treatment for non-violent drug-related offenses.
As to non-violent drug crime, let them go...and while you are at it, legalize all drugs, and suicide and all "victimless crime". As to should there be some reform to the capital punishment system, I understand you are saying that the huge amounts of money are going to ensure that the innocent are not unjustly killed, but seriously, at some point all the multiple appeals seem to be just a delaying tacit and have nothing to do with innocence.
quote:
There's also the problem of the disproportionate ratio in which poor people and minorities are executed.
If they did the crime, then they deserve the punishment. I'm not a heartless bastard, and believe that those who have less opportunity should receive help, but on the prevention and education side, not the lenient on crime side.
quote:
Actually, it is: sometimes we execute the wrong people. Completely ineffective in that case.
So true. And that is exactly why I have always said that a secondary investigation should be built into the system. All reasonable steps should be taken to ensure that no innocent people are killed by the state. Heck, extraordinary measures should be taken.
quote:
I would have no problem with the death penalty for serious crimes if we could be 100% accurate on investigating and prosecuting those crimes. Unfortunately, we are nowhere near that.
I can't really disagree here. But let's say for the sake of argument that it's 99.99%? Is that good enough. I think I would be satisfied. How about 99.0%? How about 90%? Anyone know what the batting average for our actual system is? Where is the line?
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T_Smith
Member
Member # 3734

 - posted      Profile for T_Smith   Email T_Smith         Edit/Delete Post 
So you believe every possible doubt of guilt in every circumstance can be resolved by a secondary investigation with extraordinary measures?

I personally don't, and wouldn't want to risk it killing an innocent person. What do I know, though? [Smile]

Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Yeah, no kidding.

This guy would be long dead under the proposed system (he almost died under our actual system):

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/opinion/10thompson.html

This guy would have been released 14 years earlier under the proposed system.

Let me be clear, that when I say "secondary" investigation, I mean independent.

After all evidence would be turned over, the secondary team would have published the very same findings that exonerated the author of this article, but a decade and a half sooner.

I'm rather outraged that the prosecutors on this case are not facing criminal charges.
quote:
So you believe every possible doubt of guilt in every circumstance can be resolved by a secondary investigation with extraordinary measures?
Every possible...sounds unrealistic for anyone ever.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:

Regardless of statistics (even with some supporting my side, I still don't trust them, chaos theory and all, nothing is simple and straight forward and statistics rarely prove anything) we have no stats for if there was a universal enforcement.

So again, we come back to the fact that your argument really relies not on any sort of evidence, but in that you really, really think it would work. That's why we should amp up the frequency of the death penalty in this country: because you're really sure it would work. You don't have any evidence for it aside from gut feelings - because the means of gathering evidence aren't to be relied upon (after all, 'chaos theory').

That's just not a persuasive argument. You need a better reason than that to start killing people, even scumbags. Next argument? I'm being terse because that is the heart of your argument here, Stone_Wolf. I realize it's persuasive to you, but your own utter certainty is not actually a sign of some sort of intrinsic rightness.

quote:

Twelve states do not have the death penalty at all...some that do rarely use it. What if it was universal. Rape a girl, you are found guilty, three months later after another investigation, you are dead. Kill someone in a robbery, found guilty, 3 months, dead.

Nothing here serves as a persuasive argument in favor of using the death penalty more often-nothing.

quote:
If it was consistent and universal, it would have impact.
Oh, personally I don't much doubt that it would have an impact. If the only goal of our criminal justice system was to reduce crime, then there are a whole host of things we could do to achieve that goal. I sort of thought we had more than one goal at hand, and more than one method to achieve it besides killing people. And hell, I can even credit an argument for the death penalty in the case of murder, attempted murder-but armed robbery? Now we'll kill you for stealing? What is this, the Old West?

Except...wait, that's what they did in the Old West, too-and yet plenty of stuff was stolen there, as well.

quote:
And if they were looking down the barrel of the U.S. of A. they might think twice.
It's macho chest-thumping rhetoric like this that, quite frankly, makes you sound a lot more like you're interested in vengeance than any sort of justice. Or we could...lock `em up in prison for life, with nigh-on absolute certainty they won't be escaping? And then in the off chance that it turns out they're innocent, or that someone in a position of authority did something illegal to get a conviction, we can address that besides a, "Whoops! Well, ya died in a good cause, mister!"

Because it will happen. Happens now even with all these appeals, this secondary and tertiary and ^8 power investigations and appeals that you object to so strongly. It is frankly ridiculous that you think two investigations are going to be enough when sometimes several investigations aren't enough.

quote:
I could care less dude, seriously. Politicians are (taken as a whole) evil, self serving, lying sacks of steaming donkey crap and I don't care what they say. There are two types of politicians, the ones who use their position to better their own lives and those who pave the road to hell with their good intentions (and maybe two or three that actually help, but I'm sure heroin is a great drug for two or three people). Let's just say I'm not a big fan.
This is a cop-out. Politicians aren't some magic troll that somehow obtains a position of power over us. They're elected. We put `em there. This whole, "Our politicians are garbage," rhetoric that comes so often from the American public is frankly pretty laughable given it's a public that generally is ill-informed at best and doesn't vote.

quote:
As to non-violent drug crime, let them go...and while you are at it, legalize all drugs, and suicide and all "victimless crime". As to should there be some reform to the capital punishment system, I understand you are saying that the huge amounts of money are going to ensure that the innocent are not unjustly killed, but seriously, at some point all the multiple appeals seem to be just a delaying tacit and have nothing to do with innocence.
To someone who proposes 'two investigations, then kill `em' I can see how the appeals system might appear to be just a delaying tactic, and having nothing to do with innocence. And in the case of some specific appeals, sure, it doesn't. So what? What it has to do with is the fact that we can't un-kill someone, so it's pretty important, given that killing is pretty serious business (remember, you're angry about killing, right?) to make sure that when we do it, we're doing it absolutely right. (Whatever that means.)

Basically, we don't want to half-ass it. If we have to go over some forms in triplicate, so be it. Our wallets can stretch it easily (I note you seem to have dropped this objection, along with your notion of using actual evidence in support of death penalty deterrence), and there just isn't some victim right to a speedy execution that is sovereign to our civil demand to make sure we execute the right people, if we're going to execute people at all.

quote:
If they did the crime, then they deserve the punishment. I'm not a heartless bastard, and believe that those who have less opportunity should receive help, but on the prevention and education side, not the lenient on crime side.
So they deserve the punishment even if their rich white co-citizens aren't getting the same punishment in similar proportions, huh? They deserve to die just as much? Yeah, that's a very sensible position, Stone_Wolf-certainly founded in a clear-minded passion for justice, not a macho eagerness for vengeance.

Anyway, I think our Constitution says something about equal protection under the law-and that becomes a bit problematic when minority poor are being killed by our government in distinctly greater numbers than rich white people. But, hey, you can't believe statistics.

quote:
So true. And that is exactly why I have always said that a secondary investigation should be built into the system. All reasonable steps should be taken to ensure that no innocent people are killed by the state. Heck, extraordinary measures should be taken.
There's only one reasonable step to ensure no innocent person is killed by the state. And I wonder what on Earth standard involves 'extraordinary' meaning 'OK, one investigation-then we have another one'. When I use the word extraordinary, I don't just mean 'redo'.

quote:

I can't really disagree here. But let's say for the sake of argument that it's 99.99%? Is that good enough. I think I would be satisfied. How about 99.0%? How about 90%? Anyone know what the batting average for our actual system is? Where is the line?

So, let's see if I follow along here. You would be satisfied with a 99.99% certainty rate in the case of death penalties. But not, say, in reliability of incarceration of violent offenders. (The utterly ridiculous justification you used in the last argument, that the violence they do to each other counts too, doesn't hold water, because you want to kill them in much greater numbers.)

This doesn't make much sense at all. But for the sake of argument, what statistics on death penalty reliability would you believe? Chaos theory!

ETA: What proposed system? You've just said 'secondary investigation'. Now you've said 'independent'. Where are you going to find these secondary, independent experienced criminal investigators?

I'm guessing very likely from the exact same places you find the primary, state-funded criminal investigators-except maybe retired.

Also, nice out-of-context quoting right there in the front.

------------

I'm coming off pretty heated here, and I wanted to apologize for that. I really don't mean it personally, if you can believe that-it's rather that the ideas you're expressing appear, to me, to be, "This will work, I'm sure of it, so we should do it," and the idea you're talking about is killing a lot more people.

When we've got some pretty good evidence that it doesn't actually work at all, or at the very least that it's not a slam-dunk. When we can look at other societies where it's not done and murder rates aren't noticeably higher. And we can look to our past when capital punishment was much more common, and yet somehow violent crime wasn't unheard of. And...none of this is really trivia or anything. It's not rare knowledge. So I just don't understand why people think the death penalty will be such a great deterrent after having really thought about it-or rather think that it's a slam-dunk. I can certainly credit thinking it might work. Thinking that there's room for argument. But to take it as a given? To reference Starship Troopers? To say that we can't actually look to statistics...because of chaos theory? What does that even mean in this context?

I'm confused, and I'm tired, and I probably shouldn't have posted at all-but by the time I was done I was pretty sure it had already been read, probably by Stone_Wolf at least-so I left it up there. Reads more personally harsh than I intend, and I'm sorry for that. The exasperation and bafflement are for the ideas expressed, and i should've expressed that better.

[ April 13, 2011, 01:38 AM: Message edited by: Rakeesh ]

Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wingracer
Member
Member # 12293

 - posted      Profile for Wingracer           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
I can't really disagree here. But let's say for the sake of argument that it's 99.99%? Is that good enough. I think I would be satisfied. How about 99.0%? How about 90%? Anyone know what the batting average for our actual system is? Where is the line?

There is no line. Give me absolute certainty or nothing.

Even with 99.99% accuracy, that's a lot of innocent people being killed when you think about how many violent crimes are committed each year.

Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
Particularly when you consider that the evidence in support of deterrence is, at best, inconclusive and possibly not there at all-and that we can very reliably and within our means lock `em up for life if we want to prevent re-offense forever.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wingracer
Member
Member # 12293

 - posted      Profile for Wingracer           Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, the starship troopers references are funny since I prefer The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. In that one, the moon was a polite and peaceful place more for the LACK of law than for it. If someone offended you, you could toss them out of an airlock and nobody cared, except maybe for his friends and family who could do the same to you in revenge. While that sounds like capital punishment, there really wasn't any law or procedures involved.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T_Smith
Member
Member # 3734

 - posted      Profile for T_Smith   Email T_Smith         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:

Every possible...sounds unrealistic for anyone ever.

Agreed.

Edit:
Everything everyone else said sounds better. [Smile]

Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jebus202
Member
Member # 2524

 - posted      Profile for jebus202   Email jebus202         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by T_Smith:
quote:
Originally posted by jebus202:
Getting rid of island fortress prisons guarded by soul-sucking demons just because of a few breakouts really is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Perhaps we should combine the two and replace "public whipping or fine" with a stint in Azkaban. At least this way the more serious offenders are dead and can't escape. Certainly would have made sure that nasty Sirius Black wasn't running around killing more people.
Let no man say I'm not willing to compromise. We can call it Death or Dementia as a buzzword to sell it to the people.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Swampjedi
Member
Member # 7374

 - posted      Profile for Swampjedi   Email Swampjedi         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Wingracer:
I would have no problem with the death penalty for serious crimes if we could be 100% accurate on investigating and prosecuting those crimes. Unfortunately, we are nowhere near that.

This. I support the idea of the death penalty, in general. However, race, wealth, mental status factor in to verdicts and punishments.

Our justice system is just too broken for the death penalty.

Posts: 1069 | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
The problem with the death penalty as a deterrent is that, by and large, the class of people whom it is applied to have really poor "considering the consequences of my actions" skills.

If we want it to be effective at deterring crime, I think we should move it into the world of white collar crime. Corruption of public officials is one I've advocated for before. If you seriously violate your oath of office, shouldn't capital punishment at least be a possibility.

Massive financial fraud is another area where I think we'd actually benefit from having it on the table. Bernie Madof did more damage to society that anyone on death row and he did it while fully considering the consequences of his actions. If we're going to have the death penalty at all, why shouldn't it be considered in these sorts of cases?

Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post 
Look Rakeesh, I appreciate your edit, but I seriously am trying to have a discussion here and not a debate where every single point must be discussed at length. There are no points or judges and if I choose to not specifically address something you said, you are just going to have to ask again nicely. And unless you can keep civil (like everyone else has) I will ignore your posts.

quote:
You don't have any evidence for it aside from gut feelings...
You have made at least four little comments about this...I posted a link to some stats, I really don't know how you missed it. Please cut out the snarky, disdainful, and again, ultimately inaccurate comments about how your facts are facts and mine are feelings.

quote:
The utterly ridiculous justification you used in the last argument, that the violence they do to each other counts too, doesn't hold water, because you want to kill them in much greater numbers.
Some of the people in jail are not murderers/rapests/etc, and while you may flippantly question my compassion for extreme offenders all you like, someone severing a year for unpaid parking tickets doesn't deserve to be raped and killed in prison. Crimes done in prison still count. The justice system still charges inmates with new crimes all the time.

As to my suggestion of a secondary/independent investigation I will elaborate: Bob Badguy gets arrested for murder by the city of Townsvile police department. The county of Countyvile tries him and finds him guilty of murder, and he is sentenced to death by my proposed system. For the next three months a highly specialized and experienced investigation team from the FBI, a group of criminal lawyers, and any other needed experts pour over the case, the evidence, the hearing, . The day before the execution is to take place, the agents report directly to a federal judge as to the validity of verdict.
quote:
I prefer The Moon is a Harsh Mistress
I would as well, for a small moon colony, on the frontier where danger is so prevalent and a small mistake could cause a lot of people to die. Here on earth, I doubt the system would work.
quote:
There is no line. Give me absolute certainty or nothing.
Without a Pastwatch machine, we are never going to achieve that certainty. So are you suggesting that the death penalty should just be removed as an option?
quote:
Our justice system is just too broken for the death penalty.
I am hard pressed to disagree with you. Since I'm rewriting the system in my head, I've made other changes as well. I do agree that sweeping reforms to the judicial system would be required to give over that much power to the government.
quote:
...I think we should move it (the death penalty) into the world of white collar crime. (and) Corruption of public officials...
I had never considered massive financial fraud, but I like it. As to corruption of public officials, I simply forgot to mention it and agree completely. The people of this country have put their trust into their elected officials to represent their voices in our government, and anyone who breaks that trust is guilty of treason and should be punished accordingly.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Raymond Arnold
Member
Member # 11712

 - posted      Profile for Raymond Arnold   Email Raymond Arnold         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Look Rakeesh, I appreciate your edit, but I seriously am trying to have a discussion here and not a debate where every single point must be discussed at length. There are no points or judges and if I choose to not specifically address something you said, you are just going to have to ask again nicely. And unless you can keep civil (like everyone else has) I will ignore your posts.
What does "discussion" even mean? People just post a few random ideas and then not worry about whether they're right or not? What are you hoping to get out of this?

There is nothing uncivil about fact checking a point.

Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post 
RA: A sharing of ideas. You guys will help me smooth the edges of my ideas, point out flaws I hadn't thought of, expand, refine etc. Maybe I get to plant a few ideas too. And we get to enjoy the process.

Rakeesh is taking this to a very adversarial place where the enjoyment of discussing and sharing ideas of how the world works or should work is lost.

In other words, dude, that guy is bringing me down.

I don't mind if people disagree, in fact I enjoy it, as it tends to bring more points of interest to light. But the way he is disagreeing is caustic and plain rude and I am not enjoying conversing with him.

Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Look Rakeesh, I appreciate your edit, but I seriously am trying to have a discussion here and not a debate where every single point must be discussed at length. There are no points or judges and if I choose to not specifically address something you said, you are just going to have to ask again nicely. And unless you can keep civil (like everyone else has) I will ignore your posts.
Stone Wolf, I believe you think you're trying to have a discussion here, but some of the things you're saying - and I don't actually mean your opinions on capital punishment, either - well, they don't sound like someone who's committed to having much of a discussion.

Because you basically said, "We can't trust statistics on this because they rarely prove anything and chaos theory." Well, how else are we going to know where the evidence leads if we don't use things like statistics?

The rest of your post explains how: gut feelings. That's your evidence. Now, I'm sorry you don't like me pointing that out-but that is what you've said. I don't even know why you posted a link to some stats, since they don't prove anything anyway. If I didn't believe you were a well-meaning participant in this topic, I would think the most straightforward possibility: that you dismissed the relevance of statistics because the majority of statistics is pretty unfavorable to your point of view. But to be clear, I don't believe that-I do think you're a well-meaning participant in the discussion.

I think your execution (no pun intended) is pretty bad, though-such as 'we can't use evidence here, it doesn't work.'

quote:
You have made at least four little comments about this...I posted a link to some stats, I really don't know how you missed it. Please cut out the snarky, disdainful, and again, ultimately inaccurate comments about how your facts are facts and mine are feelings.
I didn't miss it, I specifically mentioned it. And you've got an ongoing habit now of quoting out of context and not addressing things. I know it's not a point-for-point discussion, but really.

quote:
Some of the people in jail are not murderers/rapests/etc, and while you may flippantly question my compassion for extreme offenders all you like, someone severing a year for unpaid parking tickets doesn't deserve to be raped and killed in prison. Crimes done in prison still count. The justice system still charges inmates with new crimes all the time.
It's not flippant at all when you say things like, "Well if they had to stare down the barrel of the US of A!" and, "If we kill the wrong people, well, hey, they died in a good cause." That shows a frankly flippant attitude towards execution on your part, not mine.

Anyway, you're absolutely right that someone serving time for unpaid parking tickets (though you won't see someone in prison very often at all just for this) to be raped and killed in prison. (Do you think an armed robber deserves to be raped and killed in prison? Obviously you think they deserve to be killed in prison.) But the solution is pretty simple: segregated prisons based on the level of violence of offenders. Easy.

A helluva lot simpler than 'kill the violent ones really fast.'

quote:


As to my suggestion of a secondary/independent investigation I will elaborate: Bob Badguy gets arrested for murder by the city of Townsvile police department. The county of Countyvile tries him and finds him guilty of murder, and he is sentenced to death by my proposed system. For the next three months a highly specialized and experienced investigation team from the FBI, a group of criminal lawyers, and any other needed experts pour over the case, the evidence, the hearing, . The day before the execution is to take place, the agents report directly to a federal judge as to the validity of verdict.

You said independent-the FBI isn't independent, they're law-enforcement. Law-enforcement paid by the government to apprehend criminals. How is that supposed to be an independent, impartial organization to review investigations, just for starters? And three months? That's it? It's really so critical that we kill `em quick? Why? Why is it so important? The nebulous deterrence value? Justice for the fallen? Salving for the victim's families?

I mean, it's not so important for deterrence value-I know you claim it is, but since your reasoning on that is, "If we just did it, it'd work," I think we can safely dismiss that as sound reasoning. And protecting society at large isn't very compelling, since of course we can, very reliably, lock up these offenders and throw away the key where they'll never bother society again. And it's not to protect other, non-violent criminals from them either, because we can build different prisons for them-cheaper to run prisons, I might add, where they won't be harmed by these violent criminals.

So why?

Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Raymond Arnold
Member
Member # 11712

 - posted      Profile for Raymond Arnold   Email Raymond Arnold         Edit/Delete Post 
I realize you posted some stats, but then you make comments like this:

quote:
Regardless of statistics (even with some supporting my side, I still don't trust them, chaos theory and all, nothing is simple and straight forward and statistics rarely prove anything) we have no stats for if there was a universal enforcement.
This explicitly states that you don't trust the stats, and if you aren't relying on any kind of statistics then yes, your opinion is based on your gut opinion and not much else. And people will point that out.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
Without a Pastwatch machine, we are never going to achieve that certainty. So are you suggesting that the death penalty should just be removed as an option?

If he wasn't suggesting it, I will. Yes. Like most civilized countries have already done.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
I don't care that most civilized countries have done it-that's a hazardous standard to start using anyway.

I care that you can't un-kill someone, that I'm uncomfortable with the degree to which we're wrong about whether or not someone is guilty of the crimes we choose to kill over, that the deterrence factor is uncertain at best, and that society can be protected from these criminals at nigh on exactly the same level as though all of them were killed immediately with an absolutely reliable finding of guilt.

Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
I don't care that most civilized countries have done it-that's a hazardous standard to start using anyway.


It is a pretty good indicator of the general moral compass of humanity and where we fall on that.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
I hear Gypsies and Muslim immigrants get a fair shake in a lot of those civilized countries you're talking about.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
If you think that because I feel that other countries are better at some things than we are that means that we should emulate them in everything, you are leaping to a conclusion that isn't justified.

And we are doing so well with Muslim immigrants and gypsies?

Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mucus
Member
Member # 9735

 - posted      Profile for Mucus           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
I hear Gypsies and Muslim immigrants get a fair shake in a lot of those civilized countries you're talking about.

Well, America can still fix as much as it can. You don't have to give up simply because you fall short in more than one area [Wink]
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
fugu13
Member
Member # 2859

 - posted      Profile for fugu13   Email fugu13         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
And we are doing so well with Muslim immigrants and gypsies?
Last I checked, orders of magnitude better than most of Europe.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
If you think that because I feel that other countries are better at some things than we are that means that we should emulate them in everything, you are leaping to a conclusion that isn't justified.
No, I feel that the idea of using 'what other countries are doing' as a general moral compass is a pretty hazardous standard to be using. Because, well, there are some things the countries you're looking at do better than us. There are other things...not so well. Perhaps putting a bit of a dent in the idea that 'we shouldn't do the death penalty here because other civilized countries don't do it'.

Speaking of, y'know, unjustified conclusions-I wonder what I said that suggested I thought we were doing 'so well' with Muslim immigrants and gypsies? I'm pretty sure I haven't expressed an opinion on that.

quote:
Last I checked, orders of magnitude better than most of Europe.
Heh, that's what I thought too, but I wouldn't be willing to say comfortably since it's been awhile since I read news about it. But assuming you're right, maybe Europe should emulate us on capital punishment since we're handling Gypsies and Muslims better-and that's a 'general moral compass of humanity'.

quote:
Well, America can still fix as much as it can. You don't have to give up simply because you fall short in more than one area.
Well, we have developed some pretty bad habits over the past sixty years or so when we were spending a lot of our time being largely the only impediment to a whole lot of unpleasant things, without much help. You're right, though, we don't have to give up-it's unfortunate that during that time I just mentioned, well...lots of other people did give up. But hey, easy to criticize.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
The primary arguments for Capital Punishment seems to be deterrence and preventing recidivism. There is very little discussion about fairness and justice.

So consider these two extremes.

Case #1: Assume we had really solid proof that executing homeless people or fortune 500 CEOs would dramatically reduce the violent crime rate. (Please ignore the question of how likely this is). If there were proof that it would dramatically reduce violent crime, would you support the executions?


Case #2: Assume that in the future we discover that 99% of people with a particular gene will commit murder when they become adults. Would you support either a death sentence or life imprisonment for all adults who had this gene.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mucus
Member
Member # 9735

 - posted      Profile for Mucus           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Rakeesh:
You're right, though, we don't have to give up-it's unfortunate that during that time I just mentioned, well...lots of other people did give up.

?
(Or to the first part for that matter, but this I especially don't follow)

Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rollainm
Member
Member # 8318

 - posted      Profile for rollainm   Email rollainm         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by The Rabbit:
The primary arguments for Capital Punishment seems to be deterrence and preventing recidivism. There is very little discussion about fairness and justice.

So consider these two extremes.

Case #1: Assume we had really solid proof that executing homeless people or fortune 500 CEOs would dramatically reduce the violent crime rate. (Please ignore the question of how likely this is). If there were proof that it would dramatically reduce violent crime, would you support the executions?


Case #2: Assume that in the future we discover that 99% of people with a particular gene will commit murder when they become adults. Would you support either a death sentence or life imprisonment for all adults who had this gene.

Good point. No and no.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
Rakeesh, when we are ahead of the curve, yay for us. When we aren't, we should improve.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I can even credit an argument for the death penalty in the case of murder, attempted murder-but armed robbery? Now we'll kill you for stealing?
There is a world of difference between steeling and armed robbery. If a cat bugler crawls into a window, helps themselves and departs, no one the wiser to his heist, that is stealing. If I show up at a bank with an automatic rifle and threaten to kill everyone there if my demands are not met, then I have introduced violence and murder to the equation, and let everyone know in no uncertain terms that I value getting my unlawful and immoral way more then your innocent life.
quote:
...well, they don't sound like someone who's committed to having much of a discussion.
This the second time you have used "sound" as a nice little word trick to say whatever you want without having to back it up with the fact that I didn't say it.
quote:
You said independent-the FBI isn't independent, they're law-enforcement. Law-enforcement paid by the government to apprehend criminals. How is that supposed to be an independent, impartial organization to review investigations, just for starters?
A federal investigation branch of law enforcement is independent of local or state authorities. Are you suggesting that we get the Chinese police in here? At the end of the day any answer is going to involve investigators who are paid by tax dollars. Come on!
quote:
And three months? That's it? It's really so critical that we kill `em quick? Why? Why is it so important? The nebulous deterrence value? Justice for the fallen? Salving for the victim's families?
The actual length of the holding before execution/investigation time is not all that important as long as it is arbitrary and relatively swift. To be honest, I pulled three months out of my butt, it seemed to qualify both as "swift" as to justice and also as "enough time" as to investigation. It can be up for discussion.

I understand where you are coming from with not wanting to kill. I get your point about you can't unkill someone, and it is a good point. But to truly limit prisoners from hurting each other we would need to keep them isolated, for life. And that sounds worse then death to me. So, we don't isolate them you say? What happens to your innocent man who gets thrown in with the wolves, and -just- the wolves, as you suggested segregating prisoners. Again, worse then death. I would rather take extra effort to ensure we had the right person and then kill them to simply have the added cost and cruelty of boxing them up until they die of old age because we are worried about their possible innocence.
quote:
And you've got an ongoing habit now of quoting out of context and not addressing things. I know it's not a point-for-point discussion, but really.
I have addressed both these points before. I am quoting you (and others) in as brief a way as I can to not make my post simply a repost in quote form. Everyone can read what you originally said, and my quote is just a reference point to clarify what I am responding to. As to not addressing things you have brought up, just ask nicely. I'm busy, I don't have unlimited time to pour over your post and answer every little objection you make. You do not always address everything I say. I will not answer those accusations again from you.

So the statistics you quoted which you have so much faith in are a comparison of per capita violent crime in states which have the death penalty vs ones which do not.

If in state "A" which had no death penalty, the violent crime rate went up 20%, and in state "B" which had the death penalty, it decreased 20%, it would not show on your statistics. Only that some states have more violent crime and some do not, and none of the other variables are taken into consideration, such as, population size, economy, gun control, poverty level, education level, etc ad nausium.

Even at best, all your numbers suggest is that when taken overall, states without the death penalty have less violent crime then those with it. Which does not equal that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent, especially when used in a theoretical way, as was being discussed.

Chaos Theory
quote:
Small differences in initial conditions (such as those due to rounding errors in numerical computation) yield widely diverging outcomes for chaotic systems, rendering long-term prediction impossible in general.
I am willing to say this much. Statistically, the effectiveness of the deterrent level of capital punishment is widely divergent and hotly disputed. Can we please leave it at that and continue our discussion?
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
Rakeesh, when we are ahead of the curve, yay for us. When we aren't, we should improve.

Kate, I'm pretty sure that Rakeesh's point was that since other countries are behind us on some human rights issues and ahead of us on others, we use what they are doing as evidence for what is right and wrong. If Capital Punishment is immoral, then we shouldn't do it regardless of what other countries are doing. If its right, we shouldn't stop just because other countries have.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
I never suggested that we do anything "just because" other countries do it.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I am willing to say this much. Statistically, the effectiveness of the deterrent level of capital punishment is widely divergent and hotly disputed. Can we please leave it at that and continue our discussion?
I can agree on that but I'm not sure that there is anything left to discuss once we do.

If we can't know with any degree of reliability whether executing more people will have beneficial effects, we clearly shouldn't execute more people based on the precautionary principle.

You might as well be saying, "Let's execute a bunch of two year olds and see what happens. We can't know if it will be good or bad until we try it".

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sean Monahan
Member
Member # 9334

 - posted      Profile for Sean Monahan   Email Sean Monahan         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
If I show up at a bank with an automatic rifle and threaten to kill everyone there if my demands are not met, then I have introduced violence and murder to the equation...

No, you haven't. You have introduced fear and coercion, but if you don't strike or pistol-whip anyone, or you don't fire your weapon and injure or kill someone, you haven't introduced violence and murder, only the threat of violence and murder. What would you say about someone who commits an armed robbery with an unloaded weapon?
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
I never suggested that we do anything "just because" other countries do it.

No you didn't. You did however say that we could look to other civilized countries to checking our moral compass. We can't.

There are legitimate reasons to look at what other countries are doing, but checking our moral compass isn't one of them.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Vadon
Member
Member # 4561

 - posted      Profile for Vadon           Edit/Delete Post 
I'm passionate on this topic, but I'd rather limit myself to only a short response.

I believe the death penalty is wrong at a fundamental level. Even if it was cheaper to just kill folks who commit crimes (it's not), even if it deterred more violent crime (arguable, but I'm in the camp that says it doesn't), and even if it were completely failproof on never killing innocents, I'd still say that it was wrong.

In the case of felonies, the state declares itself the victim of the crime. If a capital offense occurred, the state responds to the criminal's violence by murdering them. That's not justice, that's revenge. It doesn't sit well with me that the solution to one person's violence is for us as a society to stoop to their level. Try to justify the death penalty how you wish, I still think that we drop to their level. Criminals often have their own reasons to believe that their crimes were justified. I believe that having a society which endorses the death penalty brutalizes its citizenry by showing us that violence is an acceptable solution to our problems. I don't care if you can make the death penalty more efficient. I think it's just plain wrong.

Posts: 1831 | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Mucus
Member
Member # 9735

 - posted      Profile for Mucus           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MrSquicky:
Corruption of public officials is one I've advocated for before. If you seriously violate your oath of office, shouldn't capital punishment at least be a possibility.

Massive financial fraud is another area where I think we'd actually benefit from having it on the table.

I think this idea is actually interesting. In a way, I think focusing too much on capital punishment in the US is actually a bit narrow in scope. If my math is right, currently, according to the Iraq Body Count, the US executes only about as many people in a year as people in Iraq die as a direct result of "resulting directly from military actions by the USA and its allies" in five days. At the peak of violence, the US executes only about a half a day worth of civilian casualties. And arguably the "error rate" of deaths during a war is much greater than the error rate of a proper court.

So one argument, is whether the US should be reducing the number of people it kills. Another perspective is if we're already resigned to the US killing X number of people per year, it is worth considering how those deaths should be optimally distributed.

Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stone_Wolf_
Member
Member # 8299

 - posted      Profile for Stone_Wolf_           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
...but I'm not sure that there is anything left to discuss once we do.

If we can't know with any degree of reliability whether executing more people will have beneficial effects, we clearly shouldn't execute more people based on the precautionary principle.

You might as well be saying, "Let's execute a bunch of two year olds and see what happens. We can't know if it will be good or bad until we try it".

Statistics are not the only way to predict the outcome of our actions, and not even the most reliable one. Deterrence is not the only issue at hand. And murdering toddlers randomly is hardly a fair comparison to me suggesting that the statistical analysis of the deterrence is disputed, but it is fairly ridiculous.
quote:
...you haven't introduced violence and murder, only the threat of violence and murder. What would you say about someone who commits an armed robbery with an unloaded weapon?
You are correct. And I find it an interesting and complicated question, is the close personal threat of violence and murder enough to be killed as a just punishment. I will think on this, as I feel very divided. As to an unloaded gun, it changes nothing, as your first point is so good, that it is not the violence, but the threat of violence, so if you are able to carry out that threat or not is irrelevant.
quote:
I believe that having a society which endorses the death penalty brutalizes its citizenry by showing us that violence is an acceptable solution to our problems
Sometimes violence an acceptable solution, see World War II. At some point you have to stand up for the innocent, and remove the threat.

I wonder Vadon, what do you think is an appropriate response from society to rape and murder etc?

Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 8576

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote:
Originally posted by kmbboots:
I never suggested that we do anything "just because" other countries do it.

No you didn't. You did however say that we could look to other civilized countries to checking our moral compass. We can't.

There are legitimate reasons to look at what other countries are doing, but checking our moral compass isn't one of them.

Rabbit, if most of the other countries that execute people are also countries that we consider having a crappy record on human rights doesn't that indicate something?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2