400 Executions....

Discussion in 'War Zone' started by scoober78, Aug 21, 2007.

  1. A4sForever

    A4sForever INTERNET BULLY None

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    9,078
    Deterrent?? The evil will ALWAYs do evil. You will never stop that as long as mankind exists. That's the nature of the beast.

    But with capital punishment -- the guilty will never have another opportunity to re-offend. That's a good thing ...

    The taxpayer will be spared the interminable burden of supporting these societal parasites in a lifestyle most would never achieve prior to their incarceration, not in their wildest, drug-free dreams. And that's a good thing, too ...

    Bottom line: ask 99.9999% of the murder victim's families what THEY think about capital punishment -- 'cause until YOU are sitting in that seat, it really doesn't make a whole big pile of shit what you think ...

    Just sayin' .... :)
     
    crysmc likes this.
  2. tlord82

    tlord82 Registered User None

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    Messages:
    78
    The death penalty has not been a deterrent since they fired the chairs back up. But I'm fine with that. I support the death penalty because once someone has gone so far to break the social contract, there is nothing more to be done with them. We need to be sure that that the wrong person is not executed, but with the advances in forensic sciences, particularly DNA, and the sheer number of appeal attempts that everyone on death row gets, the system will only improve.
     
  3. Brett327

    Brett327 Magnum! None

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,594
    There are a couple fundamental issues one must evaluate when discussing capital punishment - everything else is fluff. First issue, are we (as a society) being pragmatic or vengeful? The deterrence argument is pretty much moot. Almost everyone that studies these kinds of things will tell you the the death penalty does not have a significant value in the deterrence of crime. Second, as it currently exists, the death penalty (and the process to get to that point) costs more than lifetime incarceration. So, from a pragmatic POV, capital punishment doesn't make much sense. The only thing left is the element of punishment and vengeance wrought by society upon a capital criminal and whether that value outweighs the inefficiency of carrying out executions. I'm personally/morally OK with capital punishment, but I'm not sure that it makes the most sense for our society.

    Additionally, there is a cost to the US' reputation on the international scene for our stance on capital punishment as it becomes less and less "in vogue." While I know some of you will revert to the "fuck the international community - they're with us or against us" mode of thinking, I think we're going to find ourselves in more and more situations where we're going to want to choose our battles. My question: Given the pragmatist's argument I've just laid out, ought capital punishment be one of them?
     
    Cate likes this.
  4. SDNalgene

    SDNalgene Blind. Continue... None

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    214
    Well then this whole thread is pointless because it asked what we thought.... I didn't note the requirement to have lost a relative to respond to the thread. On that note, I don't want societal policies ruled by the emotions of the grieving (think Cindy Sheehan). Given the appeals process, it isn't much cheaper, if at all, to execute them. Granted if we just shot them after trial it would be a lot cheaper, but that just doesn't feel all that American.

    All I was getting at is that deterrence isn't effective, and therefore really isn't a justification. Them getting what they deserved, retribution, social contract, not killing again, etc. are better arguments. Personally though, I would rather see the wretched, evil, punks live on in solitary than execute innocents.

    Just saying, sir. :) And yes, I know what I think doesn't amount to a pile of shit, my onwing reminds me of that on a nearly daily basis.
     
  5. MrSaturn

    MrSaturn Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    136
    I THINK from a purely pragmatic point they might be better at making widgets than rotting in the earth. Plus if soceity messed up... somewhat reversable.

    I would also accept forcing them to dance for youtube
     
  6. Cate

    Cate Pretty much invincible

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    733
    The problem with that is that our justice system is nothing more than a societal contract, and it only works if both parties to the contract honor it (at least nominally). I commit a crime, you prove that I committed the crime and you punish me for it - contract. When we start futzing around with the contract for personal/political means (i.e. leaning harder on a defendant because he's poor and black, or because he's rich and white) or revenge fantasies ("Well, he must have done something bad") we can no longer count on it to protect those of us who are willing to hold up our ends.

    My own personal feelings about the death penalty aside, I'm willing to hear arguments for it in terms of "we're 100 percent certain he committed the crime and deserves to be punished for it." "We're pretty sure he's committed some crime at some point that makes him worthy of the death penalty," not so much.
     
  7. A4sForever

    A4sForever INTERNET BULLY None

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    9,078
    Well, you threw the baby out with the bathwater to a degree -- and perhaps my "insensitive" statement you chose to quote was a little "out of context" ... :) ... to make your "point (?) .... but then, again, that's my middle name -- insensitive -- not my middle finger .... :D ... and as you disagree like a young gentleman, I put that at a premium for those of your peer group .... so no harm, no foul.

    But Cindy Sheehan?? Com'on .... she's an aberration on the American scene -- and that's as out of context as you can get -- in this argument.
    Mebbe ... but I don't want to pay for them to live on and on and on and on and on and ..... they don't "deserve" it. I don't want to pay for "suitable" quarter, 3-squares/day, a/c, drugs, color t/v, conjugal visits, ..... you name it ... pick a number.

    Why do you suppose criminals keep on keepin' on year after year after decade with "appeals" to ---- stay alive ??? I think that answers a lot of the questions re: the efficacy of capital punishment. :D

    Hmmmmmmmmmmmm ...... ?????

    P.S. .... I am channeling with your OnWing .... watch out!!!
     
  8. GroundPounder

    GroundPounder Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2007
    Messages:
    230
     
  9. eddie

    eddie Working Plan B

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,765
    For context, I basically agree with Brett on this one.

    I too have always been ok with killing bad people, but I often find myself forgetting what exactly my rationale for killing them was.

    The opinions of the victims and families don't matter: this is about the law and is between society and the rule-breaker.

    So the question for me is not so much, "Do we have the moral authority to dispatch of truly wayward citizens?" because I think we do (and even now as I think about it, I lose focus as to why, ugh). The question (for me :)) is, "Should we? What do we, as society, gain from offing this dude (even in the confines of a better or even perfect justice system)?"

    Part of me wants to bastardize the Jefferson quote about fresh blood from tyrants for our favorite tree, and say that the social contract, when ripped so violently by the unwarranted taking of another's life, MUST be renewed with the offender's blood lest the whole thing unravel. Of course, that's all a bit romantic, esoteric, and philisophical.

    Part of me doesn't give a shit; put them in a pit and ignore them, remove them wholly from the system.

    And so I post, hoping that if anyone bothers to respond / rebuke, I'll better be able to understand my own half-thoughts...
     
    Brett327 likes this.
  10. SDNalgene

    SDNalgene Blind. Continue... None

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2005
    Messages:
    214
    Well then I am thoroughly screwed. :)

    I share your feelings on Cindy Sheehan, and fine, I will retract as she is an anti-American nut. The comment was in response to the implication that no one who hasn't had a family member murdered can have an opinion, well at least one that amounts to a hill of shit. The point of the comment was that grieving family members' emotional responses should not be substituted for public policy. It is important to empathize with other's heartache, whether it's about a son lost in war or a family member murdered. However, their feelings should not allow their opinion on a public policy to be beyond debate, nor should having a similar experience be required to enter that debate. Mea culpa for not fully quoting you, I hope I have explained it to your satisfaction even if you disagree.

    With regard to not wanting to pay a dime for their upkeep, I understand. But I don't think that that helps our society beyond making us feel better. Keep them locked up, limit the appeals process a bit, and let them rot. If we are wrong, then as MrSaturn pointed out, at least it's reversible. If all we get out of executing people is making sure they get what they deserve, and I agree that they probably deserve it, then I just don't think it is worth the risk of executing an innocent man. Innocent women you ask? Never met one...:D
     
  11. Purdue

    Purdue Chicks Dig Rotors... None

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    243
    Ditto. I watched TWO good friends -ON TWO SEPERATE INCIDENTS 2 YEARS APART- go down in flames, get kicked out of ROTC, and kicked out of the school altogether... humiliated in the local newspaper... before the girl finally admitted that she had made both cases up.

    In Rape, and domestic Violence... the man is assumed Guilty until proven innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.
     
  12. scoober78

    scoober78 (HCDAW) None

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    2,349
    No way. What we do may not have a damn thing to do with the "right thing". We do what we do as tools of policy, period. The people we may kill might be angels...that has nothing to do with it. We kill them because otherwise, they might kill us. We are told to be in "that place" because the government has decided we have an interest in being there.

    Killing bad people has nothing to do with it.
     
  13. A4sForever

    A4sForever INTERNET BULLY None

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    9,078
    Some of you guys have a lot to learn ... about killing ... and what it means ... and what it does to you .... and fortunately, most of you will go to your graves without ever having to do anything about it, save "intellectualizing" about right/wrong, innocence/guilt, "social contracts" and moralizing about the subject of executing criminals ... please note I said executing, not killing -- as there IS a difference.

    But some of you will intellectualize it to death.

    To take some of your thoughts (not picking on scoober, his is just the most recent) .... it's "O.K." to pull the trigger on this -- as we're tools of national policy -- and while they might be angels -- that has nothing to do with it ......

    And this is the tragic result, which happens all too often:


    [​IMG]

    The above picture repulses you, as it should. But then ... at the same time, while perhaps "repulsed" .... some of you lack the moral, ethical, or " sense of justice" required to pull the trigger on miscreants such as these (below) ....

    [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG]

    You have to see the forest for the trees. And you have to be consistent. Consistency people ... consistency. That's what counts. And you have to be willing to do what is right, no matter how distasteful ... in a less than perfect world. Sometimes a lousy world ....
     
  14. scoober78

    scoober78 (HCDAW) None

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    2,349

    I think in fairness, that you misunderstood me. What I am saying is that the "goodness" or "badness" of the person who I hope is never on the end of a weapon in my charge, is not the reason I am dropping it. Neither am I dropping it because I was ordered to...or at least blindly so. There are orders I would refuse, and I'd like to think that I can tell the difference. I am dropping it because I don't want their weapon to kill me or my fellow aviators. Would I kill someone, Mr. Manson there, to prevent him from killing somone? I think so...and I'd like to think so.

    That said, I recognize the inconsitency between that postion and my questioning (notice not disapproval of) capital punishment. I'm working through these the only way I can...

    Lastly, I know I don't know shit from shit about what killing is/does/....but I think it is better to try to wrap one's arms around it now...and at least attempt to come to some moral convictions about this business we are in before we "learn". To not think about it, to me, makes Mai Lai more likely.
     
  15. raptor10

    raptor10 Philosoraptor

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,391
    WRT deterrence, the death penalty is applied so spuriously that it is handicapped from its role of deterrence (according to the posted article the death penalty has been used 1,090 times in the last 30 years, a very small fraction of eligible cases). If the death penalty were more immediate, and used uniformly, it would be an effective deterrent.
     
    A4sForever likes this.

Share This Page