|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2007 : 22:45:58 [Permalink]
|
ejdalise:
The point being that the same argument can be used against wrongful incarceration. |
Not exactly. Once a person is executed there is no possibility of exoneration, at least from the point of view of the person who was executed. As long as a lifer is alive, if a mistake was made, there is a chance that it will be found out in time to actually do some good.
ejdalise:
The same studies that say the death penalty is not a deterrent also find the same is true of tougher prison sentencing guidelines. Why is the destroying of a life looked at differently depending what guise it takes? How is spending one's life in jail any better than having been killed outright in a case where the person is innocent? |
See above. And while you're at it, you might want to take a look at this case.
ejdalise:
I will posit that the difference is not so much for the person being incarcerated or executed, but for "ourselves" (that is in quotes because at least one person does not agree). Somehow, and I suspect because of religion, the taking of a life has become anathema when done under the rule of law. Perhaps we have Polyannic aspirations of reaching this theoretical higher plane of social, political, and personal civility . . . all the while failing to recognize there are human beings that amount to little more than animals. |
There are certainly people who should be locked up for life. No question. I just can't find, including the emotional appeal, any reasonable way I could support capital punishment. It's not fiscally sound, it's not a deterrent and worst of all it opens up the possibility of an innocent being executed. At best it's not practical and at worst, in some cases, it might be tantamount to murder. I don't think I'm being particularly idealistic to think that the state can do better. It's not as though many countries haven't done away with the practice.
ejdalise:
I will state my opinion that not all lives are equal, that not all persons have the same value. Someone who has no problem inflicting pain and suffering has no business being considered fit for humanity. |
We have places for people like that…
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 11/22/2007 : 23:05:18 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
Prison should be, IMO, only for those who commit violent crimes. If we had an adequate system to help those who break laws, on their first offense, and get them the tools they need to live inside the social structure, then we could also include those who clearly demonstrate an unwillingness to abide by law in prisons (multiple non-violent offenses). |
What if they clearly have the tools, even on a first non-violet offense, but obviously chose to not use them? I'm thinking Enron-scale stuff, or even most first-time white-collar crooks, regardless of dollar amount.
What is your ideal prison going to do for the average MBA-holding embezzler besides making him pay for the time he spends cooling his heels? Perhaps we also need to strip people of the degrees they use to commit crimes. Or better yet: anyone who commits a crime that was dependent upon the criminal having the job he/she had is simply barred from seeking employment in a similar field. That way, the educational component of your prisons, Dude, becomes a re-education for many non-violent criminals. Money-laundering accountants get re-trained as auto mechanics. Auto mechanics who use substandard parts get retrained as accountants.| As long as such a prison were run strictly in accordance with US military training manuals (for nutrition, living conditions, hours of work/rest, and so on) it would never fail a legal challenge. |
I'm not sure about that. We have a volunteer military, after all, in which a person gives up certain rights in exchange for certain benefits. I think it'd be tough to make the case that people who commit crimes are effectively volunteering for prison. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Orwellingly Yurz
SFN Regular
USA
529 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2007 : 23:07:24 [Permalink]
|
Ejdalise wrote: YO? A proper appellation would be ejd, or sir, or just leave it out. We're shooting for classier forum here.
Orwellingly Yurz Sez: Your own opinion about yourself is that YOU are shooting for a classier forum here. So far you haven't even hit the target, dude.
Ejdalise wrote: It's good you share your own opinion, but do you really feel comfortable speaking for everyone else? I mean, I know at least one person who does not agree with you. That would be me. Perhaps there are a few more.
Orwellingly Yurz Sez: Ejdalise, please! I'm not speaking for anyone but old OY, here. I know you can comprehend better than that.
OY wrote earlier: "Revenge is a fleeting thing, but the loved one is gone forever."
Ejdalise wrote: And I'm not sure what that last sentence means. I mean, it's true, but so what? Revenge, at least in my case, is only a portion of it.
Orwellingly Yurz Sez: The last sentence means that revenge is a fleeting thing, and that the loved-one victim who's been killed is dead. Unless you believe dead people come back to life, I don't know what there is that you need clarifying. And, what are the other portions of it for you, please Ejadalise.
You're not just trying to get attention with early posts here, are you?
Class it up Ejdalise, please.
OY!
|
"The modern conservative...is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy. That is the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
--John Kenneth Galbraith
If dogs run free
Then what must be,
Must be...
And that is all
--Bob Dylan
The neo-cons have gotten welfare for themselves down to a fine art.
--me
"The meek shall inherit the earth, but not the mineral rights."
--J. Paul Getty
"The great thing about Art isn't what it give us, but what we become through it."
--Oscar Wilde
"We have Art in order not to die of life."
--Albert Camus
"I cling like a miser to the freedom I lose when surrounded by an abundance of things."
--Albert Camus
"Experience is the name so many people give to their mistakes."
--Oscar Wilde |
|
|
|
ejdalise
Skeptic Friend
USA
50 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2007 : 23:11:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by ejdalise
Fine. Let's use the estimated number of people killed by the medical profession due to misdiagnosing, administration of wrong medicine, or just plain incompetence. |
I think the only comparable number would be another type of intentional killing of human beings. I figure that leaves deaths caused by war or premeditated murder (which ironically can get one the death penalty).
The death penalty is not an accident, so deaths from drunk driving or medical mistakes aren't in the same league. Might even have to discount wartime collateral damage.
|
The comparison is not to the number of people executed intentionally. The comparison is between the unintentional killing of an innocent person because of mistakes in prosecution, and the unintentional killing of a person because of mistakes in treatment and/or diagnosis.
If you want ot bring war into it, then we can compare numbers using the term "collateral damage", a nice euphemism for accidental killings.
But I want to get back to the drinking part again. I find it hypocritical for people to bring up the possibility of the accidental execution of an innocent person as the reason to abolish the death penalty while at the same time they are willing to allow the sale of large quantities of alcohol when we know for sure the result is a large body count.
On the one hand people quote the loss of a life as tragic, while on the other they justify large numbers of casualties because "people want to have fun". For the record, I am in favor of the death penalty to anyone who gets behind the wheel of a car and kills or seriously hurts someone else. There simply cannot be any excuse for it. And before someone brings up alcoholism as a "disease", I will point out that just makes my case stronger, as it is only a matter of time before they will end up hurting someone again. And we have large amounts of data to support that statement.
Look, I know I'm odd man out here, and we will not come to agreement on it. I also know it likely stems from different viewpoints about the value of human life. Many people think it is a given once you are born. I maintain you have to keep earning it. If a person violently attacks, kills, maims, or severely injures someone else under any circumstance other than in defense of self or others, that person forfeits the right to be viewed as anything other than an animal that has to be put down.
And we do that with any animal that attacks a human being, even when the human is at fault.
|
--- Disperser ---
Winning enemies and aggravating friends since 1953 |
|
|
|
ejdalise
Skeptic Friend
USA
50 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2007 : 23:23:05 [Permalink]
|
We have what we have. You can describe a Utopian society and ideal prison system (or rather your idea of one. From what little I know what you describe is not workable), but we are nowhere near being able to even consider what you describe.
Also, now you are getting into larger issues than just the death penalty.
|
--- Disperser ---
Winning enemies and aggravating friends since 1953 |
|
|
|
ejdalise
Skeptic Friend
USA
50 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2007 : 01:13:25 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Not exactly. Once a person is executed there is no possibility of exoneration, at least from the point of view of the person who was executed. As long as a lifer is alive, if a mistake was made, there is a chance that it will be found out in time to actually do some good. |
I see no functional difference unless the sentence is commuted. If a innocent person dies while serving a life sentence, be it 10 years or 50 years, there is no difference I can see. One option may ease our collective conscience, but does nothing for the innocent person. The answer, of course, would be to put more effort in establishing guilt.
Originally posted by Kil
There are certainly people who should be locked up for life. No question. I just can't find, including the emotional appeal, any reasonable way I could support capital punishment. |
Then don't. Just respect that there are those who cannot entertain the idea of letting certain kind of offenders live.
Originally posted by Kil
We have places for people like that… |
Check out statistics for repeat violent offenders. The places we have for them apparently have substantial leaks. |
--- Disperser ---
Winning enemies and aggravating friends since 1953 |
|
|
|
ejdalise
Skeptic Friend
USA
50 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2007 : 01:45:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Orwellingly Yurz
Orwellingly Yurz Sez: Your own opinion about yourself is that YOU are shooting for a classier forum here. So far you haven't even hit the target, dude. |
Dang, I missed this reply earlier. Oh well. Anyway, I'm sure by your lofty standards I will forever miss the mark. Rest assured that with your continued guidance I will keep striving to improve. Why, even now, as I read your post, I am learning of the proper forum etiquette.
Still, despite the apparent "cuteness" of the YO-OY combination, to me the first part carries a certain tone of arrogance and disrespect. Call it a character flaw of mine, or perhaps a cultural antipathy. See, being Italian, I always associated that particular letter combination as a sign of lower education, self-smugness, and poor hygiene.
Rest assured, I'm not accusing you of any of that, but please understand that is a knee-jerk reaction on my part. I shall strive to control it.
Originally posted by Orwellingly Yurz
Orwellingly Yurz Sez: Ejdalise, please! I'm not speaking for anyone but old OY, here. I know you can comprehend better than that. |
I humbly apologize if I misread the following statement:
"I don't believe a victim's family feels real closure when the killer of their loved one is killed."
See, I read that as if you were speaking for the victim's families. As in: regardless what they say, this is how I really think it is.
Now I realize I've been told that is not the case. I still don't quite see it, but I'll take your word for it.
Originally posted by Orwellingly Yurz
Orwellingly Yurz Sez: The last sentence means that revenge is a fleeting thing, and that the loved-one victim who's been killed is dead. Unless you believe dead people come back to life, I don't know what there is that you need clarifying. And, what are the other portions of it for you, please Ejadalise. |
Sorry, I should have clarified. Being only mildly stupid, I did in fact understand the meaning of the words. I mean, duh! ... I can certainly grasp simple concepts. Yes, dead people remain dead. That is in fact one of the reasons I support the death penalty. What I should have asked is what the heck that has to do with the argument in question?
The other portions I already wrote about. As they obviously made little or no impression on you, I am wont of repeating them.
Originally posted by Orwellingly Yurz
You're not just trying to get attention with early posts here, are you?
Class it up Ejdalise, please.
OY! |
Yes, yes. I crave attention from the good folks at SFN. I live for the support, good will, and camaraderie that is so evident on these forums. You see, my life is so shallow that while I may appear to be discussing serious matters, literally of life and death, I'm secretly trying to get attention from . . . uh . . . pray tell, who am I supposed to be getting attention from? Oh, and if you would, please list them in order of importance. I mean, I would feel foolish if I attracted attention from some forum lightweight. No sir! I want nothing but the top dogs noticing me!.
ejd
p.s. seeing as you are particular about "proper stuff", it's not Ejdalise; it's ejdalise, although most people just refer to me as ejd. Actually, friends refer to me as ejd. Others have all sorts of body parts names for me. Minor point, and I really won't care how you write it, but I thought you should know. |
--- Disperser ---
Winning enemies and aggravating friends since 1953 |
| Edited by - ejdalise on 11/23/2007 12:02:07 |
|
|
|
ejdalise
Skeptic Friend
USA
50 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2007 : 02:01:42 [Permalink]
|
I'm assuming by the overwhelming tide of anti-death-sentence sentiment that I am the only that sees some value to having the possibility of a death-sentence punishment remain on the books.
Lest I gather too much attention, I think it's best to end this here, as we're already beginning to repeat ourselves. Rather, I'll end this here. I'm sure a few will want to respond to my last few posts.
|
--- Disperser ---
Winning enemies and aggravating friends since 1953 |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2007 : 09:46:10 [Permalink]
|
ej.....
You pled.....| Yes, yes. I crave attention from the good folks at SFN. I live for the support, good will, and camaraderie that is so evident on these forums. You see, my life is so shallow that while I may appear to be discussing serious matters, literally of life and death, I'm secretly trying to get attention from . . . uh . . . pray tell, who am I supposed to be getting attention from? Oh, and if you would, please list them in order of importance. I mean, I would feel foolish if I attracted attention from some forum lightweight. No sir! I want nothing but the top dogs noticing me!. |
Top dog here, ej. Woof! What can I do for you? |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2007 : 10:13:10 [Permalink]
|
Dave_W said:
| I'm not sure about that. We have a volunteer military, after all, in which a person gives up certain rights in exchange for certain benefits. I think it'd be tough to make the case that people who commit crimes are effectively volunteering for prison. |
That only makes my point that much stronger. If those guidelines are acceptable treatment for people who volunteer, then how can they be unacceptable treatment for people who are supposed to be punished? Also, those manuals are used (and have been used) for a conscripted US military as well.
There is also a legal prescedent, SHerrif Joe in Arazona runs a "tent city" prison in the desert. It is maintained by the US Army bivouac manual, he feeds the prisoners "day-old" food, and has successfully defended the tent city (as well as his pink county jail) in court a couple of times.
As for the Ken Lay style of crimes... Never said my idea was complete or perfect! I'm not sure we could find (or create) a law that could strip a degree from a person and withstand legal challenges. That kind of thing would probably have to be managed by professional organizations in the same way lawyers deal with their own who screw up. The best we can probably do to this type of criminal is create a law that strips them of their wealth, taking away all resources and belongings down to some arbitrary level. If they become repeat offenders, then jail.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Orwellingly Yurz
SFN Regular
USA
529 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2007 : 12:10:56 [Permalink]
|
Cutely, I say YO: OY wrote:
"I don't believe a victim's family feels real closure when the killer of their loved one is killed."
In response, ejdalise wrote:
"...I read that as if you were speaking for the victim's families. As in: regardless what they say, this is how I really think it is."
Orwellingly Yurz Sez:
My sentence reads: I...I...I...don't believe, etc. What family members believe or think they believe could be what THEY consider is closure.
But I...I...I...don't think what they feel is closure. Revenge is a very negative emotion, just like jealousy or contempt for those with poor hygiene or lack of education---whatever they are.
Cutely, OY! |
"The modern conservative...is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy. That is the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."
--John Kenneth Galbraith
If dogs run free
Then what must be,
Must be...
And that is all
--Bob Dylan
The neo-cons have gotten welfare for themselves down to a fine art.
--me
"The meek shall inherit the earth, but not the mineral rights."
--J. Paul Getty
"The great thing about Art isn't what it give us, but what we become through it."
--Oscar Wilde
"We have Art in order not to die of life."
--Albert Camus
"I cling like a miser to the freedom I lose when surrounded by an abundance of things."
--Albert Camus
"Experience is the name so many people give to their mistakes."
--Oscar Wilde |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2007 : 12:45:59 [Permalink]
|
As long as our justice system has the potential to make mistakes, never mind the overwhelming evidence that mistakes have been made, in giving people the death penalty, I will forever be against it. One wrongful death is too much.
You can't compare this to drunk driving or malpractice. The death penalty is purposefully killing someone. You make the comparison, ejd that mistakes are made in both cases. While this is true, it has nothing to do with the issue. In executing, the choice, "I'm going to kill you" is made. On top of this, we lose nothing if we throw away the death penalty. If we were to throw away driving because of drunks, or doctors because of malpractice, we lose things that we hold dear to our way of life: freedom and health, respectively. |
Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2007 : 12:48:56 [Permalink]
|
ej.....
Consistent with your views on the destruction of, and subsequent condensation of the material mass of the bodies of serial killers, and other folks responsible for the intentional death of other human beings; what is your opinion as to the most appropriate method by which such killers should be put to death?
Or does it matter, outside of considerations of economy and efficiency?
I would appreciate a statement on your position on this matter in order to more fully understand your views on capital punishment! |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2007 : 13:19:24 [Permalink]
|
| Actually, I'd be in favor of the death penalty in any case where the criminal agrees to it in full open court, allowing a jury to decide that there's no reasonable doubt of his/her sincerity. I'd consider that a forfeiture of all possible appeals, so much so that the crook could be given a last meal and executed within hours (method of his/her choice). |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
 |
|
|
|
Does the Death Penalty Deter Crime? New Studies.
