Liberals have never said poor poor murderer just like proponents have never said blood blood blood.
Implying proponents are saying blood blood blood when they say something like 'good riddance' is tantamount to implying liberals empathize with the murderer when they concern themselves so much with his fate.
Proponents want someone dead, using whatever words, and then call it justice.
Well... yah.
In this case... we have a mushroom headed, hate filled mutant that killed some innocent people in a church. Proponents think that a warm cell, clean clothing, cooked meals, and internet use is not fitting for a punishment.
Isn't punishment that matches the crime revenge?
Isn't any punishment at all revenge (if you're inclined to think that way)?
Some punishment by courts is to make amends, some is supposed to be a deterrent to committing future crimes, some is just to keep society safe. The state can do these things with out killing the offender. It seems like the death penalty is about individuals emotions rather than justice.
Well in the case of a sick individual that killed 9 innocent people he never even knew... the courts are doing all of the above with a particular emphasis on making amends. It seems to me that the DP reserved and applied for cases such as these most accurately reflects our level of disdain for the crime.
Roof is a lower form of life than a worm.
He's human, but you raise the point that we have to de-humanize someone in order to kill them.
That's not a valid point at all and more philosophical fluff.
It's not fluff. There's a mental process that needs to happen for someone to kill someone else. It's part of military training, also.
Maybe I'm just a simpleton. But in order to kill someone on death row, you must put needles in his arms. And push a button. That's it. The machine does the rest.
In order for people to be okay with the government killing people and oeople being sentenced to death, they have to dehumanize the person first, and say things like they are a "lower form of life than a worm".
Why do you keep,saying that? If I was to flip the switch to electrocute dylan roof, I would not have to dehumanize him. I would say I am glad you won't be breathing the same air as me. You deserve this.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
Liberals have never said poor poor murderer just like proponents have never said blood blood blood.
Implying proponents are saying blood blood blood when they say something like 'good riddance' is tantamount to implying liberals empathize with the murderer when they concern themselves so much with his fate.
Proponents want someone dead, using whatever words, and then call it justice.
Well... yah.
In this case... we have a mushroom headed, hate filled mutant that killed some innocent people in a church. Proponents think that a warm cell, clean clothing, cooked meals, and internet use is not fitting for a punishment.
Isn't punishment that matches the crime revenge?
Isn't any punishment at all revenge (if you're inclined to think that way)?
Some punishment by courts is to make amends, some is supposed to be a deterrent to committing future crimes, some is just to keep society safe. The state can do these things with out killing the offender. It seems like the death penalty is about individuals emotions rather than justice.
Well in the case of a sick individual that killed 9 innocent people he never even knew... the courts are doing all of the above with a particular emphasis on making amends. It seems to me that the DP reserved and applied for cases such as these most accurately reflects our level of disdain for the crime.
Roof is a lower form of life than a worm.
He's human, but you raise the point that we have to de-humanize someone in order to kill them.
That's not a valid point at all and more philosophical fluff.
It's not fluff. There's a mental process that needs to happen for someone to kill someone else. It's part of military training, also.
Maybe I'm just a simpleton. But in order to kill someone on death row, you must put needles in his arms. And push a button. That's it. The machine does the rest.
In order for people to be okay with the government killing people and oeople being sentenced to death, they have to dehumanize the person first, and say things like they are a "lower form of life than a worm".
Why do you keep,saying that? If I was to flip the switch to electrocute dylan roof, I would not have to dehumanize him. I would say I am glad you won't be breathing the same air as me. You deserve this.
I guess I'm saying it because it's true. We're not born to kill others, it's a process.
Liberals have never said poor poor murderer just like proponents have never said blood blood blood.
Implying proponents are saying blood blood blood when they say something like 'good riddance' is tantamount to implying liberals empathize with the murderer when they concern themselves so much with his fate.
Proponents want someone dead, using whatever words, and then call it justice.
Well... yah.
In this case... we have a mushroom headed, hate filled mutant that killed some innocent people in a church. Proponents think that a warm cell, clean clothing, cooked meals, and internet use is not fitting for a punishment.
Isn't punishment that matches the crime revenge?
Isn't any punishment at all revenge (if you're inclined to think that way)?
Some punishment by courts is to make amends, some is supposed to be a deterrent to committing future crimes, some is just to keep society safe. The state can do these things with out killing the offender. It seems like the death penalty is about individuals emotions rather than justice.
Well in the case of a sick individual that killed 9 innocent people he never even knew... the courts are doing all of the above with a particular emphasis on making amends. It seems to me that the DP reserved and applied for cases such as these most accurately reflects our level of disdain for the crime.
Roof is a lower form of life than a worm.
He's human, but you raise the point that we have to de-humanize someone in order to kill them.
That's not a valid point at all and more philosophical fluff.
It's not fluff. There's a mental process that needs to happen for someone to kill someone else. It's part of military training, also.
Maybe I'm just a simpleton. But in order to kill someone on death row, you must put needles in his arms. And push a button. That's it. The machine does the rest.
In order for people to be okay with the government killing people and oeople being sentenced to death, they have to dehumanize the person first, and say things like they are a "lower form of life than a worm".
or they are just another fallible fucked up human being who, by their wanton taking of multiple lives, gave up their right to live.
Living in a nation ruled by dispassionate law, and dp being as yet still a legal means of punishment, if beyond even the slimmest shred of doubt such a person is found guilty BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION, then Go Easy Convict.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Liberals have never said poor poor murderer just like proponents have never said blood blood blood.
Implying proponents are saying blood blood blood when they say something like 'good riddance' is tantamount to implying liberals empathize with the murderer when they concern themselves so much with his fate.
Proponents want someone dead, using whatever words, and then call it justice.
Well... yah.
In this case... we have a mushroom headed, hate filled mutant that killed some innocent people in a church. Proponents think that a warm cell, clean clothing, cooked meals, and internet use is not fitting for a punishment.
Isn't punishment that matches the crime revenge?
Isn't any punishment at all revenge (if you're inclined to think that way)?
Some punishment by courts is to make amends, some is supposed to be a deterrent to committing future crimes, some is just to keep society safe. The state can do these things with out killing the offender. It seems like the death penalty is about individuals emotions rather than justice.
Well in the case of a sick individual that killed 9 innocent people he never even knew... the courts are doing all of the above with a particular emphasis on making amends. It seems to me that the DP reserved and applied for cases such as these most accurately reflects our level of disdain for the crime.
Roof is a lower form of life than a worm.
He's human, but you raise the point that we have to de-humanize someone in order to kill them.
That's not a valid point at all and more philosophical fluff.
It's not fluff. There's a mental process that needs to happen for someone to kill someone else. It's part of military training, also.
Maybe I'm just a simpleton. But in order to kill someone on death row, you must put needles in his arms. And push a button. That's it. The machine does the rest.
In order for people to be okay with the government killing people and oeople being sentenced to death, they have to dehumanize the person first, and say things like they are a "lower form of life than a worm".
Why do you keep,saying that? If I was to flip the switch to electrocute dylan roof, I would not have to dehumanize him. I would say I am glad you won't be breathing the same air as me. You deserve this.
I guess I'm saying it because it's true. We're not born to kill others, it's a process.
So when chimpanzees kill other chimpanzees they need to dechimp them? You're giving the human race qualities that simply do not exist (fluff... or fancy sounding imperfect psychological/sociological blather that people sitting around in antique chairs smoking pipes talk about).
Some people are just f**ked up people. Like mushroom head for example. He's f**ked up, The unfortunate part of this story isn't f**ked up mushroom head... it's his victims. They crossed paths with a f**ked up idiot.
I callled him a lower form of life than a worm because he is- worms have never hurt anyone. I haven't dehumanized him at all. He's just a shitty human being whose life has value to some, while having absolutely none to others.
Liberals have never said poor poor murderer just like proponents have never said blood blood blood.
Implying proponents are saying blood blood blood when they say something like 'good riddance' is tantamount to implying liberals empathize with the murderer when they concern themselves so much with his fate.
Proponents want someone dead, using whatever words, and then call it justice.
Well... yah.
In this case... we have a mushroom headed, hate filled mutant that killed some innocent people in a church. Proponents think that a warm cell, clean clothing, cooked meals, and internet use is not fitting for a punishment.
Isn't punishment that matches the crime revenge?
Isn't any punishment at all revenge (if you're inclined to think that way)?
Some punishment by courts is to make amends, some is supposed to be a deterrent to committing future crimes, some is just to keep society safe. The state can do these things with out killing the offender. It seems like the death penalty is about individuals emotions rather than justice.
Well in the case of a sick individual that killed 9 innocent people he never even knew... the courts are doing all of the above with a particular emphasis on making amends. It seems to me that the DP reserved and applied for cases such as these most accurately reflects our level of disdain for the crime.
Roof is a lower form of life than a worm.
He's human, but you raise the point that we have to de-humanize someone in order to kill them.
That's not a valid point at all and more philosophical fluff.
It's not fluff. There's a mental process that needs to happen for someone to kill someone else. It's part of military training, also.
Maybe I'm just a simpleton. But in order to kill someone on death row, you must put needles in his arms. And push a button. That's it. The machine does the rest.
In order for people to be okay with the government killing people and oeople being sentenced to death, they have to dehumanize the person first, and say things like they are a "lower form of life than a worm".
Why do you keep,saying that? If I was to flip the switch to electrocute dylan roof, I would not have to dehumanize him. I would say I am glad you won't be breathing the same air as me. You deserve this.
I guess I'm saying it because it's true. We're not born to kill others, it's a process.
Man wasn't born to kill others? We may have been taught not to kill others, but humans certainly are born to as a matter of survival. I can lean to left only so far on this.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
Pretty distinct opinions from the left and right on this one:
Leftie Liberal says: This kid had numerous behavioral problems and was probably mentally disturbed, maybe now is a good time to discuss expanding healthcare services? This kid had easy access to guns, maybe now is a good time to talk about gun control? This kid is guilty, but the death penalty has no place in civilized modern society. Federal prosecutors said this kid was "self-radicalized" online, maybe now is a good time to talk about how that malicious information was disseminated and received before another incident occurs.
Radical Rightie says: Punish! Torture! Kill! (proceeds to close barn door)
A biased post.
Let me rework the Leftie Liberal portion for you to match the idiocy of the Radical Rightie portion:
Leftie Liberal says: Poor poor kid had severe trauma of some sort in his life and he needs our support now because we failed him prior to the somewhat unfortunate event. What's done is done and we can't bring back any of the deceased, but we can all come together and pour love all over mushroom head to salvage a life. Etc.
I have never ONCE seen a liberal voice that kind of perspective about this guy. "Poor poor kid... needs our support... what's done is done"??? Thirty, where are you getting that from? I personally think you made it up out of thin air or you are listening to others who did.
Follow along, man.
The post I responded to mocked the pro DP faction and I responded in kind.
Why didn't you address this:
Radical Rightie says: Punish! Torture! Kill! (proceeds to close barn door)
honestly, 30, you post this liberal crybaby rhetoric without having been prodded at all, all the time. you know that.
You obviously didn't read the post I responded to either.
Classic though... the inability to see the provocation.
For thorough understanding of the exchange... go read the post that prompted mine and further yet... how I set mine up,
I did. But you are framing it as though you only respond with such content when prompted. when in most cases, you have not been.
Unsubstantiated. Your claim here about 'most cases'. It's actually bullshit... what you say.
You know what's not bullshit though? It's not bullshit that you never speak to the posts that are hurled from your side of the fence (you know... blood blood blood). The only ones you get pissy about are the ones that mock your perspective in those mud slinging affairs.
well, I'm sorry but you simply haven't been paying attention. whenever I see something that requires being noted, I do so. no matter the side of the debate.
Pretty distinct opinions from the left and right on this one:
Leftie Liberal says: This kid had numerous behavioral problems and was probably mentally disturbed, maybe now is a good time to discuss expanding healthcare services? This kid had easy access to guns, maybe now is a good time to talk about gun control? This kid is guilty, but the death penalty has no place in civilized modern society. Federal prosecutors said this kid was "self-radicalized" online, maybe now is a good time to talk about how that malicious information was disseminated and received before another incident occurs.
Radical Rightie says: Punish! Torture! Kill! (proceeds to close barn door)
A biased post.
Let me rework the Leftie Liberal portion for you to match the idiocy of the Radical Rightie portion:
Leftie Liberal says: Poor poor kid had severe trauma of some sort in his life and he needs our support now because we failed him prior to the somewhat unfortunate event. What's done is done and we can't bring back any of the deceased, but we can all come together and pour love all over mushroom head to salvage a life. Etc.
I have never ONCE seen a liberal voice that kind of perspective about this guy. "Poor poor kid... needs our support... what's done is done"??? Thirty, where are you getting that from? I personally think you made it up out of thin air or you are listening to others who did.
Follow along, man.
The post I responded to mocked the pro DP faction and I responded in kind.
Why didn't you address this:
Radical Rightie says: Punish! Torture! Kill! (proceeds to close barn door)
honestly, 30, you post this liberal crybaby rhetoric without having been prodded at all, all the time. you know that.
You obviously didn't read the post I responded to either.
Classic though... the inability to see the provocation.
For thorough understanding of the exchange... go read the post that prompted mine and further yet... how I set mine up,
I did. But you are framing it as though you only respond with such content when prompted. when in most cases, you have not been.
Unsubstantiated. Your claim here about 'most cases'. It's actually bullshit... what you say.
You know what's not bullshit though? It's not bullshit that you never speak to the posts that are hurled from your side of the fence (you know... blood blood blood). The only ones you get pissy about are the ones that mock your perspective in those mud slinging affairs.
well, I'm sorry but you simply haven't been paying attention. whenever I see something that requires being noted, I do so. no matter the side of the debate.
For the most part, what you say here about yourself is true.
I think it's fair to say that you become somewhat more defensive when your belief system is challenged (or mocked); hence, my 'selective' comment.
Pretty distinct opinions from the left and right on this one:
Leftie Liberal says: This kid had numerous behavioral problems and was probably mentally disturbed, maybe now is a good time to discuss expanding healthcare services? This kid had easy access to guns, maybe now is a good time to talk about gun control? This kid is guilty, but the death penalty has no place in civilized modern society. Federal prosecutors said this kid was "self-radicalized" online, maybe now is a good time to talk about how that malicious information was disseminated and received before another incident occurs.
Radical Rightie says: Punish! Torture! Kill! (proceeds to close barn door)
A biased post.
Let me rework the Leftie Liberal portion for you to match the idiocy of the Radical Rightie portion:
Leftie Liberal says: Poor poor kid had severe trauma of some sort in his life and he needs our support now because we failed him prior to the somewhat unfortunate event. What's done is done and we can't bring back any of the deceased, but we can all come together and pour love all over mushroom head to salvage a life. Etc.
I have never ONCE seen a liberal voice that kind of perspective about this guy. "Poor poor kid... needs our support... what's done is done"??? Thirty, where are you getting that from? I personally think you made it up out of thin air or you are listening to others who did.
Follow along, man.
The post I responded to mocked the pro DP faction and I responded in kind.
Why didn't you address this:
Radical Rightie says: Punish! Torture! Kill! (proceeds to close barn door)
honestly, 30, you post this liberal crybaby rhetoric without having been prodded at all, all the time. you know that.
You obviously didn't read the post I responded to either.
Classic though... the inability to see the provocation.
For thorough understanding of the exchange... go read the post that prompted mine and further yet... how I set mine up,
I did. But you are framing it as though you only respond with such content when prompted. when in most cases, you have not been.
Unsubstantiated. Your claim here about 'most cases'. It's actually bullshit... what you say.
You know what's not bullshit though? It's not bullshit that you never speak to the posts that are hurled from your side of the fence (you know... blood blood blood). The only ones you get pissy about are the ones that mock your perspective in those mud slinging affairs.
well, I'm sorry but you simply haven't been paying attention. whenever I see something that requires being noted, I do so. no matter the side of the debate.
For the most part, what you say here about yourself is true.
I think it's fair to say that you become somewhat more defensive when your belief system is challenged (or mocked); hence, my 'selective' comment.
no, I get annoyed when people make blanket hyperbolic statements about me or what they think they know about me that are completely untrue, and are only stated to further their own agenda. I do try to just ignore that shit; sometimes I just keep swimming, sometimes I take the bait.
He lived off of Garners Ferry, right? I'm out in Irmo, but that's close enough.
I haven't seen any videos, but I've been reading the articles online. Bone chilling testimony, especially from the lady that survived the attack. It should be an open and shut case, just a matter of final sentencing. He's admitted guilt, hasn't recanted, and has said he'd plead guilty for a life sentence. Glad isn't the right word, but I'm in favor of the prosecution not accepting that and pushing for capital punishment. I'm not in favor of capital punishment for every case, but this one definitely calls for it. I'll be interested to see if the state follows through with its trial if he is given the death penalty.
He lived a lot of places, apparently, but at one point he was living off 378 in Lexington, a couple of miles from my neighborhood. Makes my skin crawl thinking about him occupying the same spaces as me and my family.
You never know who's next to you in the supermarket line. I mean... I'm pretty sure one would glance at mushroom head and think, "What a f**king dork" but they wouldn't be thinking he's a mass murderer.
I completely disagree with the notion that the DP is never appropriate. This case is the perfect example of that.
I gathered that. I am against the DP 100% of the time. The extent of the atrocity is totally irrelevant to my stance on capital punishment. Now, if it actually prevented violent crimes, I would very likely have a different viewpoint (although the problem of innocents being found guilty would still be an issue). But it doesn't prevent violent crime. So no, I do not support it no matter what the circumstances are.
But the DP does prevent violent crimes. The person executed will never again be able to harm another person, either on the streets or in prison committing violence against another inmate or corrections officer.
I'm generally uneasy with the DP, but make exceptions when there is a clear case (video, a confession, etc...). This one is pretty clear to me.
No, the DP does not prevent violent crimes. Someone who is locked in a cell for 23 hours a day and is allowed in a walled courtyard alone and under armed guard, perhaps in shackles if that makes you feel better, is not a danger to anyone unless the guards are seriously not doing their jobs properly. BTW, confession is a notoriously unreliable form of proof of guilt. And perhaps you think DNA evidence is solid enough? I would disagree with that too. DNA evidence can be planted, tampered with, etc. But either way, the possibility of innocent people dying isn't the only reason I'm so strongly opposed, as I said.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I completely disagree with the notion that the DP is never appropriate. This case is the perfect example of that.
I gathered that. I am against the DP 100% of the time. The extent of the atrocity is totally irrelevant to my stance on capital punishment. Now, if it actually prevented violent crimes, I would very likely have a different viewpoint (although the problem of innocents being found guilty would still be an issue). But it doesn't prevent violent crime. So no, I do not support it no matter what the circumstances are.
But the DP does prevent violent crimes. The person executed will never again be able to harm another person, either on the streets or in prison committing violence against another inmate or corrections officer.
I'm generally uneasy with the DP, but make exceptions when there is a clear case (video, a confession, etc...). This one is pretty clear to me.
No, the DP does not prevent violent crimes. Someone who is locked in a cell for 23 hours a day and is allowed in a walled courtyard alone and under armed guard, perhaps in shackles if that makes you feel better, is not a danger to anyone unless the guards are seriously not doing their jobs properly. BTW, confession is a notoriously unreliable form of proof of guilt. And perhaps you think DNA evidence is solid enough? I would disagree with that too. DNA evidence can be planted, tampered with, etc. But either way, the possibility of innocent people dying isn't the only reason I'm so strongly opposed, as I said.
If that was the case, there would be no crime in prison. So technically, Jeff has a point. Because there is a possibility that someone could murder in prison, even on death row.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
I completely disagree with the notion that the DP is never appropriate. This case is the perfect example of that.
I gathered that. I am against the DP 100% of the time. The extent of the atrocity is totally irrelevant to my stance on capital punishment. Now, if it actually prevented violent crimes, I would very likely have a different viewpoint (although the problem of innocents being found guilty would still be an issue). But it doesn't prevent violent crime. So no, I do not support it no matter what the circumstances are.
But the DP does prevent violent crimes. The person executed will never again be able to harm another person, either on the streets or in prison committing violence against another inmate or corrections officer.
I'm generally uneasy with the DP, but make exceptions when there is a clear case (video, a confession, etc...). This one is pretty clear to me.
No, the DP does not prevent violent crimes. Someone who is locked in a cell for 23 hours a day and is allowed in a walled courtyard alone and under armed guard, perhaps in shackles if that makes you feel better, is not a danger to anyone unless the guards are seriously not doing their jobs properly. BTW, confession is a notoriously unreliable form of proof of guilt. And perhaps you think DNA evidence is solid enough? I would disagree with that too. DNA evidence can be planted, tampered with, etc. But either way, the possibility of innocent people dying isn't the only reason I'm so strongly opposed, as I said.
If that was the case, there would be no crime in prison. So technically, Jeff has a point. Because there is a possibility that someone could murder in prison, even on death row.
Which has been illustrated in the DP thread.
When guilt is certain, the 'execute an innocent person' argument is moot.
I completely disagree with the notion that the DP is never appropriate. This case is the perfect example of that.
I gathered that. I am against the DP 100% of the time. The extent of the atrocity is totally irrelevant to my stance on capital punishment. Now, if it actually prevented violent crimes, I would very likely have a different viewpoint (although the problem of innocents being found guilty would still be an issue). But it doesn't prevent violent crime. So no, I do not support it no matter what the circumstances are.
But the DP does prevent violent crimes. The person executed will never again be able to harm another person, either on the streets or in prison committing violence against another inmate or corrections officer.
I'm generally uneasy with the DP, but make exceptions when there is a clear case (video, a confession, etc...). This one is pretty clear to me.
No, the DP does not prevent violent crimes. Someone who is locked in a cell for 23 hours a day and is allowed in a walled courtyard alone and under armed guard, perhaps in shackles if that makes you feel better, is not a danger to anyone unless the guards are seriously not doing their jobs properly. BTW, confession is a notoriously unreliable form of proof of guilt. And perhaps you think DNA evidence is solid enough? I would disagree with that too. DNA evidence can be planted, tampered with, etc. But either way, the possibility of innocent people dying isn't the only reason I'm so strongly opposed, as I said.
If that was the case, there would be no crime in prison. So technically, Jeff has a point. Because there is a possibility that someone could murder in prison, even on death row.
Which has been illustrated in the DP thread.
When guilt is certain, the 'execute an innocent person' argument is moot.
I am not talking about there being no crime in prison, but those who would have otherwise gotten the DP can be handled so that it's not a factor.
Again, the execute the innocent person argument, while a REALITY under the DP right now, is far from the only good argument against it.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I completely disagree with the notion that the DP is never appropriate. This case is the perfect example of that.
I gathered that. I am against the DP 100% of the time. The extent of the atrocity is totally irrelevant to my stance on capital punishment. Now, if it actually prevented violent crimes, I would very likely have a different viewpoint (although the problem of innocents being found guilty would still be an issue). But it doesn't prevent violent crime. So no, I do not support it no matter what the circumstances are.
But the DP does prevent violent crimes. The person executed will never again be able to harm another person, either on the streets or in prison committing violence against another inmate or corrections officer.
I'm generally uneasy with the DP, but make exceptions when there is a clear case (video, a confession, etc...). This one is pretty clear to me.
No, the DP does not prevent violent crimes. Someone who is locked in a cell for 23 hours a day and is allowed in a walled courtyard alone and under armed guard, perhaps in shackles if that makes you feel better, is not a danger to anyone unless the guards are seriously not doing their jobs properly. BTW, confession is a notoriously unreliable form of proof of guilt. And perhaps you think DNA evidence is solid enough? I would disagree with that too. DNA evidence can be planted, tampered with, etc. But either way, the possibility of innocent people dying isn't the only reason I'm so strongly opposed, as I said.
If that was the case, there would be no crime in prison. So technically, Jeff has a point. Because there is a possibility that someone could murder in prison, even on death row.
Which has been illustrated in the DP thread.
When guilt is certain, the 'execute an innocent person' argument is moot.
I am not talking about there being no crime in prison, but those who would have otherwise gotten the DP can be handled so that it's not a factor.
Again, the execute the innocent person argument, while a REALITY under the DP right now, is far from the only good argument against it.
To my way of thinking, it's the only legitimate argument outside of the other ones linked to personal values.
I completely disagree with the notion that the DP is never appropriate. This case is the perfect example of that.
I gathered that. I am against the DP 100% of the time. The extent of the atrocity is totally irrelevant to my stance on capital punishment. Now, if it actually prevented violent crimes, I would very likely have a different viewpoint (although the problem of innocents being found guilty would still be an issue). But it doesn't prevent violent crime. So no, I do not support it no matter what the circumstances are.
But the DP does prevent violent crimes. The person executed will never again be able to harm another person, either on the streets or in prison committing violence against another inmate or corrections officer.
I'm generally uneasy with the DP, but make exceptions when there is a clear case (video, a confession, etc...). This one is pretty clear to me.
No, the DP does not prevent violent crimes. Someone who is locked in a cell for 23 hours a day and is allowed in a walled courtyard alone and under armed guard, perhaps in shackles if that makes you feel better, is not a danger to anyone unless the guards are seriously not doing their jobs properly. BTW, confession is a notoriously unreliable form of proof of guilt. And perhaps you think DNA evidence is solid enough? I would disagree with that too. DNA evidence can be planted, tampered with, etc. But either way, the possibility of innocent people dying isn't the only reason I'm so strongly opposed, as I said.
If that was the case, there would be no crime in prison. So technically, Jeff has a point. Because there is a possibility that someone could murder in prison, even on death row.
Which has been illustrated in the DP thread.
When guilt is certain, the 'execute an innocent person' argument is moot.
I am not talking about there being no crime in prison, but those who would have otherwise gotten the DP can be handled so that it's not a factor.
Again, the execute the innocent person argument, while a REALITY under the DP right now, is far from the only good argument against it.
To my way of thinking, it's the only legitimate argument outside of the other ones linked to personal values.
Fair enough. One of my biggest concerns is the role of government and how that plays in the DP. Revenge is not something that the government should be taking part in, nor should it have the right to use its own FALLIBLE justice system that it has the power to manipulate to determine who they kill, nor should it punish killing by killing because of the moral absurdity that creates (which I do not view as a personal value issue at all). Personal values? You mean what, like religious values? Like "Thou shalt not kill"? Yes, well, for religious folks that is certainly a bit of a problem, isn't it? But as an Atheist, that doesn't play a part in my own viewpoint. Nor does my own personal feelings about revenge for that matter. It's about revenge not being something the government should be taking part in against its citizens. Personal feelings as far as that goes don't really seem relevant to me.
Anyway, like I said before, I don't expect you to change your mind, and I'm sure you know I'm not about to change mine... but I do think that, given the numerous arguments against the DP along with the aforementioned fallibility of the criminal justice system, I don't feel like it can be logically justified, let alone morally.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
You keep calling it revenge. Others think of it as justice. Do the dead count for nothing?
And it's completely logical: the punishment should fit the crime. If someone walks into a church and kills nine people he doesn't even know... them how is serving time like a drug dealer or 'run of the mill' murderer justice?
I'm not saying we surround him with his friends and loved ones, shoot him, and let him die in his pool of blood like he did to his victims... but a clinical death is reasonable given the horrific circumstances.
You're right... mass murder, serial murder, murders where children are the victims, or murders with extra depravity will never have me thinking prison is appropriate.
Government sponsored killing. If they aren't dping it, who is? For arguments sake, as a compromise, the government decides it should not be associated with the DP. But it remains an acceptable form of punishment for only the worst crimes. Who takes it over? Is it contracted out? Do private businesses bid on who gets to do it? Should it be on the tax payers dime or the victims of the family, or the family of the person being executed?
Or the government continues to use the DP but revises the standards. Maybe they only allow the DP to be used when there is nl,shadshad of a doubt that the person convicted actually did the crime. To ensure the wrong people aren't executed. Would you prefer that ovee entry system?
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
We (SC) didn't even give Susan Smith the death penalty for killing her own kids.
That was before I moved down here. But remember hearing about it and thinking it was odd that she didn't get the DP. Not only did she get to live, but got pregnant from a guard in prison.
One thing this state does not lack is horrendous crimes. Susan Smith may be the only rival to dylan roof when it comes to heinous acts committed in this state since slavery.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
We (SC) didn't even give Susan Smith the death penalty for killing her own kids.
That was before I moved down here. But remember hearing about it and thinking it was odd that she didn't get the DP. Not only did she get to live, but got pregnant from a guard in prison.
One thing this state does not lack is horrendous crimes. Susan Smith may be the only rival to dylan roof when it comes to heinous acts committed in this state since slavery.
I don't remember enough about the Smith case to comment but if she got pregnant in prison and a guard was the father then that's abuse, plain and simple. There is no way to excuse the guard's behaviour.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
We (SC) didn't even give Susan Smith the death penalty for killing her own kids.
That was before I moved down here. But remember hearing about it and thinking it was odd that she didn't get the DP. Not only did she get to live, but got pregnant from a guard in prison.
One thing this state does not lack is horrendous crimes. Susan Smith may be the only rival to dylan roof when it comes to heinous acts committed in this state since slavery.
I don't remember enough about the Smith case to comment but if she got pregnant in prison and a guard was the father then that's abuse, plain and simple. There is no way to excuse the guard's behaviour.
The guard abused his position of authority without question. Let's not forget the other person in that event- just merrily humping away after killing her two children that had become inconvenient to her.
We (SC) didn't even give Susan Smith the death penalty for killing her own kids.
That was before I moved down here. But remember hearing about it and thinking it was odd that she didn't get the DP. Not only did she get to live, but got pregnant from a guard in prison.
One thing this state does not lack is horrendous crimes. Susan Smith may be the only rival to dylan roof when it comes to heinous acts committed in this state since slavery.
I don't remember enough about the Smith case to comment but if she got pregnant in prison and a guard was the father then that's abuse, plain and simple. There is no way to excuse the guard's behaviour.
The guard abused his position of authority without question. Let's not forget the other person in that event- just merrily humping away after killing her two children that had become inconvenient to her.
Are we sure about that? I have no idea in this case, but it's not like rape in prison is unknown. Or manipulation.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
We (SC) didn't even give Susan Smith the death penalty for killing her own kids.
That was before I moved down here. But remember hearing about it and thinking it was odd that she didn't get the DP. Not only did she get to live, but got pregnant from a guard in prison.
One thing this state does not lack is horrendous crimes. Susan Smith may be the only rival to dylan roof when it comes to heinous acts committed in this state since slavery.
I don't remember enough about the Smith case to comment but if she got pregnant in prison and a guard was the father then that's abuse, plain and simple. There is no way to excuse the guard's behaviour.
I don't think there was any abuse going on by the guard. They had an ongoing relationship. I'm sure Smith was using the guard more than the guard was using Smith. Everything was consensual from what I remembered.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
We (SC) didn't even give Susan Smith the death penalty for killing her own kids.
That was before I moved down here. But remember hearing about it and thinking it was odd that she didn't get the DP. Not only did she get to live, but got pregnant from a guard in prison.
One thing this state does not lack is horrendous crimes. Susan Smith may be the only rival to dylan roof when it comes to heinous acts committed in this state since slavery.
I don't remember enough about the Smith case to comment but if she got pregnant in prison and a guard was the father then that's abuse, plain and simple. There is no way to excuse the guard's behaviour.
The guard abused his position of authority without question. Let's not forget the other person in that event- just merrily humping away after killing her two children that had become inconvenient to her.
Are we sure about that? I have no idea in this case, but it's not like rape in prison is unknown. Or manipulation.
I think it's a pretty safe assumption. The fact that she murdered her children to bed another man makes me think she's far from a poor, little, abused waif that was completely taken advantage of by some goofball prison guard (not saying you said this... this qualifying statement is for Soul).
Why... the f**k... would you want to have sex with a monster such as her? F**king idiot.
We (SC) didn't even give Susan Smith the death penalty for killing her own kids.
That was before I moved down here. But remember hearing about it and thinking it was odd that she didn't get the DP. Not only did she get to live, but got pregnant from a guard in prison.
One thing this state does not lack is horrendous crimes. Susan Smith may be the only rival to dylan roof when it comes to heinous acts committed in this state since slavery.
I don't remember enough about the Smith case to comment but if she got pregnant in prison and a guard was the father then that's abuse, plain and simple. There is no way to excuse the guard's behaviour.
I don't think there was any abuse going on by the guard. They had an ongoing relationship. I'm sure Smith was using the guard more than the guard was using Smith. Everything was consensual from what I remembered.
Maybe she agreed, but the power differential between a prison guard and an inmate is such that it's never going to be a consensual relationship. You can't have a consensual relationship with someone who holds power over pretty much every aspect of your life.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Comments
we will find a way, we will find our place
Living in a nation ruled by dispassionate law, and dp being as yet still a legal means of punishment, if beyond even the slimmest shred of doubt such a person is found guilty BY THEIR OWN ADMISSION, then Go Easy Convict.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Some people are just f**ked up people. Like mushroom head for example. He's f**ked up, The unfortunate part of this story isn't f**ked up mushroom head... it's his victims. They crossed paths with a f**ked up idiot.
I callled him a lower form of life than a worm because he is- worms have never hurt anyone. I haven't dehumanized him at all. He's just a shitty human being whose life has value to some, while having absolutely none to others.
we will find a way, we will find our place
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
I think it's fair to say that you become somewhat more defensive when your belief system is challenged (or mocked); hence, my 'selective' comment.
www.headstonesband.com
BTW, confession is a notoriously unreliable form of proof of guilt. And perhaps you think DNA evidence is solid enough? I would disagree with that too. DNA evidence can be planted, tampered with, etc. But either way, the possibility of innocent people dying isn't the only reason I'm so strongly opposed, as I said.
we will find a way, we will find our place
When guilt is certain, the 'execute an innocent person' argument is moot.
Again, the execute the innocent person argument, while a REALITY under the DP right now, is far from the only good argument against it.
Anyway, like I said before, I don't expect you to change your mind, and I'm sure you know I'm not about to change mine... but I do think that, given the numerous arguments against the DP along with the aforementioned fallibility of the criminal justice system, I don't feel like it can be logically justified, let alone morally.
You keep calling it revenge. Others think of it as justice. Do the dead count for nothing?
And it's completely logical: the punishment should fit the crime. If someone walks into a church and kills nine people he doesn't even know... them how is serving time like a drug dealer or 'run of the mill' murderer justice?
I'm not saying we surround him with his friends and loved ones, shoot him, and let him die in his pool of blood like he did to his victims... but a clinical death is reasonable given the horrific circumstances.
You're right... mass murder, serial murder, murders where children are the victims, or murders with extra depravity will never have me thinking prison is appropriate.
Or the government continues to use the DP but revises the standards. Maybe they only allow the DP to be used when there is nl,shadshad of a doubt that the person convicted actually did the crime. To ensure the wrong people aren't executed. Would you prefer that ovee entry system?
we will find a way, we will find our place
One thing this state does not lack is horrendous crimes. Susan Smith may be the only rival to dylan roof when it comes to heinous acts committed in this state since slavery.
we will find a way, we will find our place
we will find a way, we will find our place
Why... the f**k... would you want to have sex with a monster such as her? F**king idiot.
http://m.live5news.com/live5news/db_349195/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=UbF4epKJ
we will find a way, we will find our place