quote:
Demos thought this was the Ricky Martin Fan Club Forum and wrote:
Statistics say no.
I'd like to see the compared values (statistical, not moral) of a society that doesn't execute murderers compared to a society that does.
More to the point, lets see these statistics you mention.
quote:
Nobody really understood why CBTao wrote:
I'd like to see the compared values (statistical, not moral) of a society that doesn't execute murderers compared to a society that does.More to the point, lets see these statistics you mention.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=17&did=437 comes to mind off-hand (NY times article, only linked it on another site because the NY Times site wants you to register/pay). I just wish the study had clearer statistics concerning urban areas, since it just kinda makes sense with population density that South Dakota would have less capital offenses than Illinois or New York. Although, it does mention that
quote:
Massachusetts, which abolished capital punishment in 1984, has a lower rate than Connecticut, which has six people on death row
which was interesting since Massachussets does have a major urban city.
quote:
A sleep deprived Mr. Parcelan stammered:
Fun fact about the death sentence: In Japan, death row prisoners are not told when they're scheduled to die and they aren't given a "humane" death. They sit in their cells until the guards decide to take them outside and shoot them.
The Japanese justice system in general is all kinds of fucked up. Given how it works it's appalling that they're considered a first-world democracy.
quote:
Mod had this to say about Reading Rainbow:
The Japanese justice system in general is all kinds of fucked up. Given how it works it's appalling that they're considered a first-world democracy.
Beneath the manners and otaku, the Japanese are incredibly psychotic civilization.
quote:
The propaganda machine of Bloodsage's junta released this statement:
You're dancing around the question I've asked several times: why is it necessary that the punishee recognize, after the fact, that he's been punished? That begs the question whether punishment is necessarily rehabilitative.
I thought I was beat, but after sleeping on it, I realized this: we don't punish those who don't realize they're being punished. Do we punish the person who kills his wife, then himself? Do we punish someone whose crime is discovered after he has died? Do we punish the man who drives drunk, kills a child, then crashes his car and spends the rest of his life in a coma? Do we punish the severely retarded, or those who are so insane that they cannot tell reality from fantasy? I mean, these people can't recognize that they're being punished, and because of this, we don't punish them. Why? Honestly, I don't know. It's just something we do.
It nonetheless appears that the whole nature of punishment dwells upon the notion that the punishee be able to recognize the punishment. It is necessary because we deem it to be necessary. We need not say anything about what the punishee makes of it--rehabilitation, retribution, penance, whatever--because that varies by the nature and degree of punishment. Were it not necessary, we would see fit to punish people posthumously for crimes which they committed in life, or punish the severely retarded or extremely insane, despite the fact that they cannot recognize their punishment. Invariably we visit the consequences on the living and scient.
Then, it still holds that death is not the punishment. Death is death. I'd go so far as to say everything leading up to the instant of death is the punishment, and from this, death follows, because that is all the punishee can recognize. Is this a pointless distinction? I don't know. I'm going to have to chew on it for a while longer.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
It is necessary because we deem it to be necessary.
Honestly, do I really need to point out such obvious circular reasoning?
Further, you've made timeline errors in your logic. While it's true that no one punishes someone who is already dead, that has nothing to do with the situation where the person is alive when subjected to punishment. The question is why does the person have to be alive after being punished?
The reason mentally incompetant people aren't punished has nothing to do with the fact that they may or may not be able to realize they are being punished. They are not punished because they are not responsible for their actions. Being responsible for the action that results in punishment is the criterion, not awareness of being punished.
And there you have your mistake in a nutshell. You are assuming that every observed trapping of what you've defined to be punishment is equally critical to its identity as punishment.
So neener. 
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
2. As for Moussaoui (sp), there's a very simple way to kill him without him getting his 72 virgins. Dip the syringe in pig's blood. He becomes unclean, and is not allowed into heaven. Problem solved. Yes, I know pig's blood is incredibly not sanitary.
quote:
Anakha had this to say about Robocop:
1. Why should prisoners fear the death penalty? THey get to sit in cells for years on end. And then we just inject you and put you to sleep. Personally, if we are going to have the death penalty, we need to just put a bullet in the convicted felon's brain an hour after the trial. Saves time and money.2. As for Moussaoui (sp), there's a very simple way to kill him without him getting his 72 virgins. Dip the syringe in pig's blood. He becomes unclean, and is not allowed into heaven. Problem solved. Yes, I know pig's blood is incredibly not sanitary.
Internet tough guy ahoy!
quote:
Everyone wondered WTF when Anakha wrote:
1. Why should prisoners fear the death penalty? THey get to sit in cells for years on end. And then we just inject you and put you to sleep. Personally, if we are going to have the death penalty, we need to just put a bullet in the convicted felon's brain an hour after the trial. Saves time and money.2. As for Moussaoui (sp), there's a very simple way to kill him without him getting his 72 virgins. Dip the syringe in pig's blood. He becomes unclean, and is not allowed into heaven. Problem solved. Yes, I know pig's blood is incredibly not sanitary.
1. Why should someone fear the oncoming cessation of their existence? If you can't answer this question, there's something wrong with you.
2. See Karnaj's post on page 1 about the Wall of Ignorance.
None, he fell Sakkra fucked around with this message on 05-06-2006 at 02:19 PM.
I don't even have a problem with him getting the lethal injection rather than the chair, firing squad, or the like. As viscerally satisfying as it may be to make a villain suffer a vicious end or the like, it's not necessarily. Just that the end comes as quickly as the appeals system allows is enough for me.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
quote:
Ruvyen was listening to Cher while typing:
1. Why should someone fear the oncoming cessation of their existence? If you can't answer this question, there's something wrong with you.
You took his question completely out of context.
And I'm not afraid of death. I don't want to die, but I have no fear of it. What's to fear? The moment it happens, you won't care anymore.
quote:
Ja'Deth Issar Ka'bael had this to say about John Romero:
Anyone is worth more than me if I were a cold-blooded killer or knowingly associated with cold-blooded killers, much less mastermind a serial-killing plot like Charles Manson.If I've been convicted of a crime and sentenced to something where I'm essentially in a tiny hole by myself with no hope of ever getting out, I'm pretty sure I'm not worth more than any average citizen. That's part of the reason I'm off the street. The point of rehabilitative incarceration is to make me a worthwhile functional member of society. If I'm in non-rehabilitative incarceration, then my stock value is about as low as it gets.
You're sidestepping the question. If the value of a human life can be defined as a function of 'value to society' there surely must be someone who is more useful to society than you and whose life is thus worth more than yours, as you are now. Uness this is one of the countless systems of humanity and sub-humanity which conveniently places the one making it at the top of the "humanity"-list.
quote:
Mod had this to say about Pirotess:
You're sidestepping the question. If the value of a human life can be defined as a function of 'value to society' there surely must be someone who is more useful to society than you and whose life is thus worth more than yours, as you are now. Uness this is one of the countless systems of humanity and sub-humanity which conveniently places the one making it at the top of the "humanity"-list.
You're asking for the value of the dollar by only focusing on currencies valued more. I can very easily and legally define my point using things only inferior to me...and by using the criteria by which they are inferior I can judge who is superior to me on the continuum. I would assume that people who contribute more to society, either by doing dangerous or vital work, providing aid and/or sustenance to their fellows by offering work, or people who work in charity institutions of their own free accord are contributing positively to the society, and would be worth more than people who neither really contribute nor unnecessarily tax the system. I don't propose to, sticking to the point of argument, somehow magically give them more life, but I would value those peoples' ongoing lives far more than someone who kills. I myself am one of the other people; I don't do a lot of charity work, I don't employ lots of other people, I don't do dangerous or vital work. On the other hand, I don't draw unnecessarily on the system. I'm not hurting anything. But then society has decided that I can get by like this. Most of society is comprised of people like me, I would be willing to wager. Hell even bums, who contribute nothing, do comparitively little damage in comparison to murderers.
Let's not be ignorant of the point just for the sake of argument, Mod.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
quote:
Snoota thought this was the Ricky Martin Fan Club Forum and wrote:
You took his question completely out of context.And I'm not afraid of death. I don't want to die, but I have no fear of it. What's to fear? The moment it happens, you won't care anymore.
How am I taking his question out of context? He did ask why someone should fear death.
And as for death itself...it's hard for me to say how I feel towards it. I do fear it, but it's not the "cessation of existence" part that I fear. As you said, once my existence comes to an end, I won't care anymore. I guess what I'm afraid of, is what's going to happen to my friends and family when I'm not around.
I guess the prospect of rotting in jail is less appealing than a martyr's death. What a shocker.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
Ruvyen had this to say about dark elf butts:
How am I taking his question out of context? He did ask why someone should fear death.
No, he asked why an inmate should fear the death penalty when it takes decades in most cases.
quote:
How.... Karnaj.... uughhhhhh:
"I was just kidding!"I guess the prospect of rotting in jail is less appealing than a martyr's death. What a shocker.
Further reinforcement that we've made the right decision here. A terrorist has shown the true nature of his calling: impotence masked with fear.
Also, here's some good legal advice: If you want to change your plea, it probably helps that you don't cackle and say "You have lost, America! I have won!" when you're sentenced to life. 
His best bet is to take a swan dive off of his bed and hope he breaks his neck.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
Everyone wondered WTF when Snoota wrote:
No, he asked why an inmate should fear the death penalty when it takes decades in most cases.
I don't see how the time it takes to execute a prisoner is of any importance, assuming of course that they can be executed before they expire naturally.
