Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32

Thread: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by P/N View Post
    37 people executed out of a population of well over 300 million is significant? I'd say that's not enough based on the amount of crime that takes place here. I gave 4 examples of worthless pieces of **** that deserve to be put to death, and yet only one stands a chance at being put to death (the first one), the others were sentenced to life or less. Putting the US in the same category as Iran, China and Saudi Arabia when it comes to putting people to death is not fact based, it is agenda based. When scum like the ones I linked to are not put to death in the US, but would be put to death in a heartbeat in the other three countries mentioned, the US is not even in the same league. This is a clear agenda driven report because the facts simply do not prove their point in the least.
    Whether or not they deserved to die is irrelevant to the fact that the numbers represent state executions within the United States. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

    The report doesn't cater to who deserved to die and who didn't. It simply reports the numbers of people executed world wide, and then divides the top statistics based on which countries execute the most. The U.S. falls in the top 5.

    I don't believe it is a commentary on comparing human rights in China to human rights in the U.S. It is simply a numbers based report. Freaking out about it is not necessary.

  2. #22
    Global Moderator
    Silent Bob for President!

    RedAkston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    33,768
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    Whether or not they deserved to die is irrelevant to the fact that the numbers represent state executions within the United States. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?
    I agree with this, but my point remains - these people would be put to death in China, Iran or Saudi Arabia, and yet they weren't here. Maybe you just can't comprehend that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    The report doesn't cater to who deserved to die and who didn't. It simply reports the numbers of people executed world wide, and then divides the top statistics based on which countries execute the most. The U.S. falls in the top 5.
    And you think statistics are really accurate from places like Sudan, Jordan, North Korea, Syria, Uganda, Yemen or Indonesia? If you do, then you've lost touch with reality. The US is not in the top 5, period.

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    I don't believe it is a commentary on comparing human rights in China to human rights in the U.S. It is simply a numbers based report. Freaking out about it is not necessary.
    Intellectual dishonesty isn't necessary either, but you seem to display it in many of your posts.
    Welfare (Food Stamps, WIC, etc...) are not entitlements. They are taxpayer funded handouts and shouldn't be called entitlements at all. Social Security and Veteran's benefits are 'Entitlements' because the people receiving them are entitled to them. They were earned and paid for by the recipients.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by P/N View Post
    I agree with this, but my point remains - these people would be put to death in China, Iran or Saudi Arabia, and yet they weren't here. Maybe you just can't comprehend that.
    Again, whether or not I agree with you on those points (although I do) is irrelevant to the raw numbers that Amnesty collects. It seems like you are just in denial about the U.S. being in the top 5... I'm sorry, I can't help you.

    Quote Originally Posted by P/N View Post
    And you think statistics are really accurate from places like Sudan, Jordan, North Korea, Syria, Uganda, Yemen or Indonesia? If you do, then you've lost touch with reality. The US is not in the top 5, period.
    This is an unprovable claim, even though it is reasonable.

    Quote Originally Posted by P/N View Post
    Intellectual dishonesty isn't necessary either, but you seem to display it in many of your posts.
    I'll let this ad hom slide. Next time, I report it.

  4. #24
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    Whether or not they deserved to die is irrelevant to the fact that the numbers represent state executions within the United States. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

    The report doesn't cater to who deserved to die and who didn't. It simply reports the numbers of people executed world wide, and then divides the top statistics based on which countries execute the most. The U.S. falls in the top 5.

    I don't believe it is a commentary on comparing human rights in China to human rights in the U.S. It is simply a numbers based report. Freaking out about it is not necessary.
    The point is that including the US in that group of countries without noting the disparity is disingenuous at best and misleading at worst.

    Say there are 100 people participating in a hot dog eating contest. The top person eats 75 hot dogs, the second eats 73, the third eats 70 and the fourth eats 65. The other 96 people are all lightweights, eating amounts ranging from 0 to 7.

    Now, pretend that competitor number five is a famous person and that I'm a reporter who doesn't particularly like competitor number five and has in fact gotten into a lot of arguments with him. Further pretend that I have a history of seeking to get my articles on the front page by writing bad things about competitor number five in particular, and I know that implying that he's a fatass that eats a lot of hot dogs is a great way to do that.

    Now, I could write an article saying that "the top five competitors combined to eat 290 hot dogs, 93% of the total" and I would be 100% accurate. However, wouldn't that article be somewhat misleading in that it would be lumping the fifth competitor in with the top four without noting the huge disparity in consumption between the top four and the fifth? Wouldn't you be suspicious of my motives in doing so?
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    Silent Bob for President!

    RedAkston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    33,768
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    The point is that including the US in that group of countries without noting the disparity is disingenuous at best and misleading at worst.

    Say there are 100 people participating in a hot dog eating contest. The top person eats 75 hot dogs, the second eats 73, the third eats 70 and the fourth eats 65. The other 96 people are all lightweights, eating amounts ranging from 0 to 7.

    Now, pretend that competitor number five is a famous person and that I'm a reporter who doesn't particularly like competitor number five and has in fact gotten into a lot of arguments with him. Further pretend that I have a history of seeking to get my articles on the front page by writing bad things about competitor number five in particular, and I know that implying that he's a fatass that eats a lot of hot dogs is a great way to do that.

    Now, I could write an article saying that "the top five competitors combined to eat 290 hot dogs, 93% of the total" and I would be 100% accurate. However, wouldn't that article be somewhat misleading in that it would be lumping the fifth competitor in with the top four without noting the huge disparity in consumption between the top four and the fifth? Wouldn't you be suspicious of my motives in doing so?
    There you go using logic and common sense again. Didn't your mother tell you to wait an hour after eating before using your brain? Oh wait...
    Welfare (Food Stamps, WIC, etc...) are not entitlements. They are taxpayer funded handouts and shouldn't be called entitlements at all. Social Security and Veteran's benefits are 'Entitlements' because the people receiving them are entitled to them. They were earned and paid for by the recipients.

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    The point is that including the US in that group of countries without noting the disparity is disingenuous at best and misleading at worst.

    Say there are 100 people participating in a hot dog eating contest. The top person eats 75 hot dogs, the second eats 73, the third eats 70 and the fourth eats 65. The other 96 people are all lightweights, eating amounts ranging from 0 to 7.

    Now, pretend that competitor number five is a famous person and that I'm a reporter who doesn't particularly like competitor number five and has in fact gotten into a lot of arguments with him. Further pretend that I have a history of seeking to get my articles on the front page by writing bad things about competitor number five in particular, and I know that implying that he's a fatass that eats a lot of hot dogs is a great way to do that.

    Now, I could write an article saying that "the top five competitors combined to eat 290 hot dogs, 93% of the total" and I would be 100% accurate. However, wouldn't that article be somewhat misleading in that it would be lumping the fifth competitor in with the top four without noting the huge disparity in consumption between the top four and the fifth? Wouldn't you be suspicious of my motives in doing so?
    I understand your view, but you would have to find reportable countries comparable to the U.S. to say that the U.S. is being hand picked from a slew of other countries to represent the 5th slot.

    According to the article (reposted since the OP link isn't working):

    Quote Originally Posted by Article
    Fifty-nine countries retain the death penalty. But only 25 of them carried out executions in 2008. In Europe, only one country carried out the death sentence: Belarus, where four people were executed last year.
    Of those countries, the U.S. falls into the top five. I agree that 39 isn't that many executed, but it's still a notable figure from an organization that is universally against the death penalty and has internally declared it a human rights issue.

    I think objectors to this article are seeing an argument against the U.S. where one doesn't exist. You are essentially anticipating an anti-U.S. or anti-death penalty argument... but I don't see that at all. All I see are numbers. It's just like when people say that the U.S. and China are the world's worse polluters... Americans get offended by being compared to the Chinese, but the figures aren't about your national pride, they're about reality.

  7. #27
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    I understand your view, but you would have to find reportable countries comparable to the U.S. to say that the U.S. is being hand picked from a slew of other countries to represent the 5th slot.

    According to the article (reposted since the OP link isn't working):
    I'm not saying that the numbers themselves have been misrepresented, as I fully believe that based on the statistics they compiled, we're the fifth highest. My objection is to the way they're presented, not the content.

    Of those countries, the U.S. falls into the top five. I agree that 39 isn't that many executed, but it's still a notable figure from an organization that is universally against the death penalty and has internally declared it a human rights issue.

    I think objectors to this article are seeing an argument against the U.S. where one doesn't exist. You are essentially anticipating an anti-U.S. or anti-death penalty argument... but I don't see that at all. All I see are numbers. It's just like when people say that the U.S. and China are the world's worse polluters... Americans get offended by being compared to the Chinese, but the figures aren't about your national pride, they're about reality.
    I just don't think that's the case. Neither I, nor the other posters objecting, perceive the 39 executions as something to be ashamed of. In fact, as many people mentioned, we are completely content with that number and wouldn't object to it being a bit higher.

    The objection comes from the fact that an organization with a long history of trying to paint the US as a bad guy is continuing on that path in a less than forthright manner.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I'm not saying that the numbers themselves have been misrepresented, as I fully believe that based on the statistics they compiled, we're the fifth highest. My objection is to the way they're presented, not the content.
    How are they being presented that makes it appear that way? How come you got that impression but I didn't? We're both reasonable people.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I just don't think that's the case. Neither I, nor the other posters objecting, perceive the 39 executions as something to be ashamed of. In fact, as many people mentioned, we are completely content with that number and wouldn't object to it being a bit higher.
    I don't think you need to feel ashamed per se... I made no value judgment about what the numbers represented. Maybe I was being too coldly logical about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    The objection comes from the fact that an organization with a long history of trying to paint the US as a bad guy is continuing on that path in a less than forthright manner.
    I'm not sure on the details of this claim, but I'm not keen on Amnesty's politics to be honest. Maybe you are right. In any event, I must judge it on a case by case basis... I still think that people are anticipating some kind of agenda, so that's what they are seeing. As someone who likes to avoid making assumptions, I just looked at the numbers.

  9. #29
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    I've got one question for you...

    ...what's "almost" 38 people? Did they execute 37 and a half, or maybe only 36 and a quarter people? Are you using the archaic Constitutional formula that defines a black person as 3/5 of a white person?

    How did you get to "almost" 38?
    First, RightinNYC pointed out what I was doing:

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I think he's playing off the title of the thread.
    Also there was this:

    Death Sentence Commuted In Va. Case - washingtonpost.com

    There were 37 executions in the Us. Let's pretend that he's the "almost" killed 38th person so that literalists who don't get my dry sense of humor don't melt their brains trying to figure it out.



    But most importantly I was using sarcasm to point out how the article was disingenuous to include the US and Pakistan on their list of "executors" in order to get the 93% number when they could just as easily have accurately reported:

    "China, along with Iran and Saudi Arabia were responsible for more than 90% of all executions in 2008"

    Combined, The US and Pakistan accounted for less than 3% of the executions. Saudi Arabia had the fewest executions of the big three, and they had 45 more executions than the US and Pakistan combined. (That translates into almost 79% more executions in Saudi Arabia than the US and Pakistan combined.)


    Listen, I'm not a fan of the death penalty because I don't believe the state should have the power to execute prisoners because I think it is more power than the government should have. It's something that is often associated with totalitarianism and monarchy because it is a powerful tool of subjugation. I'm for limited governmental powers. Granting the state the power to kill it's citizens, for any reason, is counter-intuitive to that belief system.

    That being said, I firmly believe the article is trying to portray the US (and Pakistan for that matter) as one of the "worst" when they aren't even in the same ballpark as the other three. It's bull****.

    In other words, when a person who is firmly against the death penalty is saying an article about the US variant is pulling some bull****, there is obviously some bull**** being pulled.

  10. #30
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    The point is that including the US in that group of countries without noting the disparity is disingenuous at best and misleading at worst.

    Say there are 100 people participating in a hot dog eating contest. The top person eats 75 hot dogs, the second eats 73, the third eats 70 and the fourth eats 65. The other 96 people are all lightweights, eating amounts ranging from 0 to 7.

    Now, pretend that competitor number five is a famous person and that I'm a reporter who doesn't particularly like competitor number five and has in fact gotten into a lot of arguments with him. Further pretend that I have a history of seeking to get my articles on the front page by writing bad things about competitor number five in particular, and I know that implying that he's a fatass that eats a lot of hot dogs is a great way to do that.

    Now, I could write an article saying that "the top five competitors combined to eat 290 hot dogs, 93% of the total" and I would be 100% accurate. However, wouldn't that article be somewhat misleading in that it would be lumping the fifth competitor in with the top four without noting the huge disparity in consumption between the top four and the fifth? Wouldn't you be suspicious of my motives in doing so?
    The only things I must add is that the US was actually fourth, Pakistan was fifth on the list, and even combined they got blown out by number three.

    This article paints out BOTH the US and Pakistan as being in the same ballpark as the big three, when they literally didn't even enter the competition.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •