Capital Punishment

Andalublue said:

That didn't work. I think this is what he meant though...

"I feel the same way, though I fully support a defence of 'self-defence' when someone has been violently attacked. Should a victim of assault kill his/her assailant, provided it is within a reasonable time limit, I'd support them."

See? Much clearer, no?

I have no idea how this relates to the DP, however.

Click to expand...

All it took was the two commas, but that works too... and see, you did figure it out!

Bodhisattva said:

All it took was the two commas, but that works too... and see, you did figure it out!

Click to expand...

Eventually. Should reading posts in a thread be that difficult? I guess the guy's a lawyer, so we shouldn't expect clarity.

Andalublue said:

Eventually. Should reading posts in a thread be that difficult? I guess the guy's a lawyer, so we shouldn't expect clarity.

Click to expand...

Doctors are even worse, and then there are foreigners (damn them), but I am a teacher, so it has to be pretty clear. I read poorly constructed sentences from students far too often.

Bodhisattva said:

Doctors are even worse, and then there are foreigners (damn them), but I am a teacher, so it has to be pretty clear. I read poorly constructed sentences from students far too often.

Click to expand...

I still have a High School report in which 3 different entries by 3 different teachers remain indecipherable to me, after 33 years!

Andalublue said:

I still have a High School report in which 3 different entries by 3 different teachers remain indecipherable to me, after 33 years!

Click to expand...

It is probably just me, and not the profession. I have always been pretty neat and organised with regards to how I communicate.

Kali said:

Agree. Bleeding hearts wish to whine and cry that it is not a deterrent due to all these lame ass studies but the fact is that we have not used Capital Punishment in the way that we should be so no study in the USA world can speak about things we are not doing.

I am pretty sure that if we started killing these monsters and sending a clear message to anybody living in the U.S.A.: if you kill someone in cold blood for no reason we can and will kill you in a speedy fashion? The lower than **** asswipes doing these things will stop and re-think their actions.

I am also 100% sure that if we started killing these little prick assholes that rape babies and small children that these digusting monsters would re-think what they do.

If we send a clear message that if you do this in this country you will DIE? You damn sure bet your ass it will go down. Period. Point. Blank.

Click to expand...

You really believe this drivel? That psychos and schizophrenics will suddenly become respectable God fearing citizens if you kill even more of them? Maybe if you say it enough and convince yourself of the effeminacy of us inadequates who disagree with you, you can make it so?

Badmutha said:

So what would you say to the families......of the thousands of prison guards, correctional officers, and other inmates killed by convicted murderers during their incarceration?

Tell them about the 100% effective rate.......
.
.
.

Click to expand...

I'd say you have a big problem if thousands of prison guards are getting killed. A problem that exists nowhere else in the world. Thousands of prison guards dying at work. How do they recruit any?

Another solution : just kill all lawbreakers. After all I bet some of the "thousands" of murders that you seem to have conjured up here were committed by people who were not convicted of murder. Kill all psychotic people as well, unless you want to explain to the families of the thousands of psychiatric nurses why their relatives were killed by mad people that we allowed to live. Kill epileptics, as they are prone to lose control and kill people. Kill...well just kill, kill. ...I'm sure it will make you feel better.

Ikari said:

It's not incomprehensibe, some of us just don't think it's proper use of the government to extract revenge killings on criminals.

Click to expand...

You keep wanting to attribute it to revenge. I've worked with murderers. I don't hate them. One of my clients shot two people to death over hubcaps. He was still my client, even after the killing.

I just understand that there are some humans who aren't salvageable, and keeping them in prison exposes OTHER INMATES and guards to danger from them. Prolonging their lives serves no legitimate purpose.

Is it possible for some of you to debate this issue without resorting to strawmen? Apparently not.

Plato said:

You really believe this drivel? That psychos and schizophrenics will suddenly become respectable God fearing citizens if you kill even more of them? Maybe if you say it enough and convince yourself of the effeminacy of us inadequates who disagree with you, you can make it so?

Click to expand...

The murdering sort of psychos and schizos are unlikely to reform, and thus should be culled from the herd, lest they do further harm.

Plato said:

I'd say you have a big problem if thousands of prison guards are getting killed. A problem that exists nowhere else in the world. Thousands of prison guards dying at work. How do they recruit any?

Another solution : just kill all lawbreakers. After all I bet some of the "thousands" of murders that you seem to have conjured up here were committed by people who were not convicted of murder. Kill all psychotic people as well, unless you want to explain to the families of the thousands of psychiatric nurses why their relatives were killed by mad people that we allowed to live. Kill epileptics, as they are prone to lose control and kill people. Kill...well just kill, kill. ...I'm sure it will make you feel better.

Click to expand...

Do you feel better after getting your little temper tantrum out here?

Firstly, you really ought to get your vocabulary straight.

"Condone" does not mean the same thing as "condemn", which I suspect is the word you were looking for. If not, your poll is heavily biased and entirely useless, because both options mean the same thing.

Secondly, I condemn the death penalty, because, as a former soldier, I can tell you that the single most damaging act a government can take to lose its legitimacy is kill its own citizens. There are no "if"s, "but"s, or objections -- killing your own citizens for any reason, whatsoever, is unacceptable. When a government legally allows for the execution of its own citizens, no matter the reason, that government has no moral high ground to claim.

The law is bull****e, when you take an eye-for-an-eye approach -- because the eye-for-an-eye approach necessarily means you're committing the same crime as the criminal.

Capital punishment is barbaric, lazy, ineffective and destructive to the law.

Plato said:

I'd say you have a big problem if thousands of prison guards are getting killed. A problem that exists nowhere else in the world. Thousands of prison guards dying at work. How do they recruit any?

Another solution : just kill all lawbreakers. After all I bet some of the "thousands" of murders that you seem to have conjured up here were committed by people who were not convicted of murder. Kill all psychotic people as well, unless you want to explain to the families of the thousands of psychiatric nurses why their relatives were killed by mad people that we allowed to live. Kill epileptics, as they are prone to lose control and kill people. Kill...well just kill, kill. ...I'm sure it will make you feel better.

Click to expand...

Its true not all the murdered prison guards, correctional officers, and inmates come from the actions of incarcerated convicted murderers......just the majority.

The deterent is only as effective as the punishment is harsh.......if you think you can bring down the murder rate by handing out $50.00 fines in lieu of a death penalty......try it.
.
.
.

Badmutha said:

Its true not all the murdered prison guards, correctional officers, and inmates come from the actions of incarcerated convicted murderers......just the majority.

The deterent is only as effective as the punishment is harsh.......if you think you can bring down the murder rate by handing out $50.00 fines in lieu of a death penalty......try it.

Click to expand...

This is the point you put up some proof or gtf. Numbers of correctional officers and prison staff murdered per year? Are you sure it runs to thousands?

Badmutha said:

Its true not all the murdered prison guards, correctional officers, and inmates come from the actions of incarcerated convicted murderers......just the majority.

The deterent is only as effective as the punishment is harsh.......if you think you can bring down the murder rate by handing out $50.00 fines in lieu of a death penalty......try it.
.
.
.

Click to expand...

Yeah that's what I think. $50 fines all round. Because apparently if you don't believe in the death penalty you believe in freedom for murderers. Bit like Monty Python really. Is that really the best you've got? Crucifixion, over there, crucifixion, over there, freedom actually, freedom?, yes freedom, oh well then off you go, only joking...crucifixion really....Remember that? Oh never mind.

I notice the preference for abuse over argument in your posting but this time don't you think you're just scraping the barrel! I mean, that was just a pathetic whimper of a post wasn't it. It hadn't even got any testosterone flowing through it!

Lets look at the clear experience of societies which have no death penalty. You would think that they would have much higher murder rates than the US. The US may not kill enough people quickly enough for you but those limp wristed feeble minded Euros are without any deterrent whatsoever! But this is the opposite of the truth. European countries have far, far, far lower rates of murder (especially it would seem of prison guards who are seldom even armed in European correctional facilities) than in the USA. There is clearly a strong prima facie case that this may demonstrate that judicial killing doesn't reduce your murder rate.

Let me help you out with the argument against that: obviously there could be other variables involved without which Europe would have a far higher murder rate than the US. What could they be?

Well, less relative poverty, or more gun control in Europe maybe? Those two don't fit the right wing agenda? There can simply be no correlation between the fact that most Europeans never handle a hand gun on their whole lives and the murder rate using handguns.

OK then, maybe it's the higher success rate of the police in solving the murders? Nope, can't be that because everyone knows that it's the death penalty that deters, not the chances of getting caught.

Maybe it's the fact that all the bad Europeans emigrated to America, so everyone in Europe is good? Nope again, everyone knows that the country with the highest murder rates in the advanced world is God's country.

Maybe it's the special air we breathe in Europe, or the garlic in French and Italian food, or the salt in Scottish porridge, or just the fact that we're all just a bunch of effeminate gayboys who can't lift a pistol? Maybe it's our queer historical preference for the rule of law over the lynch mob, or warm English beer that sends us to sleep in the afternoon. It must be something after all.

Because without whatever it is, Europe would be up to the ankles in dead prison guards, murdered police, dead children, raped and murdered mothers. If only Europe would see sense and start strangling people to death again, it's crime rate would be even lower than the record low that it already is in history. In fact there would be no crime at all.

Vengeance is all you've got... Oh and that system where Catz appoints himself judge of all the murderers who get compassion and all those who deserve to die.

Comparing statistics in the USA with individual countries in Europe is disingenuous, because of the immense population difference. If one truly wanted to compare apples to apples... the per capita murder statistic for entire population of Europe... one must total the number of homicides in the whole of Europe compared with the total population of the whole of Europe.

That's all of Europe! Simply cherry-picking the five most westernized nations, such as UK, France, Italy, Germany and Spain, doesn't quite cut it. Not unless we get to cut out a bunch of states with high homicide rates, and pretend they're not really part of the USA!

That's the problem with using statistics to prove a point. They are too easily manipulated and skewered to be of value, unless the underlying data has been scrupulously and meticulously validated. For example, if we were to simply view "Total Crimes per capita by Country), poor New Zealand is the #2 worst in the world! Poor innocent Denmark comes in at #4! The UK is #6, and the USA below them all at #8.

It's okay to be against the death penalty. A lot of Americans certainly are.

But when one pits Europe against the USA based on statistics, i.e. "...the country with the highest murder rates in the advanced world...", and seven European countries have statistically higher murder rates than the USA, then what we have here is statiscally unsubstantiated hyperbole delivered in a condescending, aggressive and sarcastic style that probably won't serve you well here.

I'm just sayin'.

Plato said:

You really believe this drivel? That psychos and schizophrenics will suddenly become respectable God fearing citizens if you kill even more of them? Maybe if you say it enough and convince yourself of the effeminacy of us inadequates who disagree with you, you can make it so?

Click to expand...

Well yes I do believe it and sorry you consider my posts as drivel:roll:

Seems like most angles have been covered already, but I'm new to DP so I might as well make my stance on this known.

I'm not necessarily against capital punishment from a moral standpoint. There seem to be some pretty messed up individuals out there and I feel better knowing that they are six feet under.

Ultimately though I'm against capital punishment because it's no longer a cost effective way of dealing with inmates. We have pretty high efficiency jails that mobilizes inmates into effective labour forces now, including even the most violent offenders. The appeals process of the death penalty costs millions upon millions of dollars. Some say that the solution to this is to just make appealing more difficult, but I'm against that because I'm against reducing the effectiveness of the justice system to determine guilt and protect the innocent.

If someone is damned guilty, then it will be figured out eventually, and if that takes millions of dollars then so be it. But it's still a waste of money. Send them to work and forget about it. The main reason why most countries used to kill people in the western world is because the jails got full or people were just outraged. If it's not about revenge and it's not about jails being full, then I don't see a reason to do it. I'm a fiscal conservative most of the time and this seems like a waste. You can keep them in jail for life for less money than it takes to finally get them to the death chair.

DiAnna said:

That's all of Europe! Simply cherry-picking the five most westernized nations, such as UK, France, Italy, Germany and Spain, doesn't quite cut it. Not unless we get to cut out a bunch of states with high homicide rates, and pretend they're not really part of the USA!

That's the problem with using statistics to prove a point. They are too easily manipulated and skewered to be of value, unless the underlying data has been scrupulously and meticulously validated. For example, if we were to simply view "Total Crimes per capita by Country), poor New Zealand is the #2 worst in the world! Poor innocent Denmark comes in at #4! The UK is #6, and the USA below them all at #8.

It's okay to be against the death penalty. A lot of Americans certainly are.

But when one pits Europe against the USA based on statistics, i.e. "...the country with the highest murder rates in the advanced world...", and seven European countries have statistically higher murder rates than the USA, then what we have here is statiscally unsubstantiated hyperbole delivered in a condescending, aggressive and sarcastic style that probably won't serve you well here.

Click to expand...

DiAnna, I agree with you on the tone and style of Plato's post, he's new here, I hope he learns that heavy rhetoric and sarcasm aren't great debate winners around here.

I do have to take you up on this last paragraph of yours, however. I assume you were taking your statistic from this list:
List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In it, there are indeed seven European countries with high intentional homicide rates than the US, two of which are EU members (Estonia and Lithuania). I doubt Plato was referring to these countries when he was speaking of Europe. He should have been much more precise. You must concede that western European, or EU nations generally have a much lower rate of intentional homicide than the US. It really doesn't help your case, if indeed it IS your case, to compare the US with the likes of Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus and Moldova, all mired in endemic corruption, violence and social breakdown.

I don't understand this point, I'm afraid.

That's all of Europe! Simply cherry-picking the five most westernized nations, such as UK, France, Italy, Germany and Spain, doesn't quite cut it. Not unless we get to cut out a bunch of states with high homicide rates, and pretend they're not really part of the USA!

Click to expand...

Why wouldn't you pick those countries and compare both their individual homicide rates and their collective homicide rates? Why not pick the most westernized countries to compare with the most westernized country in the world? The populations kind of work too.

USA: pop. 300 million
UK: pop. 60m
Germany: pop. 90m
Italy: pop. 60m
France: pop. 60m
Spain: pop. 45m
Total of Euro 5 = 315 million

What's unfair about that? The US has a GDP higher than all of those countries, why would you give a pass to the bigger states with a higher crime rate?

You are quite right however, you cannot say the US has a worse homicide rate than Europe, unless you define what you mean by Europe. But I don't think it's a stretch for Plato to claim:

the country with the highest murder rates in the advanced world is God's country.

Click to expand...

I assume he's referring the US (although all true-born Yorkshiremen grow up knowing that they come from 'God's Own Country'TM) I don't think, even for rhetorical purposes, we could include Georgia, Russia or Moldova in a list of the most advanced nations. Added to this, 2 of the 7, Russia and Belarus retain the death penalty.

Plato is quite wrong, and really ought to have read the rest of the thread before blustering, that the DP defendants in the main use the deterrent argument. Badmutha may do, but he's really not much of a player in this debate thread.

DiAnna said:

Comparing statistics in the USA with individual countries in Europe is disingenuous, because of the immense population difference. If one truly wanted to compare apples to apples... the per capita murder statistic for entire population of Europe... one must total the number of homicides in the whole of Europe compared with the total population of the whole of Europe.

That's all of Europe! Simply cherry-picking the five most westernized nations, such as UK, France, Italy, Germany and Spain, doesn't quite cut it. Not unless we get to cut out a bunch of states with high homicide rates, and pretend they're not really part of the USA!

That's the problem with using statistics to prove a point. They are too easily manipulated and skewered to be of value, unless the underlying data has been scrupulously and meticulously validated. For example, if we were to simply view "Total Crimes per capita by Country), poor New Zealand is the #2 worst in the world! Poor innocent Denmark comes in at #4! The UK is #6, and the USA below them all at #8.

It's okay to be against the death penalty. A lot of Americans certainly are.

But when one pits Europe against the USA based on statistics, i.e. "...the country with the highest murder rates in the advanced world...", and seven European countries have statistically higher murder rates than the USA, then what we have here is statiscally unsubstantiated hyperbole delivered in a condescending, aggressive and sarcastic style that probably won't serve you well here.

I'm just sayin'.

Click to expand...

The style is suitable for the post I was responding to. Perhaps you could look at that piece if crap and tell me how it deserved an intellectual response?

As to the "statistics" argument I am gobsmacked! We are talking about capital crimes, not all crime. Crime statistics are distorted by what gets reported. Murders are generally the least skewed by this factor.

This is not about geography. It would be sufficient to just compare the USA with the UK. And the murder RATE ( which is exactly what you describe) is far lower per head of the population than in the USA. In the UK it could be argued that not having a routinely armed police force may be a factor in reduced gun crime. So you may need a sample that includes countries with armed police forces. So if you want to have a sample bigger than sixty million people to compare with then you compare with those nations which gave broadly similar sociology political systems and history, which would be the old EU before the inclusion of the communist countries. The murder rate would similarly be miles lower. Even if you wanted to include the present EU, including former communist countries (why would you do that?) the murder rate would be miles lower. The USA has to realize that it has a murder problem completely out of proportion to the rest of the free world. Maybe it could learn if it wasn't so bloody arrogant about it's own superiority.

Kali said:

Well yes I do believe it and sorry you consider my posts as drivel:roll:

Click to expand...

It's drivel because it is plainly nonsensical that a threat of punishment would turn psychopaths into saints. But maybe if you could explain how, I might be able to see the counter intuitive genius behind your thesis and acknowledge my mistake.

Andalublue said:

DiAnna, I agree with you on the tone and style of Plato's post, he's new here, I hope he learns that heavy rhetoric and sarcasm aren't great debate winners around here.

I do have to take you up on this last paragraph of yours, however. I assume you were taking your statistic from this list:
List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In it, there are indeed seven European countries with high intentional homicide rates than the US, two of which are EU members (Estonia and Lithuania). I doubt Plato was referring to these countries when he was speaking of Europe. He should have been much more precise. You must concede that western European, or EU nations generally have a much lower rate of intentional homicide than the US. It really doesn't help your case, if indeed it IS your case, to compare the US with the likes of Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus and Moldova, all mired in endemic corruption, violence and social breakdown.

I don't understand this point, I'm afraid.

Why wouldn't you pick those countries and compare both their individual homicide rates and their collective homicide rates? Why not pick the most westernized countries to compare with the most westernized country in the world? The populations kind of work too.

USA: pop. 300 million
UK: pop. 60m
Germany: pop. 90m
Italy: pop. 60m
France: pop. 60m
Spain: pop. 45m
Total of Euro 5 = 315 million

What's unfair about that? The US has a GDP higher than all of those countries, why would you give a pass to the bigger states with a higher crime rate?

You are quite right however, you cannot say the US has a worse homicide rate than Europe, unless you define what you mean by Europe. But I don't think it's a stretch for Plato to claim: I assume he's referring the US (although all true-born Yorkshiremen grow up knowing that they come from 'God's Own Country'TM) I don't think, even for rhetorical purposes, we could include Georgia, Russia or Moldova in a list of the most advanced nations. Added to this, 2 of the 7, Russia and Belarus retain the death penalty.

Plato is quite wrong, and really ought to have read the rest of the thread before blustering, that the DP defendants in the main use the deterrent argument. Badmutha may do, but he's really not much of a player in this debate thread.

Click to expand...

Your argument is spot on. The European nations which were part of the post WW2 free world are the most relevant comparison. Although upu could just take any of those democracies by themselves. Introducing countries with post communist gangster mafia is not a useful comparator. My post was only to badmutha. I ascribe no views to "the majority". And I was born on Yorkshire. I understand that people from Maine claim a divine neighbour too. I expect he was a Pilgrim from Whitby.

I'll rest my case.

Its simple, Capital Punishment was first instituted by God for the premeditated act of spilling innocent blood (Genesis 9:6). Physically punishing the wicked and evil mind is perfectly moral. Most progressives are simply being politically correct when they protest Capital Punishment yet turn around and endorse institutional slavery (prison) by the state as an acceptable form of punishment.

They can offer no logical and reasoned argument why they support slavery and condemn capital punishment other than the the typical "feel good" emotional positions adhered by all progressives based not upon logic but "feeling"...i.e., its unkind, its unloving, its inhumane..etc., yet these same people through proxy of towing a political line support Abortion on Demand while defending Islamic fundamentalism and Sharia Law.

I approve of it as long as it's not too severe.

Kill the killers because killing is wrong. I'm not seeing the logic in that. If you're going to say an action is wrong, and that people who do it are evil, doesn't it negate the legitimacy of that notion when you perform the act that you say to be wrong?

Walter said:

Its simple, Capital Punishment was first instituted by God for the premeditated act of spilling innocent blood (Genesis 9:6). Physically punishing the wicked and evil mind is perfectly moral. Most progressives are simply being politically correct when they protest Capital Punishment yet turn around and endorse institutional slavery (prison) by the state as an acceptable form of punishment.

They can offer no logical and reasoned argument why they support slavery and condemn capital punishment other than the the typical "feel good" emotional positions adhered by all progressives based not upon logic but "feeling"...i.e., its unkind, its unloving, its inhumane..etc., yet these same people through proxy of towing a political line support Abortion on Demand while defending Islamic fundamentalism and Sharia Law.

Click to expand...

Already dealt with.

Christ repudiated the OT and told us to turn the other cheek, not to judge our brothers and to put down the stones of capital punishment. I am sure you can spin it but Christ told us we have no right to punish anyone.

Imprisonment is only acceptable as a means of protecting society or rehabilitating a criminal. Any punishment is against Christian teaching. Christ told us to love, and particularly those in prison. It is utterly hypocritical for Christians to call for punishment, capital or otherwise. As members of society we are entitled to restrain people or reform them. We are not permitted to punish. We are commanded to love all God's creatures.

In the case of atheists who argue that selfishness and vengeance are perfectly acceptable motivators, it is more difficult to find an argument. But for Christians the New Testament teaching is clear.

Oh no, i just read the last bit of the above post properly. I suppose I should have realized the gookiness of this drivel when it argued that those of us who oppose capital punishment support Sharia law. Why did I even bother to answer this juvenile pap? Of course we think all executions are wrong except for those in Iran and Saudi Arabia. We just love a good stoning.

Abusive adolescent horse****. Why do we have to put up with such tedious bollocks. Life's too short to be dealing with this kindergarten ****e.