• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Amnesty: Almost 2,400 executed in 2008

T

theTANTALIZER

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
58
Reaction score
9
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Almost 2,400 people worldwide were executed last year, but most countries moved a step closer toward abolishing the death penalty, Amnesty International said Tuesday.

China carried out more executions than the rest of the world combined, with 1,718 people put to death, the human-rights group said.

With China, four other nations -- Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States -- accounted for 93 percent of the 2,390 executions, according to the group's report "Death Sentences and Executions in 2008."

Saudi Arabia put to death 102 people. It often publicly beheaded the condemned, and sometimes followed that by crucifying them.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/24/...ort/index.html
 
How a country chooses to punish their criminals is none of our business and how we choose to punish criminals is no one else business. This whole "oh look China or Saudi Arabia executes criminals we must be like them" is idiotic. Thats like going oh look a homosexual pedophile then that must mean all catholic priest or all homosexuals are pedophiles. I am sure China's and Saudia Arabia's reasons for executing criminals is alot different than ours. This whole lets end the death penalty is nothing more than rat scumbag sympathizing garbage spewed by morons who have as much sympathy for the victims of criminals as the criminals do.

BTW your link is showing "page not found".
 
Gee... If I didn't know better, I'd think this was a rather sad attempt to equate the state of human rights in the US to that in China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran -- because, after all, if we have the death penalty, and they have the death penalty, we must be as bad as they are.

:roll:
 
Maybe our nation and China are correct in our respective philosophies.
We must remember that some Islamic nations are backward....compared to us or the more advanced Euro countries..Also, we were that same way, not so long ago.
What does anger me is those who have compassion for the villain, but none for the victim...
What is wrong with them, anyway ????
 
earthworm said:
Maybe our nation and China are correct in our respective philosophies.
We must remember that some Islamic nations are backward....compared to us or the more advanced Euro countries..Also, we were that same way, not so long ago.
What does anger me is those who have compassion for the villain, but none for the victim...
What is wrong with them, anyway ????
Click to expand...

It dont think it is compassion for the villain. It is an acceptance that our (yours and ours in Europe and everywhere) legal systems are far far from perfect and the death penalty is the ultimate sentence that there is no way on going back on.

Only the other week a man in the UK was released from prison after serving decades for a crime he did not commit. If he had been in the US or China he could have been dead by now.
 
theTANTALIZER said:
Almost 2,400 people worldwide were executed last year, but most countries moved a step closer toward abolishing the death penalty, Amnesty International said Tuesday.

China carried out more executions than the rest of the world combined, with 1,718 people put to death, the human-rights group said.

With China, four other nations -- Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States -- accounted for 93 percent of the 2,390 executions, according to the group's report "Death Sentences and Executions in 2008."

Saudi Arabia put to death 102 people. It often publicly beheaded the condemned, and sometimes followed that by crucifying them.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/24/...ort/index.html
Click to expand...

Where in Texas is China? :mrgreen:
 
Nancy Pelosi really let China have it about human rights in a recent interview. I think it was with Charlie Rose. She also gave a house floor speech about China.

She said that Tibet is the greatest sin of this world concerning human rights and talked about how awful the Chines government is. She sounded ready to invade. She praised the US for being the leader for human rights.
 
danarhea said:
Where in Texas is China? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

A sleepy little town, down 'round San Antoine, China Grove.

You can even hear the music at night. Though it's a part of the Lone Star state, people don't seem to care, they just keep on looking to the east.
 
Goobieman said:
Gee... If I didn't know better, I'd think this was a rather sad attempt to equate the state of human rights in the US to that in China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran -- because, after all, if we have the death penalty, and they have the death penalty, we must be as bad as they are.

:roll:
Click to expand...

In a similar vein - the US's abortion policies are the most liberal in the world. Our company? NK, China, Zimbabwe, Cuba, and some other country.

OH NOES
 
Oh, that's a shame.

There's 700 things on California's Death Row, we could have broken the 3000 mark last year if we'd applied ourselves.
 
Almost 38 people executed in the US in 2008!

Seriously, they could easily have said

With China, THREE other nations -- Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia -- accounted for more than 91 percent of the 2,390 executions, according to the group's report "Death Sentences and Executions in 2008."
Click to expand...


I guess it's easier to put the US in that category than saying "The US was responsible for a little over 1.5% of those executions.

China was responsible for almost 72% by themselves.

Iran was responsible for over 14%

Saudi Arabia was responsible for a little over 4%

And Pakistan must have been responsible for less than 1%
 
Tucker Case said:
Almost 38 people executed in the US in 2008!

Seriously, they could easily have said




I guess it's easier to put the US in that category than saying "The US was responsible for a little over 1.5% of those executions.

China was responsible for almost 72% by themselves.

Iran was responsible for over 14%

Saudi Arabia was responsible for a little over 4%

And Pakistan must have been responsible for less than 1%
Click to expand...

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?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
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?
Click to expand...

I think he's playing off the title of the thread.
 
In the US, most people are put to death because they deserve to die. Let me provide you with a few examples:

Death recommended for Lam Luong - al.com

AMW.com | Harrell Johnson - Fugitive

Boy, 6, Dies After Being Dragged in a Stolen Car - Los Angeles Times

3:03 p.m.: Life sentence for gruesome murder - TribToday.com - News, Sports, Jobs, Community Information - Tribune Chronicle - Warren, OH

Now some of these wastes of life didn't get the death penalty, but they all deserve it. IMO, the death penalty isn't used enough in this country.
 
I didn't find the report biased... Amnesty doesn't form political agendas out of nowhere. If the U.S. is mentioned, then it is part of the top layer of the statistics. You can't sugar coat that. After some of the worst nations on Earth, the U.S. puts the most people to death. Out of the developed world, the U.S. executes the most of its own people. It's a simple fact.
 
Orius said:
I didn't find the report biased... Amnesty doesn't form political agendas out of nowhere. If the U.S. is mentioned, then it is part of the top layer of the statistics. You can't sugar coat that. After some of the worst nations on Earth, the U.S. puts the most people to death. Out of the developed world, the U.S. executes the most of its own people. It's a simple fact.
Click to expand...
You lost me at the part in bold. :roll:
 
P/N said:
You lost me at the part in bold. :roll:
Click to expand...

Some people in this thread claim that placing the U.S. alongside the other worst nations (which are largely dictatorial in nature) is agenda based. I disagree... it is simply fact based.
 
Orius said:
Some people in this thread claim that placing the U.S. alongside the other worst nations (which are largely dictatorial in nature) is agenda based. I disagree... it is simply fact based.
Click to expand...
From the article:

The United States carried out 37 executions, but the number was the lowest since 1995
Click to expand...

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.
 
P/N said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Orius said:
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?
Click to expand...
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.

Orius said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.

Orius said:
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.
Click to expand...
Intellectual dishonesty isn't necessary either, but you seem to display it in many of your posts.
 
P/N said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

P/N said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is an unprovable claim, even though it is reasonable.

P/N said:
Intellectual dishonesty isn't necessary either, but you seem to display it in many of your posts.
Click to expand...

I'll let this ad hom slide. Next time, I report it.
 
Orius said:
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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
RightinNYC said:
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?
Click to expand...
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... :2razz:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom