• 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!

Death Penalty For White Colloar Crimes

Death Penalty For White Collar Crimes

  • Yes

    Votes: 5 9.6%
  • No

    Votes: 47 90.4%

  • Total voters
    52
  • Poll closed .
No, not the death penalty. But long prison sentences. Fraud on a huge scale, recklessly destroying people's life savings, basically everything the bankers did to create the crash in 2008. All of those should result in very long stays in prison.
 
No, not the death penalty. But long prison sentences. Fraud on a huge scale, recklessly destroying people's life savings, basically everything the bankers did to create the crash in 2008. All of those should result in very long stays in prison.

Interesting.

If someone applies for a loan while falsifying their income or not putting down their many other debt obligations, and the bank takes them at their word suspecting that they are probably lying but not caring, who has actually committed fraud?
 
IOWs there's no real consequence for the powerful and rich taking everything we commoners have worked our entire lives to achieve. Even if there was a death penalty, we'd never see a dime of our savings.

Revolution comes to mind.
Who stole your pennies and how did they take everything you worked your entire life to achieve?
 
I believe the US might have been helpful in arrangements after Nuremberg.

In Germany it would be illegal to execute a mass murderer.

There ya go. Germany would have just housed Hitler in jail. For life, do you think?
 
Who stole your pennies and how did they take everything you worked your entire life to achieve?

Nothing from me but, I know.a couple of people who lost pretty much everything in 2008. One took his own life.

My Wife lost half her 401.
 
Nothing from me but, I know.a couple of people who lost pretty much everything in 2008. One took his own life.

My Wife lost half her 401.
Most accounts have completely recovered while on average small business 401ks are doing about 20% better. Anyone that invests in unstable markets should understand they go down...they go up. So who do you blame? Bush? Clinton? Politicians for changing the sub-prime rules? People that took out home loans they knew damn well they couldnt afford? Or teh eeeeevil bankers?
 
I could see supporting the death penalty for a white collar crime if it could be directly proven that the actions of the business person negligently and knowingly led to the death or deaths of customers.

A couple of examples:

1. Drug company executives who manipulated testing results to hide adverse, deadly effects of a drug coming on the market knowing that the drug could kill people and gambling that sales of the drugs would far outstrip any civil court ordered penalties for wrongful death lawsuits.

2. Similarly, such as in the airbags case currently in the news, where a company knew their product was faulty, potentially dangerous and deadly, and yet continued to ship the product hoping to profit and avoid liability down the road.

To me, such actions are premeditated, reckless, and "murderous" in the true sense of the word.
 
Nothing from me but, I know.a couple of people who lost pretty much everything in 2008. One took his own life.

My Wife lost half her 401.

So what? The market has rebounded and is stronger today than it was at it's peak in 2007. Nobody lost anything who was in the market long-term. The only people who lost are the ones who reacted emotionally and pulled their money out of the market. This is how the market works. It always rises long-term.
 
There ya go. Germany would have just housed Hitler in jail. For life, do you think?

A life sentence is no longer life in the real sense. Present interpretation has it that that is incompatible with human dignity to take away hope or some such explanation.
Capital punishment was forbidden by the constitution after but still exists untested in Hessen, so he would probably get 15 years and be put in an asylum thereafter. This way nobdy could criticize the procedure and Hitler would have the human dignity required, while he would be neatly out of sight. Something like that. The main problem would be that his presence would fill certain groups with enthusiasm.
 
A life sentence is no longer life in the real sense. Present interpretation has it that that is incompatible with human dignity to take away hope or some such explanation.
Capital punishment was forbidden by the constitution after but still exists untested in Hessen, so he would probably get 15 years and be put in an asylum thereafter. This way nobdy could criticize the procedure and Hitler would have the human dignity required, while he would be neatly out of sight. Something like that. The main problem would be that his presence would fill certain groups with enthusiasm.

I'm speechless.

Thank you for your response to how Germans today would deal with Hitler post war.
 
Would you support the death penalty for white collar crimes?

It is difficult, but not impossible, for me to conceive of a situation in which a white-collar crime could merit the death penalty. I'm thinking of something along the lines of a scam that so thoroughly impoverishes its victim that that victim subsequently dies prematurely of some cause that could have been avoided, had that victim not been so impoverished, coupled with am awareness and lack of concern on the part of the perpetrator that his crime could result in such a death.

Really, any crime which the perpetrator should reasonably know has a likelihood of resulting in an unjust death, which the perpetrator commits without concern for this possibility, and which, in fact, does result in death, ought to merit the death penalty.

I'm open to the idea of the death penalty for serious crimes in which the victim's livelihood is attacked. Stealing a horse used to be considered a capital crime, on the basis that by stealing a man's means of transportation, you might be depriving him of the necessary means to survive. I'd not be opposed to the death penalty, on that basis, for some instances of stealing a car, or of stealing the tools on which someone depends in order to make his living.


I can also see the death penalty as being justified for some instances of a large accumulated amount of criminality, consisting of a very large number of crimes each of which do not, in themselves, rise to nearly a capital level; but where the sum total of all the criminality, and all the disregard for the rights of others, reflected in this pattern of many crimes, amounts to a sufficient level as to merit the forfeit of the perpetrator's life.

Finally, I can easily see the death penalty as appropriate for almost any serious abuse of one's power as a member of government. Public servants really need to be very forcefully reminded, from time to time, that they are our servants, and not our masters. I think this would be a much healthier society if we were much bolder about reminding the worst of our corrupt officials in such a manner, both to eliminate them from our population, and as a warning to any others who might contemplate similar abuses. I have a very vague memory of having heard of some society in which a certain public official, while conducting his duties, sat on a bench that was upholstered with the skin of the last person to hold that position and to abuse the power thereof. How much healthier our society would be if our public servants all had similar reminders of their role as our servants,and of the gravity of any abuse of the positions.
 
I got the idea for this thread from the recent execution in China of mining tycoon Liu Han.

A quick search seems to indicate that he was convicted of nine murders, and of running a mafia-style organized crime operation. Not exactly “white collar” crimes. Assuming the accusations are accurate, his execution was entirely justified. As far as I am concerned, any one murder, in the absence of significant mitigating circumstances, is sufficient to call for the death penalty. Nine murders demands it.
 
the majority of the population has issue with the death penalty for capital crimes

why would you think anyone would want the death penalty for white collar crime?

thread fail

Who cares what the majority thinks... it is about what is best for society as the vaccine threads argue...
 
I don't condone the death penalty for anything other than the most heinous of crimes...murder, rape, etc.

Though I'll consider supporting mandatory death penalty for anyone who commits a crime while in physical possession of a firearm...whether they use it or not.

I cannot agree. Bearing arms is an explicitly affirmed right under our Constitution, which government is forbidden to infringe. Under no circumstances can I ever agree with treating the legitimate exercise of a Constitutional right, in itself, as a crime, or even as an aggravating circumstance to another crime. Possession of an arm cannot legitimately be part of a criminal charge, until the point is reached where that arm, or the threat of the force which that arm represents, is used in the commission of a crime. Now, if a criminal uses deadly force, of the threat of deadly force, to commit a crime, then I am with you as far as the death penalty being on the table. The mere presence or possession of a weapon does not meet this standard, and falls entirely within the Constitutionally-protected right affirmed by the Second Amendment.
 
Last edited:
Depends... steal tons of money ruining families or communities... yes. Neglegent CEO of baby food company and babies die... yes. Those are two examples.
 
I said I would consider it. I was thinking more along the lines of someone robbing a bank while armed or someone demanding money from me on the street while pointing a gun at me. My thought is, even if they don't shoot me, they very well might and they indicate they very well would. Now...if I were armed and I defended myself by killing the robber, then I have justifiably sentenced that robber to death and carried out the execution. The State should do no less in defense of its citizens.

No, you haven't. You've just used deadly force in an unfortunate, but necessary and justified manner, to defend yourself against an imminent threat. Though I certainly support the right to do so in that instance, it is an inferior result to that of the robber being captured alive, and given due process of law in which he was properly convicted of a crime, sentenced to death, and had that sentence carried out.
 
I cannot agree. Bearing arms is an explicitly affirmed right under our Constitution, which government is forbidden to infringe. Under no circumstances can I ever agree with treating the legitimate exercise of a Constitutional right, in itself, as a crime, or even as an aggravating circumstance to another crime. Possession of an arm cannot legitimately be part of a criminal charge, until the point is reached where that arm, or the threat of the force which that arm represents, is used in the commission of a crime. Now, if a criminal uses deadly force, of the threat of deadly force, to commit a crime, then I am with you as far as the death penalty being on the table. The mere presence or possession of a weapon does not meet this standard, and falls entirely within the Constitutionally-protected right affirmed by the Second Amendment.

Many States already impose greater sentences if a crime is committed while in possession of a firearm...even if it is not used.

Committing a Crime While Using a Firearm

In most states, the penalties that would normally apply to a crime increase when you commit the same crime while in possession of a firearm. This is often the case whether or not you actually use the weapon, and sometimes merely possessing it incurs the additional punishment. For example, the District of Columbia imposes up to 30 additional years in prison if you commit specified dangerous crimes while in possession of a firearm (in addition to the normal fines and prison time for the underlying crime).

Do penalties increase if I commit certain crimes while in possession of a firearm? | Criminal Law

Furthermore, some States also include knives and other weapons such as TASARS in such laws...so the precedent is there. I am only considering making the penalty much harsher.
 
Maybe for the most egregious offenses. People like Madoff who ruined the lives of thousands of people.
 
Most accounts have completely recovered while on average small business 401ks are doing about 20% better. Anyone that invests in unstable markets should understand they go down...they go up. So who do you blame? Bush? Clinton? Politicians for changing the sub-prime rules? People that took out home loans they knew damn well they couldnt afford? Or teh eeeeevil bankers?

I blame all who play the derivatives market. Not only does it have few winners, they use other people's money to play
 
So what? The market has rebounded and is stronger today than it was at it's peak in 2007. Nobody lost anything who was in the market long-term. The only people who lost are the ones who reacted emotionally and pulled their money out of the market. This is how the market works. It always rises long-term.

It's the dipships who believe it's just a correction that are the problem.

They're being played.

The FedGov insist that you invest your money or play hefty taxes on those monies. Unless you buy precious metals, you are at the mercy of the market.
 
Many States already impose greater sentences if a crime is committed while in possession of a firearm...even if it is not used.

Many states—most in fact—go to much greater extremes than that in blatantly violating the Second Amendment. It doesn't mean that these violations are the least bit legitimate, nor does it mean that any additional violations would be legitimate. What it means is that the governments of these states have become corrupt, and the people of these states have become too cowardly and apathetic to hold their public servants properly accountable. I have the misfortune of living on one of the few states out of the fifty that is the worst in this way.
 
Many states—most in fact—go to much greater extremes than that in blatantly violating the Second Amendment. It doesn't mean that these violations are the least bit legitimate, nor does it mean that any additional violations would be legitimate. What it means is that the governments of these states have become corrupt, and the people of these states have become too cowardly and apathetic to hold their public servants properly accountable. I have the misfortune of living on one of the few states out of the fifty that is the worst in this way.

Fair enough...your opinion.

I'm all for the 2nd Amendment, but when one commits a criminal act while in possession of a firearm, I believe they don't deserve that Amendment's considerations.
 
Fair enough...your opinion.

I'm all for the 2nd Amendment, but when one commits a criminal act while in possession of a firearm, I believe they don't deserve that Amendment's considerations.

Punish the criminal for the criminal act; not for a legitimate exercise of a Constitutional right, especially a right away from which the Constitution so clearly and strongly tells government to keep its filthy hands.
 
Back
Top Bottom