Capital Punishment: Should the Death Penalty Still Exist In A 'Civilised Society'?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1756 of them)
You didn't understand my argument, or I didn't make it clear enough.

Jonathan Z. (Joanthan Z.), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:26 (nineteen years ago) link

You all should just go ahead and live in Castro's Cuba and see how you like your constitution then!!

(OK I fully admit I'm just saying this because it came into my head--my grandfather used to threaten my mother when she was stroppy with that exact line)

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:27 (nineteen years ago) link

Castro's Cuba is, much like the US, a place where capital punishment is meted out fairly often.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:29 (nineteen years ago) link

Honestly, A) Jews for Jesus makes no sense to me, I have heard their arguments and still am unsure how exactly they reconcile their belief system, the whole "the apocolypse thing didn't mean an APOCOLYPSE but rather an apocolypse of the world as we know it" mantra is like an extraordinary level of trying-to-rationalize-your-idiocy B) I really am curious about the Nazi thing.

If we developed a way to prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that someone had really killed other people in cold blood, with malice, for pleasure, would the death penalty still be a bad thing?

Also it is worth noting, to Tom I suppose, that death penalty is not something generally (read: ever, see here) applied to rape. Actually, real punishment is not something often applied to sex crimes. God help you if you're a Puerto Rican talking on your cell phone in your car in NYC though, tombs for a weekend.

xpost that's what I mean, hsilly!

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:35 (nineteen years ago) link

Obviously my question is completely theoretical, the shadow-of-a-doubt one, being as Dr. Xavier is merely a comic book character.

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:36 (nineteen years ago) link

i have a friend, a retiree, who volunteers doing research to assist in mitigating sentences for criminals--mostly murderers. some of them are potentially up for the death penalty (though what this means in illinois at the moment is uncertain). she interviews the criminals themselves and, most of the time, their family and friends, former employers, etc. the crimes committed by these people are often heinous. but i admire her for seeing too that the criminals are human beings and the sentence should be given with some thought to their future, to the general good.... i'm not naive enough to think that the criminal justice system is only about "rehabilitating" people and that it is absent an instituionalized revenge mechanism. but i don't think that mechanism is the one that should be savored, or beefed up.

lots of xposts

are "jews for jesus" really jew? i mean, were they ever actually jews? or is it just an evangelical organization with a strange twist?

|a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:36 (nineteen years ago) link

sorry for all the typos.

|a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:37 (nineteen years ago) link

The idea that our criminal justice system is actually about rehabilitation and not pure revenge is a ridiculous one, actually. I mean, it's honorable and admirable and really noble but it's not even remotely what we practice in the United States (cannot say anything about other countries).

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:38 (nineteen years ago) link

I'm still reeling from dave's "Incone tax is GREAT! We're all in it TOGETHER!" post upthread.

roger adultery (roger adultery), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:38 (nineteen years ago) link

my cousin is a jew for jesus. he started out as a regular jew, then became a born-again christian, then a jew for jesus. he's always been an asshole.

lauren (laurenp), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:38 (nineteen years ago) link

all my jewish friends hate them

Red Panda Sanskrit (ex machina), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:40 (nineteen years ago) link

I'd start a thread about Jews for Jesus if I thought it'd get any serious responses. I really am curious, it just makes no sense to me, even less sense to me than my own religion's fascination with the saints, which always kind of struck me as idol worship.

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:42 (nineteen years ago) link

start a thread! and let's get back to capital punishment.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:43 (nineteen years ago) link

Its like you're culturally jewish... but christian

Red Panda Sanskrit (ex machina), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:43 (nineteen years ago) link

Jews for Jesus

Back to capital punishment.

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:45 (nineteen years ago) link

yeah, that seems like a pretty accurate summation.

lauren (laurenp), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:46 (nineteen years ago) link

I am not trying at all to justify the way the death penalty is used in the United States. I am basically trying to convince people and myself I guess that I am not totally off my rocker because I want to shoot people like Gacy and Brisbon and their ilk in the face in cold blood, don't think I'd feel one bit bad about it, and can't see why I shouldn't be allowed to do so. Except Gacy's already dead. The horrendous methodology by which our justice system approaches the whole issue is stupid to me, too, but as I said upthread the issues with our laws and forensics are not what I'm arguing about, I'm arguing about the fact that I think that some people deserve to fucking die.

TOMBOT, Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:49 (nineteen years ago) link

one of the inconsistencies I find with the SC is their reliance, as far as capital punishment goes, to agree with state legislatures, and not rule on the issue itself. Like its some sort of weird continuing Federalism (or anti-Federalism Federalism? The way that word is applied doesn't make sense anymore) that says "well okey-dokey, majority gets to rule here." Which obv. doesn't make sense since the 20th Century the Court has ruled against such nonsense, esp. when considering "mitigating factors" and "historical evidence" and whatnot (hello BROWN v. BOARD).

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:51 (nineteen years ago) link

Well, if it's any consolation, Tom, I really don't think that wanting to rid humanity of people like that is an unusual instinct, nor is it a deplorable one.

And yes, hstencil, I agree, but you could pull a whole lot of issues and point to how they are extremely inconsistent vis a vis the issue of mitigating factors or historical precedent, in particular (the state legislature one is a little odder, they do seem more likely to tell the states to go done fuck themselves). It's like, ok, for example, part of Roe v. Wade cites that there WERE no anti-abortion laws prior to the 20th Century so therefore historical precedent says this is no one's business. However, historical precedent in cases like Debs or Abrams or Schenck (and I'm assuming whenever someone actually goes ahead and challenges Patriot Act) pretty much shows that the US didn't have draconian speech restrictions for 120 years and went thru several periods of tension/war without these laws but hey, dude, we gots to make you all shut yo' face. The 20th Century Court is wholly inconsistent, Holmes court v. Warren court v. Current Court etc.

Should I start a Supreme court thread?

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 15:58 (nineteen years ago) link

what about the Alien and Sedition Act, though?

btw everybody: http://www.ncadp.org/

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:01 (nineteen years ago) link

Well, if it's any consolation, Tom, I really don't think that wanting to rid humanity of people like that is an unusual instinct, nor is it a deplorable one.

Quite.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:03 (nineteen years ago) link

putting morality and the fact that the death penalty in the US is administered in a completely unfair and unjust way (pretty much across the board, every state, not just trigger-happy Texas), how does the death penalty not constitute "cruel and unusual punishment," as defined and prohibited by the Constitution?

This is a no-brainer for a Supreme Court Justice cause when the states ratified the ban on cruel an unusual punishment they also included a provision for the execution of traitors.

Amendment V (1791)

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. (Italics mine)

I'm sure in the late 18th century hanging was seen as neither cruel nor unusual.

Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:04 (nineteen years ago) link

Speaking of which, is it true that O'Connor is considering NOT retiring if Kerry gets elected to prevent addition of Kerry-chosen judges? That's fucked up shit.

xpost I know about the Alien and Sedition Act, that was prior to the period I deliniated (120 years)--it was a failed law, only applied occasionally, and was deplored by Jefferson (who called it something like a witch trial or a reign of witch trials or something similarly pat and quaint and 1700s-y). It was only on the books a short period and was never an issue dealt with by the Court (unlike, say, segregation issues). It couldn't be used as a precedent (and isn't mentioned as such in any of the decisions).

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:04 (nineteen years ago) link

I don't think it is an unusual or deplorable instinct at all, I wasn't saying that really. It's not the thought that counts.

I just don't understand why everybody seems to think that actually performing the action of executing dangerous animals is somehow a horrible idea and should be completely dismissed.

I'm also beginning to think I may not share the kneejerk distrust of The State that seems to pervade this board. Shocker.

TOMBOT, Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:06 (nineteen years ago) link

Speaking of which, is it true that O'Connor is considering NOT retiring if Kerry gets elected to prevent addition of Kerry-chosen judges? That's fucked up shit.

i imagine her like that girl in secretary, doggedly remaining in her seat on the S.C. bench, wetting her pants, etc.

|a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:07 (nineteen years ago) link

Well the question with the Fifth Amendment is what is "due process of law", obviously.

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:08 (nineteen years ago) link

okay so as I'm reading that, Michael, that pretty much cancels out my argument.

Allyzay, rumors like that about justices retiring are spread every election year.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:08 (nineteen years ago) link

Yeah, but I actually read it in like a real newspaper somewhere.

Yes, I understand it means nothing. Aren't they all like 100 years old now anyway?

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:10 (nineteen years ago) link

I'm arguing about the fact that I think that some people deserve to fucking die.

I agree but I think that the promotion of equal protection under the law is paramount especially inasmuch as, from a revenge point of view, spending the rest of one's days incarcerated seems as cruel as death, and from a rehabilatory point of view death seems counter-productive.

Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:13 (nineteen years ago) link

The idea that everyone can be rehabilitated is not one I agree with.

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:15 (nineteen years ago) link

that's why we have parole boards, and the non-rehabilitation worthy stay inside (hopefully).

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:19 (nineteen years ago) link

No, I agree with that, hstencil, it was more a counter-point to the idea that the death penalty is counter-productive to rehabilitation: it's not meant for the rehabilitable (is that a word?).

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:21 (nineteen years ago) link

but at the same time, prisons seem to have entirely given up their rehabilitative functions and focus mainly on the punitive/deterrent aspect.

xpost

lauren (laurenp), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:22 (nineteen years ago) link

It is now (and really that's probably the crux of this disagreement more than anything else; can every criminal/mentally unstable individual be normalized back into mainstream society (where "mainstream" is used in its broadest definition, ie I'm not advocating putting everyone in an Izod shirt and giving them golf lessons, no matter how funny it might be)).

(xpost)
()

VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:23 (nineteen years ago) link

Yeah, the concept of prison as rehabilitator is not one that is reflected in the current state of affairs. We might as well send them to hard labor in Siberia for what prison does to people.

xpost Dan, I know, that's why I personally think the death penalty should be halted for now, the system is waaaaaaay too flawed and is not being used in any way I'd approve of persnoally.

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:24 (nineteen years ago) link

The idea that everyone can be rehabilitated is not one I agree with.

yep, you only need to look at ILX for this (excuse sarcasm)

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:38 (nineteen years ago) link

Would you care to elucidate your point?

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:43 (nineteen years ago) link

it was not at a dig at you, just the behaviour/character of certain people on here that despite being told it's not appreciated continue to behave that way. flippant jokey comment, nothing to see here!

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:45 (nineteen years ago) link

death penalty is counter-productive to rehabilitation

This was originally a morbid joke on my part. Unless anybody knows of any upstanding undead citizens, killing criminals is the ultimate expression of our determination of their un-rehabilatibility.

Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:48 (nineteen years ago) link

I have no idea where I stand on this one. Tombot's reasoning is sound, but the idea that killing a convicted felon is permissible would take me a long long time to become comfortable with, just based on social/ethical conditioning I suppose, but I'm not even totally convinced of that.

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:49 (nineteen years ago) link

Haha I wasn't thinking you were insulting me, stevem! I was just wondering what the hell it meant, like I missed something massive in my time off. Now I'm kind of slapping my head.

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:51 (nineteen years ago) link

I'm all for the death penalty when we have an equitable legal system that guarantees real equal access to counsel, is devoid of racism, and isn't driven by mere bloody-minded bloodthirstiness. Which is to say, it's unlikely I'll ever support it in practice.

Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:52 (nineteen years ago) link

Someone in a class of mine yesterday used the phrase "catastrophic catastrophe"!

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:54 (nineteen years ago) link

As opposed to those seredipitous catastrophes?

Michael White (Hereward), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:56 (nineteen years ago) link

Do you all think we can "rehabilitate" that piece of dirt who killed six people - bashing their brains in with aluminum bats so savagely that even dental records were useless in identifying them - over a stolen X-Box video game?

"This is the worst thing that I've ever seen in my career," said Johnson, a 33-year veteran of law enforcement. "The brutal force used against the victims ... it's indescribable."

Rehabilitate my ass. You're goddamn right it's about revenge. I'll be watching for a jury of the people of Florida to do the right thing and fry that guy.

Monetizing Eyeballs (diamond), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 16:59 (nineteen years ago) link

y'know, statements like the ones the law enforcement officials made about this heinous crime make it more difficult for prosecutors.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 17:00 (nineteen years ago) link

what do you mean?

|a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 17:01 (nineteen years ago) link

See, you don't understand, that's the fault of American video game society, and not the perpetrator, once removed from society he can be treated...

*moves to Castro's Cuba*

Allyzay Science Explosion (allyzay), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 17:01 (nineteen years ago) link

*asks ally for some salsa cds*

|a|m|t|r|s|t| (amateurist), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 17:01 (nineteen years ago) link

she's only going to see the Manics

the neurotic awakening of s (blueski), Tuesday, 10 August 2004 17:02 (nineteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.