Kraken that might actually be the most retarded thing I've ever heard.
Travesty of Justice
adgadfhasd
I won't even say that much.
Doubt it. It probably would have taken twenty years for the State to execute him. He could well have escaped in the meantime.
Wait someone is using a Bible in a debate regarding modern criminal policy?
AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAH
AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAH
Indeed, and notice he only touches the New testament. If you wish to speak biblically, does God not smash entire cities, entire civilizations due to heresy, due to lesser crimes or sins? Please, do not preach about such moralities unless you are prepared to debate the issue on both sides.
I am not an overly religious man, but I do know that God says Vengeance is Mine. As executioners we are not taking vengeance, we are enforcing the edicts of Justice. If Vengeance is God's then men are merely speeding the journey of the wicked so that such Divine Judgement can be passed with much more alacrity.
The dealth penalty as it stands is not a deterrent, Drayson is absolutely right. But let us look at why it is not. A man is sentenced to hang by the neck until dead, then the bleeding hearts at the ACLU or some other ridiculous criminal-aiding enterprise say it's cruel or whatever - forgetting entirely the suffering of the victims - thus forcing another trial. The execution is then made something more palatable and after ten years on death row our star murderer is finally put to death in a comfortable manner when compared to the repeated stabbing and bludgeoning and whathaveyou that is his personal choice when killing before his arrest.
Now, is that a deterrent? I don't think so. I have attended executions. I have arrested the and 'corrected' the scum of society so I speak as an officer of the law. It is not a deterrent. Now, if the system were quite different - murderer is sentenced, he has six months to be proven innocent - not find a legal loophole that manevuers him away from the noose - and is then put to death horribly, then THAT is a deterrent.
My reasoning for such a stance has been questioned. My reasoning is really my own and I have supported my reasons with sattements made logically and rationally. But you want to know why, personally, I Matthias am virulently in favor of the heinous villians of our time meeting a gruesome fate, then I shall say. While an attendee of the Fahnenjunkerschule in Germany I was taken advantage of my an older peer who was on drugs at the time. He was of course expelled and incarcerated - and released some ten years later. Ten years in a prison is not justice for what happened to me. Not at all.
You all spout your democratic rhetoric or hippie this and that until you are a victim. Until it is you lying on the ground, immobilized by the fear you swore would never conquer you, straining your ears for a friendly footstep or the wail of approaching sirens. Then your mercy goes out the window. I have been a victim and now I am a protector of the innocent. That is what I do, and I believe that the best way to deal with offenders to prevent a repeat offense is to eliminate the desire to offend and the need to do so. The elimination of the criminal is neccessary to that end and it is neccessary for the people to know of it so the stories of his end resound and people think twice about what they can and cannot do. What deterrent is it fromr aping a woman to know that ten years in prison and you can do it again, learning more horrid skills from the peers with whom you shall be housed? - -None I say. Now, if that rapist knows that with every step he takes towards he he is a step closer to the un-sedated removal of his gentials. then he may stop and pause, considering the measure of pain to pleasure.
Of course, such draconian methods would not stop all crime. I dare say however, it would stop most and give pause to all who would perpatrate.
Cruel and unusual you argue? Unusual? I dare say not, and no more cruel than the crime transgressed. Remember the time those words were penned prison was something to be feared. Prisons were often mastless ships riding at anchor in the bay, conditions squalid and food scarce - discipline was harsh. Prison was something then to be feared. Cruel and unusual did not protect murderers and traitors and rapists, no - it protected the innocent. The Constitution Amis hold so dear is in place to protect the innocent as a parchment bastion against which evil can pound its fists and not penetrate - it was not meant to be a shield for them to hide behind.
My ideas may be archaic but they work. we have seen that incarceration now does not work either. A change is required. A drastic change, and an immediate one.
I am not an overly religious man, but I do know that God says Vengeance is Mine. As executioners we are not taking vengeance, we are enforcing the edicts of Justice. If Vengeance is God's then men are merely speeding the journey of the wicked so that such Divine Judgement can be passed with much more alacrity.
The dealth penalty as it stands is not a deterrent, Drayson is absolutely right. But let us look at why it is not. A man is sentenced to hang by the neck until dead, then the bleeding hearts at the ACLU or some other ridiculous criminal-aiding enterprise say it's cruel or whatever - forgetting entirely the suffering of the victims - thus forcing another trial. The execution is then made something more palatable and after ten years on death row our star murderer is finally put to death in a comfortable manner when compared to the repeated stabbing and bludgeoning and whathaveyou that is his personal choice when killing before his arrest.
Now, is that a deterrent? I don't think so. I have attended executions. I have arrested the and 'corrected' the scum of society so I speak as an officer of the law. It is not a deterrent. Now, if the system were quite different - murderer is sentenced, he has six months to be proven innocent - not find a legal loophole that manevuers him away from the noose - and is then put to death horribly, then THAT is a deterrent.
My reasoning for such a stance has been questioned. My reasoning is really my own and I have supported my reasons with sattements made logically and rationally. But you want to know why, personally, I Matthias am virulently in favor of the heinous villians of our time meeting a gruesome fate, then I shall say. While an attendee of the Fahnenjunkerschule in Germany I was taken advantage of my an older peer who was on drugs at the time. He was of course expelled and incarcerated - and released some ten years later. Ten years in a prison is not justice for what happened to me. Not at all.
You all spout your democratic rhetoric or hippie this and that until you are a victim. Until it is you lying on the ground, immobilized by the fear you swore would never conquer you, straining your ears for a friendly footstep or the wail of approaching sirens. Then your mercy goes out the window. I have been a victim and now I am a protector of the innocent. That is what I do, and I believe that the best way to deal with offenders to prevent a repeat offense is to eliminate the desire to offend and the need to do so. The elimination of the criminal is neccessary to that end and it is neccessary for the people to know of it so the stories of his end resound and people think twice about what they can and cannot do. What deterrent is it fromr aping a woman to know that ten years in prison and you can do it again, learning more horrid skills from the peers with whom you shall be housed? - -None I say. Now, if that rapist knows that with every step he takes towards he he is a step closer to the un-sedated removal of his gentials. then he may stop and pause, considering the measure of pain to pleasure.
Of course, such draconian methods would not stop all crime. I dare say however, it would stop most and give pause to all who would perpatrate.
Cruel and unusual you argue? Unusual? I dare say not, and no more cruel than the crime transgressed. Remember the time those words were penned prison was something to be feared. Prisons were often mastless ships riding at anchor in the bay, conditions squalid and food scarce - discipline was harsh. Prison was something then to be feared. Cruel and unusual did not protect murderers and traitors and rapists, no - it protected the innocent. The Constitution Amis hold so dear is in place to protect the innocent as a parchment bastion against which evil can pound its fists and not penetrate - it was not meant to be a shield for them to hide behind.
My ideas may be archaic but they work. we have seen that incarceration now does not work either. A change is required. A drastic change, and an immediate one.
Telan, shut up. You claim to have empathy for the victims of crime, but you have zero empathy for the hundreds of people that would be wrongly convicted and put to death mistakenly under your regime. Thank God our society has evolved from your Medieval notion of "punishment".
Do you know what kinds of countries perform these sorts of punishments? The ones that America has labeled part of the 'Axis of Evil'. Why is it that the same Americans that are so quick to condemn these nations are the same ones that are obsessed with their archaic notions of punishment? America has more in common with Iran than it wants to admit, it seems.
Hell, why not just stone those who dissent? It doesn't work, either, but it's appropriately violent to satisfy your bloodlust.
Do you know what kinds of countries perform these sorts of punishments? The ones that America has labeled part of the 'Axis of Evil'. Why is it that the same Americans that are so quick to condemn these nations are the same ones that are obsessed with their archaic notions of punishment? America has more in common with Iran than it wants to admit, it seems.
Hell, why not just stone those who dissent? It doesn't work, either, but it's appropriately violent to satisfy your bloodlust.
Frankly, I just don't trust anyone but myself to kill anybody.
Reform in our prison system is required no matter what else is to be considered, but in a more productive manner. Death sentences mean nothing. No one cares, especially those who get them because they can keep appealing them and live in better conditions than they were. The only person who wants a death sentence is the one threatened by an individual. There are two solutions to this that might actually work when used together.
1. Rehabilitation which will work if the individual is willing and believe me, there are those who are. Its been researched and demonstarted with prison inmates given their own business and community to run and yes I have read the article, it did happen but no link at them moment so find it yourselves. The men in this situation adapted greatly and lead better lives, even with a secure livestyle. Any member of the group who broke their rules was kicked out immediately and sent back to prison. So now I bet you ask what about those individuals, the ones who don't want to rehabilitate. Well there is no answer to this part from this research or ideal.
2. But I have one. Labor Camps. Yes, I know that comes dangerously close to something else but consider this. You offer inmates what I like to call the Heaven or Hell option. You give them the Heaven of a better rehabilitation program or the Hell of toiling away in a work camp which would see fit to aid in the local infrastructure somewhere and pay for the expense of supporting the prisoners. No death, but plenty of suffering to make them consider maybe rehab isn't such a bad idea afterall. No death, just endless grueling work with little luxury. Admittely they would try to escape, but that's what manacles and tracers are for. If we can make a damn collar for house arrest, we can make one with a GPS locator in it and slap it on them or put it in them. People are crazy, but just how crazy do you have to be to try to dig out a GPS tracer surgically implanted somewhere deep?
Perhaps that's a bit off the wall, but its better than death and society benefits overall, as does anyone who actually gets rehabilitated because it may be provided them with a better lifestyle when they're released, or at least skills to help in it. I argue this because I believe in the greater good and death benefits no one, only temporarily comforts someone else. We are in an age where society must advance and that advancement will only come by embracing it, discarding medieval notions. Humanity must save itself because if there is a God, he only watches us in our own private little mad house called Earth. It is up to us to make change and only through progressive pushes can this get better. If not, we will be no better than our ancestors, damned to rot in our own personal hell called existence. I would not see this world engulfed by another Dark Age of cruelty and depravity fueled by outdated notions. Death is only permissible in war because we cannot stop war, war is inevitable with this current society because everyone is out for their own survival rather than the overall survival of the species. Until that ideal is grasped and embraced we must do what we can internally to fix our individual societies.
Perhaps a bit of a tangent but just trying to make a point. Things can change for the better even with psychopaths and maniacs. If they can't be rehabilitated, they'll work the rest of their lives away serving society until their too old to work, etc. That is what I believe could be done, should be done rather than the ridiculous penal system we run now we just keeps spewing criminals back out.
~steps off his soap box~
1. Rehabilitation which will work if the individual is willing and believe me, there are those who are. Its been researched and demonstarted with prison inmates given their own business and community to run and yes I have read the article, it did happen but no link at them moment so find it yourselves. The men in this situation adapted greatly and lead better lives, even with a secure livestyle. Any member of the group who broke their rules was kicked out immediately and sent back to prison. So now I bet you ask what about those individuals, the ones who don't want to rehabilitate. Well there is no answer to this part from this research or ideal.
2. But I have one. Labor Camps. Yes, I know that comes dangerously close to something else but consider this. You offer inmates what I like to call the Heaven or Hell option. You give them the Heaven of a better rehabilitation program or the Hell of toiling away in a work camp which would see fit to aid in the local infrastructure somewhere and pay for the expense of supporting the prisoners. No death, but plenty of suffering to make them consider maybe rehab isn't such a bad idea afterall. No death, just endless grueling work with little luxury. Admittely they would try to escape, but that's what manacles and tracers are for. If we can make a damn collar for house arrest, we can make one with a GPS locator in it and slap it on them or put it in them. People are crazy, but just how crazy do you have to be to try to dig out a GPS tracer surgically implanted somewhere deep?
Perhaps that's a bit off the wall, but its better than death and society benefits overall, as does anyone who actually gets rehabilitated because it may be provided them with a better lifestyle when they're released, or at least skills to help in it. I argue this because I believe in the greater good and death benefits no one, only temporarily comforts someone else. We are in an age where society must advance and that advancement will only come by embracing it, discarding medieval notions. Humanity must save itself because if there is a God, he only watches us in our own private little mad house called Earth. It is up to us to make change and only through progressive pushes can this get better. If not, we will be no better than our ancestors, damned to rot in our own personal hell called existence. I would not see this world engulfed by another Dark Age of cruelty and depravity fueled by outdated notions. Death is only permissible in war because we cannot stop war, war is inevitable with this current society because everyone is out for their own survival rather than the overall survival of the species. Until that ideal is grasped and embraced we must do what we can internally to fix our individual societies.
Perhaps a bit of a tangent but just trying to make a point. Things can change for the better even with psychopaths and maniacs. If they can't be rehabilitated, they'll work the rest of their lives away serving society until their too old to work, etc. That is what I believe could be done, should be done rather than the ridiculous penal system we run now we just keeps spewing criminals back out.
~steps off his soap box~
Yes. Quite. Back in the old days, when we (read "the British") exported our criminals to Australia, I believe that during their time they would move hravy rocks from one end of a beach to the other, then back, ad infinitum. It's not achieving much, but it's making them work - and it beats letting them sit in comfort.
1. Is that any worse than being wrong convicted and spending your *entire life* behind bars with murderers and rapists? Say you're innocent and get locked up at age 18, then 50 years pass and upon reopening the casebook, you're proven innocent, given a pardon and released. You're 58 and you've had the best years of your life taken away from you? Imagine spending that long locked up, but knowing you're innocent. Hell, it'd probably make you pretty cynical and more likely to commit a crime upon release.
Admittedly though, you're still alive and society can still apologise to you. I'm sure that'll give society a lovely warm fuzzy feeling inside. Or imagine you die in prison and noone finds out that you're innocent? You had no freedom. Ever. Yet you were innocent. What would THAT do to your mind?
I'm not using this as evidence for capital punishment. I'm just saying that the same "What if the person was innocent all along" argument applies to all punishment - with equally horrific results.
However:
2. Noone's talking about saying "There's a small chance you might have committed a crime - you're for the chop." At least, I hope noone's saying that. I think all of the points put forward assume that you you know when someone's guilty. As Vance pointed out earlier, that's very difficult these days, hence the small number of executions, that you yourself quoted. In some cases, you have to admit though, it is clear. I'll cite the old favourites: Hussein, Hitler (had he been captured) & Goering & Co(Though whether Nuremberg was a fair trial is a completely different issue that I think we should avoid for the minute... Also, I'm aware of Godwin's Law ), Bin Laden, Killers with loads of witnesses, etc.
In those cases, when it's as clear cut as it's going to get, surely it's justified?
Without the argument of "you can never be certain", the only argument left is the one of "it's barbaric. You should never kill. That's what they do in Iran, etc". I'm not sure that holds up - just because your enemy does something, doesn't mean it's automatically good. In Iran, they use oil. Does that mean America should give it up? Of course not.
At the end of the day, it *does* stop a known offender from re-offending, and surely with Telan's plan in place - it would act as a deterrent.
Also, I'd like to add that just because something's morally repulsive by today's Western standards, doesn't make it "wrong." In 100 years time, people could look at incarceration and claim it's disgusting and morally wrong for reasons we can't predict (just as people couldn't predict slavery would be seen as morally wrong when it first started). In other places (Iran? Texas? The UK?) opinion is different and "morally right" means something else. Remember that morals change over time and space and demographic (unless you're a Christian, of course, in which case you have a well defined moral compass).
Finally, Wes, I'm curious as to how you can say that governments aren't subject to the same rules as individuals? Surely Zell has a point when he says:
I don't have any opinion on the religious argument myself - I'm simply genuinely curious.