Jazzy;1271271 wrote: Do I really need to entertain this question? Isn't it self evident why these "scum" are executed? If someone murdered your loved ones, what would you suggest happens to that murderer?
Here's the funny thing though. If someone murdered a loved one, I'd want them dead. If my loved one did the murdering, I'd not want them dead.
Spot? Who would decide, and how would they decide if the murderer were rehabilitated? What if they were wrong?
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
Peg;1271481 wrote: Here's the funny thing though. If someone murdered a loved one, I'd want them dead.
Yeah, that's what I was trying to say. Maybe it's not right or even responsible, but that's how I'd feel too.
Yeah, that's what I was trying to say. Maybe it's not right or even responsible, but that's how I'd feel too.
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
Saint_;1271483 wrote: Yeah, that's what I was trying to say. Maybe it's not right or even responsible, but that's how I'd feel too.
There's nothing wrong with that IMO. Like it or not, agree or disagree, that's how I feel and it's not something I can or want to change.
There's nothing wrong with that IMO. Like it or not, agree or disagree, that's how I feel and it's not something I can or want to change.
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
spot;1271281 wrote: That says to save on vet bills or to limit the suffering of a terminally ill animal, Jazzy. It doesn't go close to hoppy's explanation which covers the other larger category, killing unwanted pets. Unless you're arguing for execution of some criminals as a way of saving costs I'm not sure of the relevance, because they're not terminally ill when they're executed. Hoppy might be closer when he says they're unwanted.
If it were self-evident I'd not have asked. I asked because I hoped you might have a reason you could add to the thread.
Am I to take it from this post that your reason is revenge?
In the US executions aren't running amok like an everyday Soccer/Football game in Europe. Because executions aren't exactly numerous, compared to criminals that have committed crimes a majority within that society would deem to be well worth an execution even, I assume people execute criminals in the hope people will refrain from committing the same crime the said criminal was/is executed for. I don't know how anyone could come to a different conclusion.
I personally do not see executions as logical because all one does when kills "legally" is serve to create a "justifiable" reason to kill anyone. This false sense of reason creates a skewed view of moral integrity and can serve in many ways to romanticize killing altogether.
Cost cutting measure? Not in the slightest. American prisons make money off of housing prisoners. I know a few ex prison officers and "you'd" be amazed at how much money these prisons make, and entirely off of the tax payer.
I'm appropriately firm in my judgments but I don't attempt to judge everyone. I have absolutely no sympathy for murderers and rapists so they'd better thank their own personal "lucky" stars they've never set foot in my court room! Doesn't mean in the slightest I think all "criminals" should be dealt with as harshly as I've witnessed. Perhaps another topic. "You" might learn something!
If it were self-evident I'd not have asked. I asked because I hoped you might have a reason you could add to the thread.
Am I to take it from this post that your reason is revenge?
In the US executions aren't running amok like an everyday Soccer/Football game in Europe. Because executions aren't exactly numerous, compared to criminals that have committed crimes a majority within that society would deem to be well worth an execution even, I assume people execute criminals in the hope people will refrain from committing the same crime the said criminal was/is executed for. I don't know how anyone could come to a different conclusion.
I personally do not see executions as logical because all one does when kills "legally" is serve to create a "justifiable" reason to kill anyone. This false sense of reason creates a skewed view of moral integrity and can serve in many ways to romanticize killing altogether.
Cost cutting measure? Not in the slightest. American prisons make money off of housing prisoners. I know a few ex prison officers and "you'd" be amazed at how much money these prisons make, and entirely off of the tax payer.
I'm appropriately firm in my judgments but I don't attempt to judge everyone. I have absolutely no sympathy for murderers and rapists so they'd better thank their own personal "lucky" stars they've never set foot in my court room! Doesn't mean in the slightest I think all "criminals" should be dealt with as harshly as I've witnessed. Perhaps another topic. "You" might learn something!
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31842
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
Peg;1271481 wrote: Here's the funny thing though. If someone murdered a loved one, I'd want them dead. If my loved one did the murdering, I'd not want them dead.
Spot? Who would decide, and how would they decide if the murderer were rehabilitated? What if they were wrong? Until you are in this situation, It is very difficult to talk of the dearth penalty. Although my Sisters boy has yet to have a fair trial and be found guilty, I wonder If this country did have the death penalty. Of course I would not want to see him die especially at just 16 years old, I'm afraid I still stick to my belief that If the death penalty was in place at the time of his alleged murder, then It would be no-one's fault but his own.
Spot? Who would decide, and how would they decide if the murderer were rehabilitated? What if they were wrong? Until you are in this situation, It is very difficult to talk of the dearth penalty. Although my Sisters boy has yet to have a fair trial and be found guilty, I wonder If this country did have the death penalty. Of course I would not want to see him die especially at just 16 years old, I'm afraid I still stick to my belief that If the death penalty was in place at the time of his alleged murder, then It would be no-one's fault but his own.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
spot;1271337 wrote: If you mean there's no possibility of effectively rehabilitation then say so outright. I don't think that's what you're trying to say, though.
Sure, I'll say it. Murderers cannot be rehabilitated with 100% certainty they won't murder again. It's proven by their competence to stand trial from which defines the guilty as knowing right from wrong quintessentially thus proving that it's impossible to rehabilitate one that has already been rehabilitated prior to them taking a life. Any other case would be deemed incompetent to stand trial which suggests the crime were committed by reasons of insanity.
It's been evident that you specifically feel that releasing murderers is acceptable once they prove they do not have a desire to murder anyone but only in relation to the percentages associated with the current murder rate of said free society.
Seeing as how it's completely irrelevant to suggest a murderer is rehabilitated without proving they'll never murder again, under the exact same circumstances, how can you ultimately prove that a murderer will never murder again given the fact they've proven to murder whilst being equally conscientious of their personal actions during the event they'd decided to end someones life?
They knew what they were doing during the event they'd murdered and didn't care. Any other instance is guilty by reasons of insanity. Much easier is it to rehabilitate an insane person than a sane one because the insane person is able to learn whereas one knowing right from wrong cares less.
What happens henceforth is a simple coincidence that one convicted of murder prior to release doesn't murder for the simple sake of not going back to prison. I personally do not wish to see ticking time bombs on any street let alone mine
The risk is much too great
Sure, I'll say it. Murderers cannot be rehabilitated with 100% certainty they won't murder again. It's proven by their competence to stand trial from which defines the guilty as knowing right from wrong quintessentially thus proving that it's impossible to rehabilitate one that has already been rehabilitated prior to them taking a life. Any other case would be deemed incompetent to stand trial which suggests the crime were committed by reasons of insanity.
It's been evident that you specifically feel that releasing murderers is acceptable once they prove they do not have a desire to murder anyone but only in relation to the percentages associated with the current murder rate of said free society.
Seeing as how it's completely irrelevant to suggest a murderer is rehabilitated without proving they'll never murder again, under the exact same circumstances, how can you ultimately prove that a murderer will never murder again given the fact they've proven to murder whilst being equally conscientious of their personal actions during the event they'd decided to end someones life?
They knew what they were doing during the event they'd murdered and didn't care. Any other instance is guilty by reasons of insanity. Much easier is it to rehabilitate an insane person than a sane one because the insane person is able to learn whereas one knowing right from wrong cares less.
What happens henceforth is a simple coincidence that one convicted of murder prior to release doesn't murder for the simple sake of not going back to prison. I personally do not wish to see ticking time bombs on any street let alone mine
The risk is much too great
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
K.Snyder;1271750 wrote: The risk is much too greatIt's no higher than the risk of leaving me at large. There's no certainty I won't murder at some point in the future. Effective rehabilitation is bringing that risk of offending down to no higher than the risk I pose. That's a simple definition of effective rehabilitation - I have one and you don't, that's why we disagree.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
spot;1271768 wrote: It's no higher than the risk of leaving me at large. There's no certainty I won't murder at some point in the future. Effective rehabilitation is bringing that risk of offending down to no higher than the risk I pose. That's a simple definition of effective rehabilitation - I have one and you don't, that's why we disagree.
"Rehabilitation" cannot exist without a principle that defines an act of assuming "better" interest. It's exactly why one might view a murderer as being "rehabilitated" simply by observing them not murdering again...
It's not a question if they're "bringing that risk of offending down to no higher than the risk I pose" because you weren't placed in the same circumstances. It's about taking away those circumstances because they've already proven they're capable of murder within the context of "competent to stand trial".
What you're doing is suggesting to the public murderers will not face the same circumstances that led to murder from which is not logically true considering the fact they'd chosen to murder upon any definition of "rehabilitation". "rehabilitation" doesn't exist
You're defining "rehabilitation" with suggesting to the public murderers will not face the same circumstances that led to murder without a guarantee.
What I propose is guaranteeing the public those murderers will not face those same circumstances which will definitively negate "murder" as defined by the murderer in question.
By your logic you suggest everyone is capable of murder and that is what we do disagree on
"Rehabilitation" cannot exist without a principle that defines an act of assuming "better" interest. It's exactly why one might view a murderer as being "rehabilitated" simply by observing them not murdering again...
It's not a question if they're "bringing that risk of offending down to no higher than the risk I pose" because you weren't placed in the same circumstances. It's about taking away those circumstances because they've already proven they're capable of murder within the context of "competent to stand trial".
What you're doing is suggesting to the public murderers will not face the same circumstances that led to murder from which is not logically true considering the fact they'd chosen to murder upon any definition of "rehabilitation". "rehabilitation" doesn't exist
You're defining "rehabilitation" with suggesting to the public murderers will not face the same circumstances that led to murder without a guarantee.
What I propose is guaranteeing the public those murderers will not face those same circumstances which will definitively negate "murder" as defined by the murderer in question.
By your logic you suggest everyone is capable of murder and that is what we do disagree on
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
K.Snyder;1271803 wrote: By your logic you suggest everyone is capable of murder and that is what we do disagree on
I'd never go so far as to say everyone. I'd settle for most though. I'd put the Milgram experiment forward as evidence of that, together with all those clean-living typical Aryans who joined the SS for the travel prospects.
I'd never go so far as to say everyone. I'd settle for most though. I'd put the Milgram experiment forward as evidence of that, together with all those clean-living typical Aryans who joined the SS for the travel prospects.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
spot;1271808 wrote: I'd never go so far as to say everyone. I'd settle for most though. I'd put the Milgram experiment forward as evidence of that, together with all those clean-living typical Aryans who joined the SS for the travel prospects.
If I could prove with 100% certainty anyone was capable of murder I'd lock them up for the rest of their life
The only way to do that is to observe someone unjustly murdering another sadly
It's entirely why I'm against the death penalty in most cases
To kill someone based off of a lack of 100% certainty is inappropriate and immoral regardless if the one being put to death is divinely deserving of death
It's the moral logic that is dangerous and unjust
I'd no more feel comfortable in locking someone up for the rest of their life had I not known with 100% certainty they were guilty
What's left is all but those divinely guilty of murder(Among other crimes) being acceptable to live freely within any society upon equally 100% certainty they'll never commit the same crime again
There's absolutely no use in not releasing someone because "you" might feel they'll commit a crime unlike the crime in which they're in prison for
If I could prove with 100% certainty anyone was capable of murder I'd lock them up for the rest of their life
The only way to do that is to observe someone unjustly murdering another sadly
It's entirely why I'm against the death penalty in most cases
To kill someone based off of a lack of 100% certainty is inappropriate and immoral regardless if the one being put to death is divinely deserving of death
It's the moral logic that is dangerous and unjust
I'd no more feel comfortable in locking someone up for the rest of their life had I not known with 100% certainty they were guilty
What's left is all but those divinely guilty of murder(Among other crimes) being acceptable to live freely within any society upon equally 100% certainty they'll never commit the same crime again
There's absolutely no use in not releasing someone because "you" might feel they'll commit a crime unlike the crime in which they're in prison for
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
what does it matter
this scumbag took a life in a brutal way and deserves to die
although i would have thought the electric chair more suitable
we need the death penalty here in the uk
if not the rope by lethal injection
this scumbag took a life in a brutal way and deserves to die
although i would have thought the electric chair more suitable
we need the death penalty here in the uk
if not the rope by lethal injection
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
pantoandy;1271978 wrote: what does it matter
this scumbag took a life in a brutal way and deserves to die
although i would have thought the electric chair more suitable
we need the death penalty here in the uk
if not the rope by lethal injectionthat's too bad! What do you attribute to the moral decay in your society, Guy Richie movies?
this scumbag took a life in a brutal way and deserves to die
although i would have thought the electric chair more suitable
we need the death penalty here in the uk
if not the rope by lethal injection
that's too bad! What do you attribute to the moral decay in your society, Guy Richie movies?“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
-
fuzzywuzzy
- Posts: 6596
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
spot;1271262 wrote: I'm sure it would. What purpose do you think execution has, though? Why do judicial systems execute criminals?
Removing societies mistakes . Removing societies blame and failure. If they are not there everyone forgets and therefore forgets the reason they are executed.
Removing societies mistakes . Removing societies blame and failure. If they are not there everyone forgets and therefore forgets the reason they are executed.
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
fuzzywuzzy;1272233 wrote: Removing societies mistakes . Removing societies blame and failure. If they are not there everyone forgets and therefore forgets the reason they are executed.
Ahso!;1271279 wrote: Judicial systems may very well be an unconsciously erected facade for the purpose of sacrificing individuals for the continued viability and survival of the group. That is if one agrees with the concept of group selection.
That explanation may not satisfactorily meet with your approval, but in terms evolutionary thinking it make perfect sense.We agree!
Ahso!;1271279 wrote: Judicial systems may very well be an unconsciously erected facade for the purpose of sacrificing individuals for the continued viability and survival of the group. That is if one agrees with the concept of group selection.
That explanation may not satisfactorily meet with your approval, but in terms evolutionary thinking it make perfect sense.We agree!
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
-
fuzzywuzzy
- Posts: 6596
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
We agree ? I'm sorry this is not computing in my head . I don't agree with anyone on this board .that's just wrong!!!!!! :wah:
We sort of agree. You see I believe the death penalty is available in most places where a government is hell bent on telling everyone how much better people are living (due to their own expertise) than 100 years ago . When this is found not to be true they have to begin hiding the truth. Hence the death penalty. Century after century this happens. How do you think Australia was colonised?
It's the big LIE.
We are no more or less bloodthirsty as our ancestors . Our brains have not changed and I think we have actually become dumber than our ancients.
We sort of agree. You see I believe the death penalty is available in most places where a government is hell bent on telling everyone how much better people are living (due to their own expertise) than 100 years ago . When this is found not to be true they have to begin hiding the truth. Hence the death penalty. Century after century this happens. How do you think Australia was colonised?
It's the big LIE.
We are no more or less bloodthirsty as our ancestors . Our brains have not changed and I think we have actually become dumber than our ancients.
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
Christians seem to be front and center in demanding blood, but I recall Jesus halting an execution. Jesus himself fell victim to the practice.
I think it's also odd that people in the U.S. don't trust the government with their life (as in health care) but they give it the ability to kill them (assuming the competence of the government run law enforcement/justice system)? If one is too incompetent to work correctly, why is the other not as well?
IMO it comes down to people derive some pleasure out of killing/torturing other people.
I think it's also odd that people in the U.S. don't trust the government with their life (as in health care) but they give it the ability to kill them (assuming the competence of the government run law enforcement/justice system)? If one is too incompetent to work correctly, why is the other not as well?
IMO it comes down to people derive some pleasure out of killing/torturing other people.
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
yaaarrrgg;1272327 wrote: IMO it comes down to people derive some pleasure out of killing/torturing other people.
And you're applying this statement to whom exactly?
The U.S.? Any other country that uses "capital punishment"?
Christians?
And you're applying this statement to whom exactly?
The U.S.? Any other country that uses "capital punishment"?
Christians?
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
K.Snyder;1272328 wrote: And you're applying this statement to whom exactly?
The U.S.? Any other country that uses "capital punishment"?
Christians?
I'm talking about people in general. It seems when given a perfectly good moral excuse to kill someone, people enjoy it a little too much.
The U.S.? Any other country that uses "capital punishment"?
Christians?
I'm talking about people in general. It seems when given a perfectly good moral excuse to kill someone, people enjoy it a little too much.
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
yaaarrrgg;1272330 wrote: I'm talking about people in general. It seems when given a perfectly good moral excuse to kill someone, people enjoy it a little too much.
:wah:
Anything anyone does has to be considered either moral or not therefore enjoying it only defines their own personal moral integrity to stringent detail.
If any act were truly moral and the peoples involved didn't enjoy it they'd be equally immoral to the exact degree from which they hadn't enjoyed it.
Therefore, people are forced to ask themselves if killing in any way is moral.
How many people would truly go through with ending any life, whom are scheduled to be executed, if they wouldn't enjoy it? Raise of hands...
Me? If someone were trying to kill me or anyone unjustly I'd blow there brains out and hope to God I hadn't splattered any of the garbage matter on my cloths because I hail from a lineage of Scottish ancestors I like to always dress nice! I'd be thoroughly ecstatic about what I'd achieved! ECSTATIC!
:wah:
Anything anyone does has to be considered either moral or not therefore enjoying it only defines their own personal moral integrity to stringent detail.
If any act were truly moral and the peoples involved didn't enjoy it they'd be equally immoral to the exact degree from which they hadn't enjoyed it.
Therefore, people are forced to ask themselves if killing in any way is moral.
How many people would truly go through with ending any life, whom are scheduled to be executed, if they wouldn't enjoy it? Raise of hands...
Me? If someone were trying to kill me or anyone unjustly I'd blow there
brains out and hope to God I hadn't splattered any of the garbage matter on my cloths because I hail from a lineage of Scottish ancestors I like to always dress nice! I'd be thoroughly ecstatic about what I'd achieved! ECSTATIC!Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
K.Snyder;1272331 wrote: Me? If someone were trying to kill me or anyone unjustly I'd blow there brains out and hope to God I hadn't splattered any of the garbage matter on my cloths because I hail from a lineage of Scottish ancestors I like to always dress nice! I'd be thoroughly ecstatic about what I'd achieved! ECSTATIC!
I think self-defense is justifiable. Though after the assailant (assuming it's the real guy) is subdued and tied down, and the manner of execution is patiently contemplated, is it a different case?
brains out and hope to God I hadn't splattered any of the garbage matter on my cloths because I hail from a lineage of Scottish ancestors I like to always dress nice! I'd be thoroughly ecstatic about what I'd achieved! ECSTATIC!I think self-defense is justifiable. Though after the assailant (assuming it's the real guy) is subdued and tied down, and the manner of execution is patiently contemplated, is it a different case?
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
yaaarrrgg;1272334 wrote: I think self-defense is justifiable. Though after the assailant (assuming it's the real guy) is subdued and tied down, and the manner of execution is patiently contemplated, is it a different case?
Entirely dependent on whether or not a specific society can afford to house the criminal for life(Just as viable is it to at least assume you'd keep the murderer for life). If not, you shoot the murdering piece of garbage in the head! Preferably using ice bullets if such can be done without watching said murdering piece of garbage flop around on the floor! I might have no sympathy for murdering pieces of garbage but I'm no animal!
Other than that, I'd asked individuals specifically, "How many people would truly go through with ending any life, whom are scheduled to be executed, if they wouldn't enjoy it? Raise of hands..."...
Entirely dependent on whether or not a specific society can afford to house the criminal for life(Just as viable is it to at least assume you'd keep the murderer for life). If not, you shoot the murdering piece of garbage in the head! Preferably using ice bullets if such can be done without watching said murdering piece of garbage flop around on the floor! I might have no sympathy for murdering pieces of garbage but I'm no animal!
Other than that, I'd asked individuals specifically, "How many people would truly go through with ending any life, whom are scheduled to be executed, if they wouldn't enjoy it? Raise of hands..."...
Inmate Executed With Untested Drug
K.Snyder;1272331 wrote: Me? If someone were trying to kill me or anyone unjustly I'd blow there brains out and hope to God I hadn't splattered any of the garbage matter on my cloths because I hail from a lineage of Scottish ancestors I like to always dress nice! I'd be thoroughly ecstatic about what I'd achieved! ECSTATIC!
I'd still like to keep me shoes shiny though!
brains out and hope to God I hadn't splattered any of the garbage matter on my cloths because I hail from a lineage of Scottish ancestors I like to always dress nice! I'd be thoroughly ecstatic about what I'd achieved! ECSTATIC!I'd still like to keep me shoes shiny though!