henke on 11/11/2009 at 13:16
SD, as for an excuse, what about "mercy"? Is locking him up until he dies of old age really any better than ending his life right away? Or do you believe that he can be cured and re-integrated into society, or otherwise have a meaningful, fullfilling life after what he has done?
edit: ol' quinchy beat me to it
Aerothorn on 11/11/2009 at 13:35
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
No, this is purely an academic pov. I believe that you forfeit your right to experience the wonders and horrors of life, be they big or small, when you choose to murder for the thrilling stimulation. You've chosen your own sick pleasure as more important than all the experiences that another would have had and all the hurt you will cause to their loved ones. Imo you have given up your right to exist (in this form) and its time to flush you from the system so your consituent parts can be recycled to try again.
That's like no academic paper I've ever read.
Scots Taffer on 11/11/2009 at 13:51
Crime and punishment is flawed, justice is in the eye of the beholder, the whole situation is beyond fucked and no viewpoint is right.
Just ship everyone who breaks the law off to Australia.
ohshi
fett on 11/11/2009 at 14:41
Quote Posted by quinch
Capital punishment only serves to appease those of us in the galleries baying for revenge and blood. Those of us who are constantly looking for the next rush of self-righteous indignation.
Well, that and the peripheral chance that it might
perhaps keep him from shooting more people at random. But I guess it's also possible that he could have been rehabilitated and released back into society to become a school teacher or ice cream delivery man. All things are possible in Pleasantville, ya' know.
DDL on 11/11/2009 at 14:54
Why does 'life imprisonment' somehow also have to include "rehabilitation into society coz you're all better, also here's a rifle: enjoy!"?
Seriously, I don't think many people here actually think this is an individual that should be put away 'until better', just someone that should be put away 'until dead', since the prospects of the former are pretty low, and are arguably irrelevant.
Note that "locked up till dead" is not the same thing as "locked up then promptly killed", even if this is a somewhat semantic description. One involves state-sanctioned murder, the other does not.
Plus locking em up forever is actually cheaper. CHEAPER, ffs.
The message we should be promoting is "killing people is WRONG", rather than "killing people is wrong unless we do it, coz we've got the paperwork and everything."
Also, lots of that should now, I guess, be past-tense, but hey.
How about shipping them of to titan to mine stuff? Works for Judge Dredd...
Mr.Duck on 11/11/2009 at 15:27
Against the death penalty here.
But I would understand in many cases people wanting to administer it, just won't advocate in favor of it.
Just my 2 cents.
*Goes into silence again*
SubJeff on 11/11/2009 at 15:47
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
That's like no academic paper I've ever read.
Academic as in not swayed by emotion. Its just logic.
Quote Posted by SD
As moral agents, we have no excuse for behaving in this manner beyond simple bloodlust.
I don't believe this to be true.
Thief13x on 11/11/2009 at 17:56
Quote Posted by SD
Here's the thing: he's a killer, and killing people is what killers do, because they lack empathy and all those other things that enable the rest of us to behave in a rational manner.
Wait, so if I lack empathy I don't have to be held to the same standard as everyone else? What about lacking empathy for the 10 guys who raped that girl a few weeks ago for 2.5 hours? if her dad was to beat one to death with a lead pipe because he lacked empathy for him after what happened, should he be tried as insane even though he stalked and cornered the kid?
Your world, SD, would be pretty chilling to live in. Do you yourself have empathy for murder victims?
Just saying...this is a tough subject that doesn't have room for callousness on either side in my opinion.
DDL on 11/11/2009 at 18:13
Quote Posted by Wormrat
Trespassing is wrong unless the state has the paperwork and everything (search).
And is conveniently reversible if it turns out to be wrong.Stealing stuff is wrong unless the state has the paperwork and everything (confiscation).
And is conveniently reversible if it turns out to be wrong.Kidnapping is wrong unless the state has the paperwork and everything (arrest and incarceration).
And is conveniently reversible if it turns out to be wrong.Killing people is wrong unless the state has the paperwork and everything.
And is conveniently reversible if it turns out to be..o wait...Would be my personal view on the critical difference between those examples.
Jason Moyer on 11/11/2009 at 18:14
Quote Posted by DaBeast
That deserves a thumbs up? Really?
In particular, for life sentence types who have 0 chance of getting out vertical, would it not make sense to remove that strain?
This could just be hearsay, but I seem to remember that it was more expensive to execute someone than to incarcerate them for life. I'm not going to pretend to have any facts to back that up, but if someone could provide some for my lazy ass that would be awesome.
Edit: DDL, how exactly do you reverse trespassing?
