Skyrad 0 #151 December 18, 2006 Hey! Don't knock it until you've tried it.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #152 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuote1) It has a race component This is a problem with the system not the action. Fix the system don't stop the action. Quote2) It has a class component This is a problem with the system not the action. Fix the system don't stop the action. Quote3) It is fraught with error This is a problem with the system not the action. Fix the system don't stop the action. Quote4) Trials are inherently skewed This is a problem with the system not the action. Fix the system don't stop the action. Quote5) It is impossible to execute people w/o causing pain Simply not true. Quote6) It has been yet to be proven/established that the DP lowers the crime rate, murder rate or any of the ills of society, rendering it to be simple revenge; do we want to teach revenge to our kids? Don't use it as a deterrent, use it as a punishment. Quote7) It costs at least twice to execute over life imprisonment This is a problem with the system not the action. Fix the system don't stop the action. So in well over 200 years we have not been able to come up with a "system" without problems, despite trying and trying. Has it occurred to you that just maybe there IS a problem with the action? The death penalty is intrinsically WRONG. Almost all other developed nations have already reached this conclusion. Fiddling with it cannot and will not make it right.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #153 December 19, 2006 QuoteSo in well over 200 years we have not been able to come up with a "system" without problems, despite trying and trying. Has it occurred to you that just maybe there IS a problem with the action? The death penalty is intrinsically WRONG. Almost all other developed nations have already reached this conclusion. Fiddling with it cannot and will not make it right. So what would you rather do with these people ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country Life without parole in solitary confinement? I think that is like putting something where you can't hear it, can't see it, and you just forget about it instead of dealing with it."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #154 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteSo in well over 200 years we have not been able to come up with a "system" without problems, despite trying and trying. Has it occurred to you that just maybe there IS a problem with the action? The death penalty is intrinsically WRONG. Almost all other developed nations have already reached this conclusion. Fiddling with it cannot and will not make it right. So what would you rather do with these people ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country Life without parole in solitary confinement? I think that is like putting something where you can't hear it, can't see it, and you just forget about it instead of dealing with it. It's not about what I would like. Capital punishment is wrong and just panders to your basest instincts. We should not do it. The FACT that we still cannot do it right is clear and convincing evidence of this.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #155 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuote>This is a problem with the system not the action. Fix the system >don't stop the action. I agree with most of what you posted. But if indeed the system is broken - it would seem logical to stop the action until it is fixed, no? If the error rate is higher than the acceptable error rate than it should be stopped until the system can be fixed. If the error rate is at or below the acceptable error rate than it should continue but the system should still be fixed to lower the error rate. Which begs my question: How many murders of innocent inmates are acceptable? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #156 December 19, 2006 Four. As soon as we get to five it's absolutely out-of-hand.This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #157 December 19, 2006 QuoteSo how many innocent people executed are acceptable? The courts have refused to hear appeals of dead inmates, so there is no way to prove that innocent people ahve been killed by the gov. They did review one slam-dunk case about 6 months ago and affirm that he was guilty. Many, many innocent people have been fully exonerated by evidence after spending over 20 years on death row, so it's pretty safe to say we have murdered innocent people. I ask, what is your tollerance number? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #158 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteSo how many innocent people executed are acceptable? I'm not a statistician nor do I have any relevant statistics at this time. I threw out another number in another thread (which was actually higher than I prefer). This is not about stats, this is about your conscience. Is 1 per year oK? Please, throw me a number of innocent inmates we can smoke in order to smoke the ones that are really guilty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #159 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo how many innocent people executed are acceptable? I'm not a statistician nor do I have any relevant statistics at this time. I threw out another number in another thread (which was actually higher than I prefer). and, if you are a blood thirsty American, you are really not "smart or insightful enough to understadn all of the pitfalls of the DP." So if you put out a number, it would likely be wrong. This is an OPINION, it does not require intelligence or insight for anyone to state an opinion. Nice misdirection. What is your opinion as to the number of innocent inmates we can kill? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #160 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteSo how many innocent people executed are acceptable? The courts have refused to hear appeals of dead inmates, so there is no way to prove that innocent people ahve been killed by the gov. They did review one slam-dunk case about 6 months ago and affirm that he was guilty. Many, many innocent people have been fully exonerated by evidence after spending over 20 years on death row, so it's pretty safe to say we have murdered innocent people. I ask, what is your tollerance number? Ask away, I'm happy to say that I live in a country where we don't have the death penalty and I wouldn't be happy with a one person being executed who was innocent. Now maybe Butters would like to tell us how many he finds acceptable.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #161 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteSo in well over 200 years we have not been able to come up with a "system" without problems, despite trying and trying. Has it occurred to you that just maybe there IS a problem with the action? The death penalty is intrinsically WRONG. Almost all other developed nations have already reached this conclusion. Fiddling with it cannot and will not make it right. So what would you rather do with these people ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country Life without parole in solitary confinement? I think that is like putting something where you can't hear it, can't see it, and you just forget about it instead of dealing with it. This entire arg is really circular. The protections need to be adgered to before the need for revenge, or as Americans call it, justice. No on eis saying to let them go, but it costs at least twice as much to execute and make errors, just think what it would take to actually conduct these trials fairly? The American conservative is really a lot more like a Communist than they are able to understand; I'll explain why. - Death penalty, social services, are rendered as acceptable for cost savings, even with all their inherent errors. - Personal protections are supposed to be guaranteed via the US COnst., which is about the right of the individual being = to those of teh whole. - Ulititarianism, born from Communism, is about the needs of the whole, or, "most good for the most people." Liberals are continually pushing for individual liberties, conservatives for laws regulating the whole. - Conservatves would rather smoke a few innocent people rather than protect the rights of 1 indivdual that is likely innocent. I understand that most conservatives will disregad this rather than try to understand it, but the elements are true. Go look uo the definition to, "Utiliyarian" and you will see how America has shifted to that from a postion of individual liberty. Sometimes the extremes go so far as to wrap around and touch on the back side; exchange ideas. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #162 December 19, 2006 QuoteFour. As soon as we get to five it's absolutely out-of-hand. So sarcasm is it. It's an alternative form of misdirection. But you have made your assertion, so we see that you condone murder, no more than 4 per year, yet want to kill murderers. How can you hate guys like Dahmer, Bundy, Gacey when you condone murder? Or is it that they just exceeded the number? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #163 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo how many innocent people executed are acceptable? The courts have refused to hear appeals of dead inmates, so there is no way to prove that innocent people ahve been killed by the gov. They did review one slam-dunk case about 6 months ago and affirm that he was guilty. Many, many innocent people have been fully exonerated by evidence after spending over 20 years on death row, so it's pretty safe to say we have murdered innocent people. I ask, what is your tollerance number? Ask away, I'm happy to say that I live in a country where we don't have the death penalty and I wouldn't be happy with a one person being executed who was innocent. Now maybe Butters would like to tell us how many he finds acceptable. I was under the impression you were a proponent of CP. Am I wrong? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #164 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteFour. As soon as we get to five it's absolutely out-of-hand. So sarcasm is it. It's an alternative form of misdirection. But you have made your assertion, so we see that you condone murder, no more than 4 per year, yet want to kill murderers. Actually, I haven't stated anything of the sort. How can you ask "How many innocent people is it okay to execute?" The answer is obviously none, but the only way to guarantee that is to not execute anybody. Fair enough. I get the point. I don't know how I feel about the death penalty. There are some people who don't deserve to be out in society. I don't care whether they're dead or locked up for life, as long as their "life sentence" is actually life and not twenty years. There are some people who should never be allowed in society. My personal opinion is that, if I was to be locked up for my entire life, I'd rather be dead, which is why I would rather execute somebody who is plainly guilty and isn't going to be released. At the same time, I understand that the justice system isn't perfect, that we have executed and locked up innocent people. I also understand that sending someone to death row costs more than simply imprisoning him for life. I also understand that many of the proponents for the death penalty are so because of a desire for revenge, and justice is not about revenge. In the end, I don't care about the death penalty. Removal from society is sufficient. However, at the same time, there have been those who have been powerful enough to cause deaths from within prison. These people should be terminated. I'll see if I can find the thread about the guy I'm thinking of. QuoteHow can you hate guys like Dahmer, Bundy, Gacey when you condone murder? Or is it that they just exceeded the number? If a killer has a gun to your child's head and is most likely going to pull the trigger, but you are behind him, out of his view, and can kill him first, would you do so? If yes, how can you hate guys like Dahmer, Bundy, Gacey, when you too would kill somebody?This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #165 December 19, 2006 QuoteSo what would you rather do with these people ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country Life without parole in solitary confinement? I think that is like putting something where you can't hear it, can't see it, and you just forget about it instead of dealing with it. So you can all ask questions but none of you can answer them ... what would you rather do with these people?"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #166 December 19, 2006 QuoteIf a killer has a gun to your child's head and is most likely going to pull the trigger, but you are behind him, out of his view, and can kill him first, would you do so? If yes, how can you hate guys like Dahmer, Bundy, Gacey, when you too would kill somebody? Can you really not see the difference between those situations? What does hate have to do with it? Your decision to sentence someone to the death penalty should not be based on emotions."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #167 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteIf a killer has a gun to your child's head and is most likely going to pull the trigger, but you are behind him, out of his view, and can kill him first, would you do so? If yes, how can you hate guys like Dahmer, Bundy, Gacey, when you too would kill somebody? Can you really not see the difference between those situations? Yes I do. He asked me a similar question. So I asked one back.This ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #168 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteSo what would you rather do with these people ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country Life without parole in solitary confinement? I think that is like putting something where you can't hear it, can't see it, and you just forget about it instead of dealing with it. So you can all ask questions but none of you can answer them ... what would you rather do with these people? Same as Germany, Norway, Italy, Austria, Switzerland, Holland and other civilized nations do - and NOT kill them.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #169 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSo how many innocent people executed are acceptable? The courts have refused to hear appeals of dead inmates, so there is no way to prove that innocent people ahve been killed by the gov. They did review one slam-dunk case about 6 months ago and affirm that he was guilty. Many, many innocent people have been fully exonerated by evidence after spending over 20 years on death row, so it's pretty safe to say we have murdered innocent people. I ask, what is your tollerance number? Ask away, I'm happy to say that I live in a country where we don't have the death penalty and I wouldn't be happy with a one person being executed who was innocent. Now maybe Butters would like to tell us how many he finds acceptable. I was under the impression you were a proponent of CP. Am I wrong? I don't have a problem with execution of certain criminals where there is air tight evidence and confession. However as the system is unable to guarentee this would always be the case and the DP is over used I am against it only for the reason that innocent people will be executed.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #170 December 19, 2006 QuoteQuoteSo what would you rather do with these people ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country Life without parole in solitary confinement? I think that is like putting something where you can't hear it, can't see it, and you just forget about it instead of dealing with it. So you can all ask questions but none of you can answer them ... what would you rather do with these people? Supermax their arses. There you go you've got your answer.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #171 December 19, 2006 QuoteWhat does hate have to do with it? Your decision to sentence someone to the death penalty should not be based on emotions. Many cannot conceive that protection of society is NOT (and cannot be) based on emotions, so they don't consider it possible for others. When you find someone like that, all their arguments are similar. That's why it's pointless to debate in any fashion that level of self centeredness and opinion. So it is more fun to mock. Much like trying to debate with extremely religions types (like atheists). On the other hand, if enough people are constructed that way, it will eventually validate their opinions just through mob rule. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #172 December 19, 2006 QuoteFour. As soon as we get to five it's absolutely out-of-hand. you hideous animal obviously the answer is 3 - once we prove that we have a perfect verdict society, we then randomly pick 3 innocent people and execute them. Any more would be barbaric ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #173 December 21, 2006 QuoteQuoteFour. As soon as we get to five it's absolutely out-of-hand. you hideous animal obviously the answer is 3 - once we prove that we have a perfect verdict society, we then randomly pick 3 innocent people and execute them. Any more would be barbaric Nice, when ya can't honestly answer the question, revert to sarcasm. So you think it's ok for the gov to murder people who allegedlt commit murder, even tho a few will end uo being innocent...... hmmmm, sounds just like McVeigh, "Collateral damage." You're saying the accidentally executed people are collateral damage to those who were guilty and executed..... GOthcha, understand well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #174 December 21, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSo how many innocent people executed are acceptable? The courts have refused to hear appeals of dead inmates, so there is no way to prove that innocent people ahve been killed by the gov. They did review one slam-dunk case about 6 months ago and affirm that he was guilty. Many, many innocent people have been fully exonerated by evidence after spending over 20 years on death row, so it's pretty safe to say we have murdered innocent people. I ask, what is your tollerance number? Ask away, I'm happy to say that I live in a country where we don't have the death penalty and I wouldn't be happy with a one person being executed who was innocent. Now maybe Butters would like to tell us how many he finds acceptable. I was under the impression you were a proponent of CP. Am I wrong? I don't have a problem with execution of certain criminals where there is air tight evidence and confession. However as the system is unable to guarentee this would always be the case and the DP is over used I am against it only for the reason that innocent people will be executed. QuoteI don't have a problem with execution of certain criminals where there is air tight evidence and confession. Miranda v Arizona - voluntarilness of confessions. Escobedo v Illinois - right to counsel, here they kept moving the defendant around the police station when the attorney got too close. These are cases from that horrible liberal time when we actually built our civil liberties. There is really no such thing as NO COERCION as a rule. Some cases might be w/o it, but it occurs today. What was taht Hatian's name who was sodomized in NY as a tactic of interrogation about 5 years ago? Again, there is no bullet-proff way to be sure. Also, whenever we start anew, our prosecutors test the limits, pushing them beyond their intent. QuoteHowever as the system is unable to guarentee this would always be the case and the DP is over used I am against it only for the reason that innocent people will be executed. Right, some people definitely need to be removed, but not at teh cost of innocent lives. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #175 December 21, 2006 QuoteQuoteSo what would you rather do with these people ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country Life without parole in solitary confinement? I think that is like putting something where you can't hear it, can't see it, and you just forget about it instead of dealing with it. So you can all ask questions but none of you can answer them ... what would you rather do with these people? I don't know who you were asking, but if me, I would jail them forever if they are guilty of 1st murder. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
