An Eye for an Eye
Discussion
AJS- said:
From a more abstract, moral point of view the difference is not the level of pain inflicted but the justification for killing someone and the intention behind doing so.....if the penalty is done only to remove the worst individuals from society then there are much more humane ways to do so and no reason not to use them.
From above: "they're making excuses to themselves about capital punishment and it smacks somewhat of hypocrisy: ....killing is killing. The argument that capital punishment is necessary to prevent someone reoffending because it is too expensive to keep them in gaol forever has been refuted many times before *unless* you're happy to allow a justice system where the risk of executing an innocent is unacceptably high *or* where the application of the death penalty is applied so unevenly/infrequently (see India for the latter) as to render almost impossible to justify (especially on the flaky at best deterrent aspect). The only argument left is then one of violent physical revenge dressed up to make it politically acceptable, which is fine so long as one is honest about the motive being this - there have been times for everyone when we've wanted revenge.Many societies go to great lengths to make executions seem "clean", "moral" and "proper" etc. Surgical gowns, medical gurneys, only a few needles and the like....at least old methods of hanging/beheading/shooting/electrocution were more honest i.e. we're going to do something deeply unpleasant to you (and possibly your remains) because you probably did similar to someone else. Modern execution methods are all just put on to make us feel good and okay with doing something that is naturally abhorrent to any normal thinking human, it smacks of suspension of disbelief to me come to think of it. The only reason why judicial paralysis raises such a hoohah is that society would be forced to *acknowledge* and *justify* exactly what it had condoned and meted as punishment after the fact on a reasonably regular basis. It's easy to forget and ignore a dead person, less easy to forget someone who would pop up on the news surrounded by their family giving comment from a wheelchair every time that aspect of justice was debated. I imagine if executed people could do the same whenever capital punishment was discussed, you'd find attitudes to it would change dramatically.
TheHeretic said:
Lets hope they don't get the wrong person then, hey? Imagine a scenario whereby they do get the wrong person.. You can release a jailed person...
I agree with you, capital punishment should not be used unless it is 100% that the accused is guilty. I think they are certain that Ali is guilty, though.WeirdNeville said:
It states several times it was accidental. The victims mother states it was accidental.
I find your logic hard to follow.
I have read the article several times, I can't find the bit where the mother says it was accidental. If it was accidental, though, I would be against it.I find your logic hard to follow.
WeirdNeville said:
By accident?
Obviously I don't know the "facts" but it seems this was an accident between friends.
Lol like he just fell on it or something?! If you pull out a knife and stab someone you run the risk they may die from the wound(s) or indeed become paralysed. Don't understand knife crime in the slightest myself, if you carry a knife presumably you intend to use it on some random stranger wtf is that all about!Obviously I don't know the "facts" but it seems this was an accident between friends.
TX.
Mario
I simply disagree. It's not a matter of honesty or otherwise. Let's take a case where someone has sadisticly tortured, raped and murdered 5 children. What sort of revenge is a quick death on the rope or by lethal injection? It is a form of punishment undoubtedly, but more a form of self preservation of the rest of us by removing these most depraved people from our number.
I simply disagree. It's not a matter of honesty or otherwise. Let's take a case where someone has sadisticly tortured, raped and murdered 5 children. What sort of revenge is a quick death on the rope or by lethal injection? It is a form of punishment undoubtedly, but more a form of self preservation of the rest of us by removing these most depraved people from our number.
ClassicMotorNut said:
WeirdNeville said:
What are peoples thoughts on the guilty party being 14 at the time of the offence?
Doesn't change my opinion. At 14 one is old enough to know right from wrong.To hold a 14 year old to the same level of culpability as an adult, and to subject them to this level of punishment is barbaric (by my standards). Your standards may well be different.
Countdown said:
Not all 14 year olds are the same, some are quite mature, others aren't.
To hold a 14 year old to the same level of culpability as an adult, and to subject them to this level of punishment is barbaric (by my standards). Your standards may well be different.
I know that some 14 y/os are indeed immature, but I doubt any think that it will be a laugh to just plunge a knife into their friend's back. I think we have different standards.To hold a 14 year old to the same level of culpability as an adult, and to subject them to this level of punishment is barbaric (by my standards). Your standards may well be different.
ClassicMotorNut said:
I know that some 14 y/os are indeed immature, but I doubt any think that it will be a laugh to just plunge a knife into their friend's back. I think we have different standards.
Kids mess about ALL the time. To my mind there's a difference between a one-off act of stupidity or misjudgement and something done out of deliberate intent with full knowledge of the consequences.Countdown said:
Kids mess about ALL the time. To my mind there's a difference between a one-off act of stupidity or misjudgement and something done out of deliberate intent with full knowledge of the consequences.
I didn't mess around when I was 14 and I know plenty more ex-14 y/os who didn't either. What's more, I would never have dreamt of messing around with a knife, of all things.ClassicMotorNut said:
Countdown said:
Kids mess about ALL the time. To my mind there's a difference between a one-off act of stupidity or misjudgement and something done out of deliberate intent with full knowledge of the consequences.
I didn't mess around when I was 14 and I know plenty more ex-14 y/os who didn't either. What's more, I would never have dreamt of messing around with a knife, of all things.Kids do stupid things (because they're kids. To deliberately paralyse somebody bcause of a childhood mistake is perverse.
Countdown said:
Me neither. But I know plenty of 14 year olds who did stupid things which, but for the grace of god, could have had pretty serious consequences.
Kids do stupid things (because they're kids. To deliberately paralyse somebody bcause of a childhood mistake is perverse.
I know plenty of 14 year olds who did stupid things which should have had pretty serious consequences too, but none of those things were accidental. I don't see who would be carrying a knife with them if they weren't going to use it as a weapon.Kids do stupid things (because they're kids. To deliberately paralyse somebody bcause of a childhood mistake is perverse.
ClassicMotorNut said:
When there is evidence that proves the accused to be guilty, e.g. C.C.T.V. footage.
Considering US death row, how can there be death row exonerations? Does this mean we that a justice system that executed people could be flawed? It seems that getting executed takes a lot less than 100% proof.AJS- said:
Mario
I simply disagree. It's not a matter of honesty or otherwise. Let's take a case where someone has sadisticly tortured, raped and murdered 5 children. What sort of revenge is a quick death on the rope or by lethal injection? It is a form of punishment undoubtedly, but more a form of self preservation of the rest of us by removing these most depraved people from our number.
You're killing them when you don't have to, that's why it's revenge. We are perfectly capable of keeping them incarcerated and away from the rest of us for our safety. Indeed, we'd be perfectly capable fo doing this AND making them actually do something useful for society to at least begin in some marginal way to repay their wrongs. I simply disagree. It's not a matter of honesty or otherwise. Let's take a case where someone has sadisticly tortured, raped and murdered 5 children. What sort of revenge is a quick death on the rope or by lethal injection? It is a form of punishment undoubtedly, but more a form of self preservation of the rest of us by removing these most depraved people from our number.
I will expand on the revenge side though come to think of it: killing them is either revenge, or (and it's only just occurred to me after staring me in the face), revenge with responsibility offloaded onto the deity of choice e.g. our religious text says it should be done, so we'll do it because <insertagod'snamehere> says it's ok.
How about this: say person X deliberately rapes and murders 5 children and is guilty to an absolute certainty. The judicial punishment options are:
1) humane execution
2) lifelong incarceration that involves some sort of at least marginally useful contribution back to society
3) humane, surgically induced paralysis from the waist down
Let's take revenge out of the situation completely, it is not even a consideration. So, based on that statement.....if we were to remove option (1), I think the average normal person would choose (2) instead of (3) as an option for punishment as it is more humane. Conversely, remove option (2) - let's assume you live in a part of the USA where a case of this case requires the death penalty to be given say. How many people of the group who'd made the previous choice would opt to kill someone on moral/ethical/justice grounds instead of leaving them alive, albeit in a limited but still perfectly liveable capacity? Not many I think....ergo killing someone for a crime is worse/less moral/less ethical etc.
And if you think that if removing option (2) from the punishment options means people will go for execution instead of paralysis as it's the more moral/ethical choice and less objectionable, I wonder how serious a punishment a criminal would get for raping and murdering 5 children compared to deliberately paralysing someone....methinks the latter would suffer a milder punishment than the former as paralysing someone is less wrong than raping and killing them.
Edited by Mario149 on Saturday 6th April 21:11
TheHeretic said:
Considering US death row, how can there be death row exonerations? Does this mean we that a justice system that executed people could be flawed? It seems that getting executed takes a lot less than 100% proof.
It does take less than 100% proof in America, but it shouldn't do. I wouldn't have anyone executed unless I knew (with emphasis on 'knew') that they were guilty of doing whatever they had done to be awaiting execution.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff