Above the sun
It is funny these holy rollers are against abortion, but they don't care about killing people when they are in jail, expecially minorities, you steal a pizza three times in some places, three strikes and you are out in jail for life, this one is funny.
Paint it Pink
BT Rep: +1
Above the sun
It's pathetic, but, in some places such as California you do that stupid crime three times and you are out, well the idea started as a means to put as many minorities in jail as possible.
Shovel Ready
Yes, it's a serious question and why "never" for white collar crime?Originally Posted by rytheguy
Focus for a minute on one of the principle arguments for the death penalty- deterrence.
Much has been made about how useless deterrence might be when considering the "average" criminal.
Acting in the heat of the moment or driven by compulsion (i.e., addiction), consequences are probably the last thing this type of criminal is thinking about.
On the other hand, Madoff- and his ilk...Ken Lay, the leaders of Tyco and Worldcom- are the very definition of "malice aforethought".
Their crimes are not spur of the moment but the result of long term planning (in Madoff's case, decades) with very specific intent.
Keep in mind that in death penalty states, "unintended consequences" apply.
In other words...you're the getaway driver in a liquor store robbery.
During the commission of said crime, your partner- the guy actually in the store- shoots and kills the clerk.
Both the shooter and the driver are held equally culpable and are both subject to the death penalty.
In the Madoff case there are already two suicides (that I'm aware of) directly tied to Madoff's actions and the future consequences will take a long time to be fully revealed.
Furthermore, unlike the uneducated, poor, socially deprived crack addict-type criminal, people like Madoff are completely capable of appreciating the consequences of their actions.
Thus, "deterrence" might actually be more applicable in their case(s) than usual.
Over the past few decades we've seen an increasing number of large scale financial crimes.
Enron, Tyco, Worldcom, Madoff...obviously, the penalties for such crimes lag behind the breadth and complexity involved.
So, why NOT apply extreme measures to white collar crime?
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
I just don't think it's fair to put someone to death for stealing, no matter how many people are affected or how much was stolen because money and other material possessions are replaceable. Additionally, I'm sure white collar criminals don't really care about the possible consequences of their actions anyway because they don't anticipate ever being caught. Making the penalties more severe isn't going to stop them if that's the case.
Broken
For financial crime, hit them where it hurts.
Make them destitute, homeless and tattoo their crime on their forehead so no one will give 'em a job.
Sorry to be so Liberal, like.
But I still think it would be kinder to execute politicians than pay them. They can't help what they are, but we shouldn't be financing their habit nor encouraging them to re-produce.
An It Harm None, Do What You Will
Shovel Ready
Oh?
What if you're 75 and the stolen funds represent a lifetime of savings and work?
How do you replace that?
Given that logic, NO punishment is effective since I doubt any criminal anticipates getting caught.
OK then.
Ignore the "deterrence" argument.
If you allow that there are any crimes that deserve the death penalty (bin Laden? Ted Bundy?), why not Madoff or Lay?
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
Paint it Pink
BT Rep: +1
Shovel Ready
But that's just it...it isn't "one reckless act", it's a premeditated scheme that can go on for years.
"I am the one who knocks."- Heisenberg
Above the sun
That's why the call it WHITE, a crime only done by white men and of course they get away with it, if a minority stole a quarter they would be in jail for a very long time.
Money walks and bullshit talks, ins't it like that?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks