Death Penalty

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Biggles@4 January 2004 - 05:26
Thank you J'Pol


Putting aside understandable emotions in the face of awful crimes, what serves our societies best? You may argue that executions are most effective but this can only be on the basis that it creates greater social cohesion and (to use an awful modern term) societal goal congruence. The argument that it deters murder is unproven as the EU, which has a larger population than the US, and no executions, has a lower murder rate than the US (by some considerable margin).

this might have little to do with the death penalty and a lot to do with the shere amount of guns and the right to carry them in the USA.....just an observation not disagreeing with your post that said you quote for the entire USA population/murder rate but not all states carry the death sentence

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Biggles@4 January 2004 - 07:01
Busyman

I understand what you are saying. However, I am working from the pespective that the overwhelming majority of people are stakeholders in a stable society and would not even contemplate stealing lost property let alone kill someone.

Perhaps I am too removed from the society you live in. By your logic the EU with "light penalties" should be over-run with crime. On the other hand, the US with harsher penalties should have much less crime. Is this in fact the case?

:clover: This has nothing to do with my argument above, it is for J'Pol and Lamsey - as a neutral I celebrate their happiness.

All crime has to do with many more things than their penalties that's for sure.

There's overpopulation (the most overlooked reason), access to guns, influence of television, blahblahblah.
Fix those parts of society and maybe we can get rid of the death penalty.

Maybe this can be Star Trek. (and btw wipe out poverty)

I understand what you are saying. However, I am working from the pespective that the overwhelming majority of people are stakeholders in a stable society and would not even contemplate stealing lost property let alone kill someone.

I know Biggles I know

Don't get me wrong, I some folks would abstain from crime due to their own morals regardless of the consequences of law.

[hobbes]

So we've degenerated to "star trek", all geeks report to the stardeck thingey.

[creamer]

Originally posted by hobbes@4 January 2004 - 06:32
So we've degenerated to "star trek", all geeks report to the stardeck thingey.

heres joni

[Busyman]

Originally posted by creamer+4 January 2004 - 21:47--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (creamer @ 4 January 2004 - 21:47)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@4 January 2004 - 06:32
So we&#39;ve degenerated to "star trek", all geeks report to the stardeck thingey.

heres joni [/b][/quote]

[ilw]

Originally posted by clocker@3 January 2004 - 14:08
Since you don&#39;t seem willing to expend the minimal effort it takes to "actually look up the definition", I&#39;ll do it for you...Merry Christmas.


Why is the administration of punishment ( and, by implication, the granting of reward) ethically abhorrent?

On a side note: How do you reconcile your obvious Utopian world view with your sig?

yeah ok my last post was very rushed and pretty crap(and a lack of time means this one will probably be too), anyway thanks for the definition.

but somewhere in that crap i had a theoretical point, if you ignore the crap about a better world, what i&#39;m talking about is the idea that if punishment is not necessary do should it still be carried out. Basically i reckon all punishment is just a means to an end, whereas i get the impression that some people here see it as something that must happen. i.e. if someone intentionally does you harm, should some form of harm be visited on them.
How miserable should people in prison be made to be?

As to why ethically i don&#39;t like punishment, (while i accept 100% it is necessary), i just don&#39;t think retribution in itself does anything positive or useful, however, i can of course see how the threat of it works as an effective deterrent.

My sig is an example of self defence and proportionate force.

[j2k4]

Well, the poll looks like a pretty even split, which kind of surprises me, given this board&#39;s makeup.

[vivitron 15]

Sorry to butt in here, with a rather unrelated comment, but I watched a film the other day "The Life of David Gale", which i reckon all of you who have expressed a significant interest in this might like....its def worth a look, and is very thought provoking. also if you do try it, if you can, get the dvd-extras which are also really good - in fact i may buy it if i see it cheap


back on topic now

[l_p_4_7]

IMO the death penalty is the equivilent of fighting fire with fire.
It is no punishment, just an escape for the criminal, where they don&#39;t have to suffer or think about what they have done.

[clocker]

Originally posted by l_p_4_7@5 January 2004 - 17:14
IMO the death penalty is the equivilent of fighting fire with fire.

Terrible analogy.
IRL, you DO "fight fire with fire" effectively.

Have you any proof to support the contention that criminals spend any time at all "thinking of what they have done" beyond "Damn, I wish I hadn&#39;t gotten caught"?